Long time since but I remember this sub being a pretty good place for logical debate so thought I'd post if anyone can help with some questions. The sub seems a little inactive, Hope its okay.

It came out in MaM2 that a potential burial site was investigated, strangely only for a few hours but there was an interesting chat between KZ and a body burning expert where he talks about: most of the time people will get tired of waiting for a body to burn and be left with a torso they end up burying.

This is pretty consistent with the bones they found - cut extremities that would probably burn relatively easily and no rib bones or anything from the torso for that matter.

I have a few questions if anyone can help.

• How could they confirm so quickly there was nothing of worth after the cadaver dog alerted them?

• If the area was searched now and a body was found, what would happen (if anything) to SA?

• Has there ever been another cadaver dog search? or any form of search?

• Have they always ignored the search for 'the rest' of the body because it's so unlikely to find without a massive clue or lead?

Is there case law that this actually been used successfully to vacate a sentence? Check out this article from Oshkosh Northwestern:

Defense claims missing evidence in seeking new trial for Avery

http://post.cr/2txxXMt

If and I mean a big if, SA gets granted a retrial, would he be found guilty again? The most damning evidence is his blood in the Rav 4. Even with the new brief, it is still the biggest piece of evidence that there is against him. Would this prove him guilty beyond reasonable doubt? The bullet and key are good evidence as well, but there is more chance of that being argued against.

Last question is if not SA, then who? RH? I just can't see him playing LE, then setting up SA. SA more than likely still killed TH but maybe not in the narrative of the trial.

Any thoughts?

I think he will be found guilty again, just because of the blood in Rav 4

As promised in yesterday's post, here are the remaining records requested from Brendan's case!

Our very awesome /u/SkippTopp has them on his website here:

• http://www.stevenaverycase.org/dassey-trial-records/

The photos from Brendan's trial are listed on the same page as Avery's trial photos here:

• http://www.stevenaverycase.org/evidence-photos/

#Exhibits from Brendan's trial

Aside from CVs of various people who testified in Brendan's jury trial, these are the remaining document exhibits:

#May 4th, 2006 Motion Hearing

Here is a list of the 5 exhibits. I requested exhibits 1, 2, and 4, as Exhibit 5 is under seal and Exhibit 3 didn't seem like something people would be interested in at the moment.

01-15-2010 Post-conviction Motion Hearing

This hearing is the hearing we see snippets of in episode 10 of MaM. /u/Nexious provided a copy of the transcripts of the hearing, which you can find at the bottom of this page on Skipp's site. I bolded two that I thought people would be particularly interested in.

I had requested Exhibit 369 but it wasn't in the batch I received, so I let Barbara know about it. I should be receiving that sometime soonish.

#Exhibits that are already available

#Breakdown on funds

The crowdfunding campaign raised a total of $1624.00. After fees, the grand total remaining was $1484.78. Here is a screenshot that shows the amount of fees taken out.

Here are all invoices and payment receipts:

• Invoices for Avery's remaining trial photos for $712.51

• Payment receipt for $742.51 (including $30.00 convenience fee)

• Invoice for photos and first batch of documents from Brendan's trial for $315.36

• Payment receipt for $330.36 (including $15.00 convenience fee)

• Invoice for this batch of documents for $49.35

• Payment receipt for $52.30 (including $2.95 convenience fee)

742.51 + 330.36 + 52.30 = 1125.17 total payment for documents/photos. 1484.78 - 1125.17 = 359.61. I received a $15.75 refund for overpayment, and I put in $100 to help cover fees, so 359.61 + 115.75 = $475.36 remaining

I'm going to be updating the previous lists of exhibits, but that may take some time to do.

##Thank you so much to everyone who has made this possible! As detailed above, we still have a good chunk of funds left, so please let me know your suggestions on what you're interested in obtaining!

#Photos from Brendan's trial are on the same page where photos from Avery's trial are, just under a different heading.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/evidence-photos/

It had also been brought to my attention that the most recent request for the missing exhibit photos from Avery's trial were cropped. After some back and forth between me, the court, Lloyd's Photo, and /u/SkippTopp having to send the original disc back, he received the redone photos too :)

/u/SkippTopp has kindly offered to keep the older versions of those photos here in case anyone would like to make any comparisons.

Back in the beginning of February, I made the list of photo exhibits from Brendan's trial and some suggestions on what to request. There were a couple that I ended up not requesting, but here is what I did:

I also received the documents requested from Brendan's trial! They are scanned in, but I'm working on getting them redacted and all. Special thanks to /u/Nexious who has helped with OCR so they are searchable!

Thank you so much again to everyone who has made this possible! We still have a considerable amount of money left. I'll get all that updated soon so everyone knows what exactly is left.

As always, a very special thanks to /u/SkippTopp for taking the time to upload and host everything on his website!

Excellent news!! /u/SkippTopp received the new evidence photos we requested and has now uploaded them to his website!

• Newest evidence photos

• Trial exhibit 4 - DOT record

• Trial Exhibit 377 - Copy of PowerPoint Pictures

Exhibits 4 and 377 have been added here:

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/exhibits/

Some notes from SkippTopp:

The files for Exhibits 004, 012, 013, and 014 were corrupted and I was not able to open them, upload them, nor copy them from the CD onto my computer. I'll try again tomorrow, otherwise we may have to request new copies of those. I didn't have time to organize them so they ended up more or less in declining order by exhibit number. The thumbnails look a little funky, but if you click on each one, the full-size picture should open. Also noticed there are two files marked exhibit five, one is "exhibit 5" and the other is "exhibit 005".

The quality on Exhibit 377 is really bad, but what they sent was black and white low-resolution print-outs.

I will contact Barbara if we can't get the corrupted files to work.

I received a $15.75 refund check in the mail. It is being set aside along with the remaining funds from he crowd-funding campaign until we all decide what do go for next :)

Thank you so much everyone!!

I hope this is the best sub for this. I have seen the documentary series several times and believed SA probably innocent and BD definitely innocent. After watching the recent Dr Phil episode with his "fiancee", I got a creepy vibe from SA. I know that means nothing, but I now want to know more.

I'm hoping there's someone that can give me a very basic explanation poking holes in both sides. There is an overwhelming amount of information I wasn't prepared for and I'm not sure where to start. So can someone give me a brief: This is where the documentary was wrong or left out details and these facts make us convinced SAIG and perhaps a rebuttal for those points?

Thanks in advance.

There are few things that separate the two sides like the EDTA testing.

It only makes sense to me that Zellner would have had the testing peer reviewed or redone (as to the legitimacy of the science, not the actual blood in the vial)

Anyone else think so?

Required reading before continuing: https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/49p9j2/how_bz_could_prove_falsified_evidence_and/?

TL;DR: Basically there is a date conflict from the testimonies of Eisenberg and Culhane regarding when Culhane ([Nov 11th] (http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Jury-Trial-Transcript-Day-10-2007Feb23.pdf#page=158) ) sampled item BZ and when Eisenberg sent it to the FBI for testing ([Arrived at FBI HQ on Nov 16th] (http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Trial-Exhibit-479-FBI-Internal-Communications.pdf#page=10) ). Truthers have used this to claim that Culhane never sampled the bone or performed the testing as it was in Eisenberg's possession from some time on November 9th until it leaves to go to the FBI HQ and arrives there on Nov 16th.

So while discussing the case at r/SuperMAM this issue of the BZ chain of custody came up again. Now this theory is 5 months old and the CASO report was not released to us at the time it was written. After my work in the last few weeks trying to identify the infamous Chicken Bone evidence tags, I decided I would try an investigate this claim again using the CASO report.

First things first, Eisenberg identifies the bones she sends to the FBI as exhibit 385 and evidence tag 8318. (See bottom of page 130 here: )

With an evidence tag to search for I went about tracing the chain of custody in the CASO reports as best as I could.

Here's what I found:

• November 8th the item BZ is discovered at the scene by Deputy Rick Riemer and turned into CASO evidence lockers.

• November 9th, Deputy Jeremy Hawkins hands 8318 to DCI Agent Joy for transport to the WI STATE CRIME LAB.

So we now know that the item BZ definitely went to the WI STATE CRIME LAB on November 9th. I'm proposing this as the actual date Culhane sampled the bone for item BZ. That sample stayed at the crime lab and the bones were then transported to Eisenberg's office the same day. Now some people might be skeptical that the sample was transported twice that same day, Eisenberg says she takes the bones to the Dane County Coroner's Office lab for analysis on November 10th. Dane County is only about half an hour away from Madison (Where the WI STATE CRIME LAB was) so I imagine that Eisenberg's office was reasonably close to the crime lab.

So here's my proposed chain of custody for item BZ:

• Collected at scene Nov 8 by Riemer, turned into CASO
• Collected from CASO by Hawkins on Nov 9 and transported by DCI Agent Joy to WI State Crime Lab.
• Sampled by Culhane on Nov 9 and re-sealed and transported by (??? Probably DCI agent and in DCI reports) to Eisenberg's office.
• Transported Nov 10 by Eisenberg to Dane County Coroner's Office.
• Packaged and transported by (???) to FBI on Nov 11th.
• Received by FBI Nov 16th.

So there you have it. CASO Report tells us that item BZ did in fact go to the WI STATE CRIME LAB before Eisenberg sent it off to the FBI. Nothing to see here.

This may have already discussed so forgive me if it has because I'm just now going over the trial transcripts. The phone call made from Steven Avery to Teresa Halbach on the 31st at 4:35 P.M. could have been answered. On the trial transcripts it shows that under his phone records it shows the duration of that call being 0 seconds. Then on her phone records it shows the duration of the call being 13 seconds. That's because it could have rang a few times and he thinks she's not going to answer so he hangs up. At the same exact time he hangs up she actually answers on her line. She's probably saying "hello, hello" waiting for someone to answer before she hangs up herself. Therefore the phone connected on her end just not his. Yes that can happen.

http://www.postcrescent.com/story/news/2016/08/01/return-making-murderer-praised-panned/87439348/

MaM Season 2 will:

• 'shed additional light on what was coercion by law enforcement in obtaining Dassey’s confession to Halbach’s horrific killing':

• 'focus heavily on efforts by Dassey and Avery to overturn their convictions';

• 'back inside the story of convicted murderer Steven Avery, and his co-defendant, Brendan Dassey, as their respective investigative and legal teams challenge their convictions and the state fights to have the convictions and life sentences upheld';

• 'examine the post-conviction process and “the emotional toll the process takes on all involved";

• featured 'Dassey’s legal team, Nirider and Steve Drizin of the Northwestern University School of Law in Chicago, along with Avery’s attorney, Kathleen Zellner';

• keep Dassey's plight in the public eye!!!!!!!!!!!

...world is waiting and will watch it!...(and personally, I don't care if Hermann will watch MaM or not... IMO, he better WATCH-OUT, regardless!:).

No matter which side of SA guilt you are on I don't understand the lack of checking of alibis and elimination of suspects.

By eliminating some other possibilities it strengthens the prosecution case against SA.

not my research at all I just found this on Tick Tock, but check this out what do you guys thinK???:

Ryan Hillegas - "Well, the -- I mean, we called all her friends and basically just said that, you know, we haven't seen her, and wondering whereabouts. None of those people really turned anything up for us. And, then, we had called a good list of, like, the last numbers she had called and numbers on her phone."

How did they call numbers on her phone, if the phone is later found in a burn barrel? Yep this was missed by all..........they had her cell phone."

????? (still reeling here.....)

I may have missed this from the early days, but were the alleged Avery blood items from the RAV4 ever contemporaneously tested with and matched to a biological standard/reference for Avery under the same environmental conditions, using same amplification techniques, etc.? Or is that not a standard practice?

I noticed in the report (Exhibit 311 I believe), it says Item A6 was matched by keyboard search, and required subsequent confirmation of the match ("should be considered investigative lead..."). So, why can't I find an exhibit or report for any confirmation testing that Exhibit 311 implies is required?

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Steven-Avery-Trial-Exhibit-311.pdf

While 'killing the time' waiting for KZ Brief, I decided to go back to my original question, raised first time here after Skipp downloaded our RAV4 photos: why RAV4 has been parked in the 'wrong' direction?

Here is an original image taken from the recently published article based on eyewitness statement POSSIBLY seeing RAV4 'zooming away' toward Avery's salvage yard. ZOOMING away...speeding approx. 40 m/h, using the back entrance to salvage yard. I just added red arrows lines to show direction.

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/features/making-a-murderer-what-did-steven-averys-neighbor-see-20160708?page=2

http://imgur.com/zYy1haA

Next, I used well familiar image of Avery's property and made another arrows with the possible directions, inside of Avery property.

http://imgur.com/KUCwRNs

And the reason why I used word 'possible' is because as you can see there are more than one 'possibility' to get into place where RAV4 has been found. And regardless which 'possibility' you'll choose (red or blue/red or green), someone who did drive RAV4 would need to go around the pond or through the crusher area to be able to park RAV4 facing the tree. So, let's talk about RAV4 parking 'direction' and see what it means: why RAV4 driver choose more 'complicated' option, instead of parking RAV4 facing different direction: why not facing this -----> direction?

http://imgur.com/0Oxu5Zn

Couple questions:

Based on this image http://imgur.com/dovURjz (I simply added an imaginary front license plate)

• would you agree that removing the front license plate would be very-very hard task to perform AFTER RAV4 has been parked?

Would you agree if RAV4 would be parked in apposite direction then:

• front license plate would be much easy to remove (even back license plate shouldn't be the problem)?;

• driver door could be much easy to open?;

• battery disconnection could be performed easily?;

• big SIGN on the back would be much better concealed? and, finally...

• left side RAV4 damage would be blend nicely with all junk cars around?:)....

OK, let's say you would agree with certain things above but not with all. It's OK...I'll be more than happy to hear you out.

Here are my thoughts (and I could be way off)...

• I believe RAV4 has been parked without license plates (maybe therefore eyewitness saw RAV4 'zooming away'/speeding because it was driven without license plates?);

• I believe the reason for 'wrong' direction is double-folded: a) for easy to find RAV4 when needed (sign is very visible for volunteer searchers like Pam who doesn't have glasses:) and, the most important, entrance to cargo area is more accessible to re-arrange certain things, including placing memory card with name 'Teresa' on top.

...and if my 'believes' above are correct then whoever was driving behind RAV4 (zooming out with 40 m/h) was not LE.

jmo

Following on from this post https://www.reddit.com/r/HiveMindMaM/comments/4q66nf/people_are_creatures_of_habit/ where I tried not to think of any specific suspect or apportion blame and just look to see what patterns I could see in the evidence, I thought maybe we could talk a bit about what would do if you lived on the Avery property and you were actually seeking to conceal a murder. It would be really helpful to me - for my next post - if there was no talk of planting or even naming suspects. Just how you would clean up if you were a person living on the Avery property and you were a killer. Thanks.

HOW WOULD YOU CONCEAL/DESTROY THE EVIDENCE

For me I would;

• consider burning the body in one of the more efficient burning places they had (maybe here http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Exhibit-145-Aluminum-Smelter.jpg or here http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Exhibit-483-boiler-door-open.jpg)

• choose dumping the car at the quarry, which offers more privacy. I would be as well to torch the car with the body inside, which would destroy enough evidence before the firebrigade arrives.

• personal belongings I would remove batteries and sim cards & memory card immediately and them also torch them in the car. Covering them in fuel.

• throw the car key into the burning car or throw it from my car on the highway

So what would you do?

IF YOU WERE THE WOLF (PULP FICTION) ARRIVING AT AVERY PROPERTY ON 4TH NOV HOW WOULD YOU FINISH THE JOB?

You know there will be a flyover this afternoon. It is a business day and there will be people around, possible press too.

So if I arrived and wanted to finish the crappy job of concealing the crime, I would;

• awake at sunrise.

• collect all the bones in a barrel or bag. Take them to the quarry and distribute them through gravel piles at the quarry, churning it up to further disperse them.

• dump the remains of the electronic devices separately, distributing them in water and wooded areas bordering the property

• move the car to the quarry and torch it. If I didn't figure out the battery was disconnected I would use petrol to scrub out the interior hard surfaces and any visible blood. Plus smash all the windows to let the elements futher degrade any evidence inside.

• the key I would clean and drop down a drain nearby (but not inside the property) or just push deep into the soil.

What would you do?

"Also found in the rear of the RAV4 was a tripod, bearing property Tag#8242,and a silver colored cardboard box, bearing property tag#8092" CASO report p427

Did I miss the photos of these? I take it they were in rear seat/footwell since there is no pic of them in the cargo area?

Following on from this post https://www.reddit.com/r/HiveMindMaM/comments/4q66nf/people_are_creatures_of_habit/. I thought it might be good to take a look at what are Steven Avery's "habits". This is something I did in my head but did not make many notes so I thought maybe we could colllectively make a similar table using the criminal incidents and statements which give an insight into Steven's criminal (proven and unproven) behaviours. If you could reference the relevant report that would be handy too.

I would like to specifically exclude any behaviour in relation to the Halbach case at the moment

One of the things that stood out to me was that he is repeatedly described as "coercing" sex and in the case where he touched a young family member against her will he preceded to act in a sad way afterwards. He appears at times to be very manipulative in his attempts to gain sex when he wants it.

I would still classify all sexual assault and rape as immoral and so when I use the word spectrum here I do not mean spectrum of how serious the incident is, but spectrum meaning the different behaviours used to obtain sex, where the other person is not giving informed consent.

So when commenting with your info on Steven's "bad habits" and crimes, rather than just saying "rape" try to describe the behaviour as something on a spectrum. Sadistic? Forceful? Grooming? Pressurising? Violent?

In each of his crimes does he try to conceal it? How? How does he respond to being caught or confronted? Does he conceal/ destroy/play down his actions/admit actions?

Once we have a few bits I will put them into a similar table and we can take a look at his habits in a clear an obejctive way without the emotive language hopefully :)

If you can;

• describe the behaviour
• provide the source reporting the behaviour
• tell us if the incident occurred before or after his false imprisonment

PATTERNS AND MOTIVES IN EVIDENCE DESTRUCTION/CONCEALMENT

I am not sure if you have heard of Peter Tobin? He is a Scottish serial killer. He went undetected for many years. He had a level of forensic awareness but he did not seek to 'clean up' he just sought to conceal evidence long enough that he could move on assume a new name and start over.

For one victim he dumped her purse at a bus station to make it seem like she run away (his baby son's dna was later identified on that), he hid a knife in the loft (victim's blood later found on that), he cut the body in half and buried it (it was not found until 17 years later). His motive was to conceal evidence long enough to let him move on before it was discovered.

He also committed sexual and abusive crimes against various women and his patterns within those crimes differed from his murdered victims, but did follow a pattern across the rape/abuse crimes too.

In a later murder (the one that eventually got him caught and discovered the victim mentioned above body) he just concealed the body under the floor of the church long enough to get away. So again we see concealement to a level that allows him to flee.

So this gives context to my chain of thought. How criminals deal with evidence often follows a pattern, depending on what their future intentions are. Even where it is a first time crime there will often be a pattern within that crime (except with very disorganised thinkers).

PATTERNS IN THE EVIDENCE FROM HALBACH CASE

Different people respond differently and of course there are always exceptions or circumstances that may cause deviation, but I think of the responses broadly as these.

• fight - a desire to continue to live their current life so they try to use total destruction or concealment of evidence to achieve this

• flee - partial concealment or destruction, long enough to create distance from the evidence before discovery.

• fiddle - pretend to have diminished mental capacity or manipulate evidence/give statement to implicate others.

• freeze - do nothing except verbally deny.

So I went through the Halbach evidence trying to clear my head of any pre-conceived notion of any suspect for the murder or planting. I was interested in whether each item of evidence seemed to be;

• concealed (long term)
• concealed (short term)
• destroyed totally
• destroyed partially
• left undisturbed

Was this person trying to get away with a crime and carry on with life? Preparing to flee? Attempting to conceal their identity?

You can see what my results looks like here http://docdro.id/uCy1rz7

I have tweaked my thoughts a bit as more evidence appears but I have not wavered much from the feeling that there are at least two "hands" in the evidence.

I know people are keen to jump to LE being these planters of everything and I personally do not find that very likely. I think that they are strong contenders for planting (or moving) the key and bullets/dna on bullets are fairly likely LE attempting to fill in the blanks and tie up loose ends to solidify the Avery case.

But even if we take those out of the picture altogether, there is still a conflict in the pattern of how the physical evidence is found, whether it was 'original',concealed or destroyed.

TLDR

People are creatures of habit. The evidence in the Halbach case seems like;

• some evidence destroyed/concealed so well it is never found
• some not concealed at all
• some concealed/destroyed with various degrees of success

It feels like we have more than one "habit" at work and therefore more than one "hand" in the evidence.

I hate myself for making this post...but I would hate myself even more - if I don't:).

For a long time, I was looking at one 'subject' inside of SA barrel...Searching, analyzing, trying to find the answer to these two questions:

• what is it?

• why it was NOT burned?

You see, everything in SA barrel is burned...partially, but burned. (Beer?) can, cell phone parts, camera parts...everything except one 'subject'/item. And I did search evidence list to find out what is it. Nothing which can provide me an answers to above two questions.

I need your help, otherwise it'll continue bothering me, non-stop. I absolutely have no opinion on this 'subject'. Well, kind of have 'no opinion':).

Please look yourself...it's in the plain view.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/exhibit-burnt-pieces-3.jpg

This 'subject' is laying down between the aluminum burned can and one of the burned cell phone's part.

Please enlarge the above photo. Please pay attention to it's size. What is it? What it looks like to you? What it reminds you of?

...and here is my 'modified' image based on what I see. I did outline with red and green dash-lines the contour of this 'subject'.

Does this 'subject' looks like made of 'soft' material or not? Or this image just playing tricks with me?...and I'll tell you later what I 'see' and what it POSSIBLY could means.

http://imgur.com/oAjmpXI

Thank you all.

EDIT: OK. I need to be fair and explain 'where I'm going' with this post.

Since I learned that TH cell phone has been dis-assembled prior partial burning, I went to SA barrel looking for item which has been NOT burned. The same way, as I look at the green grass and white 'objects' around SA burn pit. And when I found this particular 'soft object' which is not burned - I was pretty much excited. So, prior to make any deduction from it, I was trying to identify this 'subject'. Is it cell phone's case or camera case?...couldn't find anything...so, maybe it's part of gardening glove?...possible. Regardless, this 'subject' looks to me as made from some kind of soft material...meaning, it must have burned sooner than any metal/plastic items as aluminum can or cell or camera's parts.

So, here I am, 'sitting' with another POSSIBLE 'proof' (not claiming that it's 100% proof/fact but possible proof) that all these electronics are planted.

• If this 'subject' is glove then I'm sure LE would send it to the Crime Lab to find if SA DNA blood inside. Right? Nope, nothing like that was send to the lab and tested.

• If this 'subject' is cell/camera case then lab should test for TH blood/DNA. Right? Nope, nothing like that was send to the lab and tested.

What it means? Why LE didn't take this non-burned 'subject' to the Crime Lab?...IMO, it means LE knew these electronics were not burned in SA barrel...therefore, planted.

JMO.

I decided to 'go there' and 'accept' the notion that Teresa's RAV4 has been 'shifted'...replaced by another 'look-a-like' RAV4 car.

My decision is self-served, to check my own sanity and see 'what it means' and 'where it leads'.

On October 31, TH was driving her own RAV4. Since that day or on the same day, her car was 'switched' with 'fake RAV4' with her DNA blood in it. The 'fake RAV4' has been found on SA territory, on November 5. What it means?

Definitely Premeditation!

• It takes time for the Killer or/and the Planter to find the same old car/model and switch VIN plate on windshield to match Teresa's car insurance information and car registration in the Department of Motor Vehicles. Let's say 'fake' car has been found days in advance and switching VIN done easily...few hours;

• But what about all corresponding unique car's identification parts which 'assigned' to this specific VIN? For example, the engine number is stamped on the engine in the most difficult place to see it...for this 'fake car' to match Teresa's VIN number - someone (professional!!!) needs to re-'chase' this number....and there are more places of unique ID...but, for the sake of argument, let's say it was done. 'Fake RAV4' is ready to be part of the murder/planting.

Motive

• Believe it or not, the 'shapeshifting' cars shenanigans/cons is pretty big under-ground illegal car industry and well known to Law Enforcement around the world. It's a big 'money making machine' to manipulate/change cars for huge profit. Especially, with the rare cars and with cars 'in demand'. And people who involved in such 'dirty' business are usually the one who has access to the cars, mainly Salvage Car Yards...So, this would be such a perfect 'motive' for Steven Avery to kill Teresa to gain her RAV4 and makes money on it. Am I crazy? Not at all!...I think if RAV4 which has been found on November 5 on his property was indeed 'fake RAV4' then LE would have the 'perfect motive' against SA!...Dammit, why didn't they use it??? And people who 'discovered' such a valuable 'facts' of 'fake RAV4' are making such a great 'motive' for SA guilt in TH murder;

• But what if 'fake RAV4' was specifically used for murder only and not for 'shapeshifting' car cons business? Hmmm...OK, but what value such 'switch' has in the murder? Does original Teresa's car was made of gold or has the gold parts and therefore her car has value for the Killer/Planter?...I have problem here and need your help...because I see absolutely no reason to use 'fake RAV4' for murder only.....which brings me back to only one reasonable, logical option, stated above: 'shapeshifting RAV4' was used to frame Steven Avery in illegal car business which leads to the TH murder. And now I'm really angry why LE didn't use such perfect 'motive'!....(no, I'm not angry...just joking).

Okey-dokey my friends....I did try to play 'fair'. I did try to be objective. I really-really did try.

...and all this non-sense about TH RAV4 car 'shapeshifting' has zero value for me...but of course, I cannot change anyone's opinion...This post was made for myself only:).

EDIT: to explain how 'shapeshifting' car illegal industry works, on very high-level.

Let's say you're Mr. Smith and you have 'like new' RAV4. And I'm very bad individual and owner of Salvage Car Yard. And I have the same RAV4 model/year car...but my car is not in good shape...has front damage, few screws are missing...I need a lot of repairs to do on my car to make decent money on it. And I saw your, Mr. Smith, car. Without going into much details, I got your car into my possession. I'll switch VIN numbers, placing your VIN on my 'damaged' car...re-'stamp' other car's parts on my RAV4 to match your car's numbers...and now, yours 'like new' RAV4 car becomes my car...and you have my old 'damaged' car with your VIN number to match your registration....of course, I need to kill you because otherwise you'll report me to authority:)...just joking....on serious note, such 'switch' happened when the owner of 'like new' car has no idea what happened...Mr. Smith's car has been stolen and possibly found later-on somewhere else, damaged....or never be found at all.

There are a few bits of evidence which may suggest the killer was looking for something.

• the blinker propping up the back seats + the memory card in the cargo area

There are some other possible reasons for the blinker being there but the most likely reason would be to get access to the area under the seats, which could indicate searching.

Teresa is running a business and getting dust in a memory card by just tossing it in the cargo could damage it and lose her images, so would seem unlikely. Compact Flash cards could cost $100+ in 2005. Anyone able to check the price of verbatim compact flash cards on the way back machine?

• contact blood smear on the cd case on the front passenger seat. Was there anything inside the cd case?

• the multiple locations of blood (if it is Avery's and was deposited there naturally) could indicate someone moving around the vehicle searching

• dismantling the electronics before burning

The obvious answer would seem that the killer sought to erase the record of their vehicle being photographed, but it should have been fairly easy to locate the camera for that purpose.

So it would seem most logical that if the killer was looking for something digital it would be a photo or video.

If someone was looking for a photo/video file then;

• they must have known it had not yet been copied to her computer at home or work (or they had access to erase it there).

• it must not be something she received/sent via text or email (or it would have been recoverable independent of her devices)

• they knew the CF memory card found in the cargo did not contain what they were looking for.

Are there any other pieces of evidence which might indicate the killer was searching the car or seeking to destroy digital records?

I was thinking I would go through CASO and make a list of the evidence item/tag# and their descriptions. Does a list like that exist already?

I also thought it might be helpful to put names with last 4 digits of their phone numbers (to see if they appear on any call logs for TH or SA).

Maybe an index too just summarising what is in each report?

Anyone up for helping out with that?

I thought it would be interesting, especially for new people to the sub, to do a list of the failings of LE relating to evidence processing and collecting. There are a lot of conspiracy allegations around, but I think there are a number of really big issues we can prove with their own documentation. So if we were doing an audit on evidence collection in the Halbach case, what would the issues be? What evidence supports this?

I'll start

ISSUE; failure to correctly document (photo/video) the bones in situ at the Avery burn pit site and failure to recover these remains using correct procedures.

TL;DR

• the medical examiner was not allowed in to view these remains in situ and advise on the best process for recovery of them.

• the remains were not photographed/videod in situ to even allow retrospective examination of their position in relation to each other or their condition when found (cremains are fragile and may have been damaged in collection and sifting process).

• failure to preserve the crime scene prior to recovery of the remains and failure to recover the remains using careful forensic anthropology techniques.

• failure to store remains separate from remains found at other locations

• failure to preserve chain of custody of remains

PROOF

Shutting out the medical examiner

The Medical Examiner, Debra Kataksch was prepared to testify that she was "walled off entirely" from the scene. http://www.jsonline.com/news/crime/witness-says-she-saw-victim-later-b99642985z1-363818721.html

This is highly unusual. The standard protocol when suspected human remains are found is to have the ME come in and examine them, prior to any attempt to recover the remains. The ME had access to specialists who could have conducted the recovery of the remains in the correct way to preserve the maximum amount of information.

failing to secure an area to preserve evidence

These photos show there was crates of water bottles, a dog & his chain and multiple feet on the areas where bomes were found.

http://m.imgur.com/GTjynuk,T529hE0

http://m.imgur.com/uyxhWGI,eCxufpw

Preventing retrospective examination by failure to document

This email exchange between Fassbender (investigator) and Ertl (crime scene tech) shows that there are NO photos or video of the bones in situ. The reason Ertl did not photograph them is the scene had already been disturbed. http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Trial-Exhibit-160-Email-Between-Fassbender-And-Ertl.pdf

This is a crucial piece of failure. Without the photos or videos a professional forensic anthropologist cannot retrospectively reach a conclusion about many things. This is explained by Dr Fairgreave (defense anthropologist) in the Docket podcast here http://www.michaelspratt.com/poadcast-legal-matters/2016/2/3/the-docket-making-a-murderer-after-show-special-guest-scott-fairgrieve

The type of information lost is ;

• were the bones in this location only from certain limbs (suggesting dismemberment)

• Were the bones in this location from all body parts (suggesting the entire remains were moved around to distribute at different locations)

• Were the bones in "order" (was the skull above the shoulder bones or were they all mixed up) which tells us if the bones were moved/stirred after burning. This info would have been of great help on establishing if this was a true burn site, or if the bones had been placed there

• was there any shovel marks or other tool marks in the soil surrounding the bones

• did any damage occur to the bones during the collection process. Cremains are brittle and easily damaged (but they were shovelled, sifted, boxed and posted which could cause a lot of damage)

No soil samples

A soil sample could reveal human fat which would be a strong indication a body was burned at that location. Or may have revealed information about accelerants used. There is no indication of soil from the area immediately around the bones being collected and sent for analysis.

Bones from multiple locations in one box

This is like forensic 101. You do not mix up evidence found in entirely different locations! This again prevents us knowing which body parts were found where. If every location has a mixture of all body parts (not just particular limns in particular locations). This and the failure to photograph the bones in situ, or let the ME or a forensic anthropologist examine them in situ means that we will NEVER know the answer. That is catastrophic in the pursuit of the truth.

We therefore cannot know if any of the bones collected from the SA pit were later identified as human. We do not know where the bones identified as human originated (burn pit, quarry, burn barrel).

chain of evidence

The bones were posted to Dr Eisenberg who was not at her office when they were delivered. The chain of custody was broken. The bones from multiple locations were all mixed in together like a pick'n'mix...

clumsy collection

Day 6 testimony p52,: Ertl admits they shovelled and sifted the remains. There was no proper forensic recovery using archaeology type techniques , they treated the remains like they sifting pebbles. http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Jury-Trial-Transcript-Day-6-2007Feb19.pdf

What are the other failings which can be proven? What would you include in an LE evidence collection audit?

I was going through the CASO report again for a browse and p8-30 we have a lot of phone numbers being checked out that do not appear on the call log submitted. Where did LE get these from?

And why is the phone number which was identified as Avery when RH profvided it now correctly reported as listing to T.Janda?

I was thinking about some of the loose ends that could be tied up, which depending on their outcome could either solidify or weaken the case against Steven (& Brendan). What loose ends would you like to see tidied up?

I would have like to see;

• a test on the garage concrete where the clean up occurred. Could they identify what had been used to clean up as well as finding out if there was any indication of what was cleaned up (like maybe paint, coppergrease etc.)

My suspicion is the garage would be ruled out as the crime scene but I would like to have that final loose end cleared up.

• a comparison for the EDTA with both edta +/- put on a rav4 dash in similar weather & lighting conditions as WI that November. Obviously they may struggle to find a sample as old as the one that was in evidence, but even with a more recent sample I would be curious to see the outcome.

Although the edta testing method I still don't feel has been sufficiently evaluated (independently), if the comparitive test showed the edta degrades significantly in the exposed conditions then it would cancel out this loose end. Alternatively if it confirmed that edta remains present and does not degrade, then I would want retesting by a non-fbi lab and dna testing done at the same time to confirm they are testing Avery blood.

• the 1.54 and 2.41 calls to Teresa. Who were they? What was the content of their messages?

Both these calls show unusual things. Call 1.54 it seems Teresa does not listen to or erase the message even though she calls into her mailbox after receiving it. The 2.41 call where cfna is activated. There is no sign of this feature active on any of the other records we have seen.

We know that he called Penny repeatedly and taunted her with details of the attack on her, whilst Steven was in jail. The reports show that he used some stalker type behaviour to contact prior victims to ask them to drop the charges.

The police were aware of his escalating behaviour and concerned enough to tail him. Hopefully they had enough training to understand that type of stress will often trigger reoffending. So in light of all that would really made them stop tailing Gregory that day?

I am also curious about the boldness of his attacks. Daylight. Very public locations. That seems like a lot more confidence in his ability to evade capture and boldness that could indicate a lot more offending than he has been linked to.

Two Rivers PD records on Gregory Allen:

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Two-Rivers-PD-Gregory-Allen-Records_redacted.pdf

Just a couple of notes:

• The August 1983 indecent exposure incident at the beach area starts on page 15

• It's not clear why the PB assault is included (page 24) given that Allen's name does not appear on that record; presumably it was attached to his record at some point, perhaps after the DNA match that was discovered during Avery's 2003 exoneration

Redaction was done (some by Two Rivers and some by me) in the interest of protecting the victims and witnesses.

A while back, I wrote about the fact that no trace of Teresa's purse, wallet or house keys were ever found. If her jeans rivets survived the fire, then keys and any metal bits in her purse or wallet should have too. At the very least, her house keys are somewhere, and they've never been found. That doesn't make sense.

It's striking me more lately that these items were never found - not among the burned cell phone and camera, nor any place else - and yet Steven left her bones in the BBQ pit and jaunted off to Crivitz, knowing the police had been around to have a look for her there, TWICE.

In my mind, this has become even more implausible than his failure to stay home that weekend and find time to crush the car when Earl wasn't looking.

I don't care what Steven's IQ is. You move the bones away from where you burned them. You scatter them under cars. You throw them in a pond. There's a fair chance they'd never have been found, had he done the latter. The search dogs might have found them if he'd put them under cars, but at least it would have been an attempt to hide the crime.

Put another way, if only he'd hidden the bones half as well as he hid her house keys.

These are the sorts of behavioral issues with the crime that make me doubt Steven did it, and make me absolutely certain there was framing involved whether he did or not.