- Aug 26, 2011
Yeah that's my feeling too just likes the attention.I think he was just a publicity whore. They showed him talking to Dasseys mother on camera during Dasseys trial and he was was acting like he was some sort of trial expert (his qualification being that he was the dismissed juror on the Avery trial and that somehow made him an expert to speak on the judicial system).
there is something in the water up there. Backwards hillbillies.
Yeah - that's the odd thing. But from what his lawyers say they had a hard enough time seating a jury that they "thought" might be fair - so probably thought it would get worse if they went for the mistrial.Yeah that's my feeling too just likes the attention.
I thought they should have elected for the mistrial when it happened.
Do you actually think you saw all the evidence presented to the jury? Because you did not.A disgusting example of our criminal justice system. Also , this guy may in fact have done the 2nd murder, I could be convinced either way, but a jury should never have found him guilty considering the evidence presented at trial.
I was enough to make it plausible that police planted evidence, I saw enough to to see that Dasseys confession was absolutely coerced,Jerry1714 said:Do you actually think you saw all the evidence presented to the jury? Because you did not. Some of the evidence published, that was not presented in the documentary, makes it pretty hard to argue his innocence.
To be clear, the issue isn't whether or not he did it. It's whether or not the state proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it.Do you actually think you saw all the evidence presented to the jury? Because you did not.
Some of the evidence published, that was not presented in the documentary, makes it pretty hard to argue his innocence.
I am an attorney so I am aware of the standard used. Not uncommon for jurors to initially vote one way and over deliberating change their stance.To be clear, the issue isn't whether or not he did it. It's whether or not the state proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it.
For what its worth, the majority of the jurors wanted not guilty after closing arguments. I think that's pretty damn telling considering they DID see all the evidence. Relatives of the sherrifs dept are on the jury? I mean come the fook on. All the sketchy-ness of the police dept, the fact they had a MASSIVE motive to pin this on Avery.
Again, I wouldn't be shocked if the truth was that he did it even though he was on the precipice of collecting tens of millions of dollars, but beyond a reasonable doubt seems pretty damn tough from what I saw and from what 7 of the 12 jurors saw after closing arguments.
So they found a body then uprooted all the evidence and moved it to the Avery property?I don't think he did it. It's not impossible that he did, but it seems more likely than not that the prosecution, cops, and investigators played, manipulated, and cut corners through the justice system to bail the county out of a monumental (and plainly justified) lawsuit.
One of the bugger pieces left out was the presence of Avery's sweat in her car. Apparently sweat can't be planted like blood potentially could so it was locked up that he had been in her car.I just finished the series. To say I enjoyed it doesn't seem right as it was very disturbing. Makes you really feel that the system is rigged against the poor and stupid. I haven't done of research into what the filmmakers left out of the documentary that might have shed more light on why they came to a guilty verdict. The part that jumped out to me was the veritable lack of forensic evidence in the trailer. The prosecution put forth a case that Avery and Dassey tied Theresa up, raped her, stabbed her, slit her throat and shot her multiple times. How was there no blood found? Was the same guy who was stupid enough to park Theresa's car in his yard the same guy that was mentally equipped to rid his entire property of every last droplet of blood or gore from the murder? Like others, I'm not saying he wasn't involved, but it's hard to see how they passed the reasonable doubt threshold.
Can you link an article about the sweat inside the car. I've only read/seen that his sweat was found on the key lanyard and on the hood latch to the car not inside.One of the bugger pieces left out was the presence of Avery's sweat in her car. Apparently sweat can't be planted like blood potentially could so it was locked up that he had been in her car.
Even as a conservative, when I hear about incidents like this there is simply no way I can support the death penalty. This kind of thing happens far more often than most people realize.Having finished it yesterday.
Zero doubt they planeted evidence in my mind.
Pretty sure Brendan wasn't involved much if at all.
50/50 that Steven killed her - reading all the fun stuff on Reddit...
Obviously what we saw wasn't enough to convict him but we know we didn't see everything.