Remove ads, unlock a dark mode theme, and get other perks by upgrading your account. Experience the website the way it's meant to be.

Making A Murderer (Netflix) TV Show • Page 2

Discussion in 'Entertainment Forum' started by Melody Bot, Jan 9, 2016.

  1. suicidesaints

    Trusted Prestigious

    I mean, calling him stupid might be insensitive, but it's not inaccurate...

    stu·pid
    ˈst(y)o͞opəd/
    adjective
    1. lacking intelligence or common sense.
     
    Davjs likes this.
  2. airik625

    we've seen the shadow of the axe before Supporter

    Calling him simple might not be inaccurate either, but it isn't necessarily something you do.
     
  3. airik625

    we've seen the shadow of the axe before Supporter

  4. SmithBerryCrunch

    Trusted Prestigious

    popdisaster00 likes this.
  5. SmithBerryCrunch

    Trusted Prestigious

     
    popdisaster00 likes this.
  6. [​IMG]
     
  7. jkauf

    Prestigious Supporter

  8. SmithBerryCrunch

    Trusted Prestigious

    Kathleen Zellner Press Conference
    Manitowoc County Courthouse

    August 26, 2016

    ZELLNER: So your question is probably what did I just file? I filed a motion for new scientific testing on the Steven Avery case. We're requesting to test dozens of items from the crime scene. The testing spans all the way from radio carbon-14 testing, DNA methylation, body identification testing. New DNA testing. Testing of items that were previously tested with new DNA methods. Microtrace testing. Different items to detect whether there were contaminates on those items so we can determine whether or not the items in evidence were planted.

    I think this will be the most comprehensive testing motions ever filed in the state of Wisconsin. Probably one of the most comprehensive motions ever filed in the united states. We're using scientists from Stockholm Sweden, Vienna Austria, California, Illinois. So we got a large number of scientists that will be doing the testing. We have completed testing on items that we don't need to request from Calumet county. That testing has already been completed. So, procedurally, what's going on is the motion that's filed today will stay the appeal that's pending in Wisconsin appellate court. That appeal was filed pro se by Mr. Avery and does not involve the issues that we want to raise--the new issues we want to raise with the court.

    So we're going to file a post-conviction petition as soon as we get these test results. We will file a post-conviction petition. Most wrongful conviction cases, I would say almost all of them, are not overturned on direct appeal. They're overturned at the post-conviction stage. So that's out plan. That's how we will proceed. I know there was confusion about the appeal on Monday, but we have to have these test results combined with the investigation we've already done. So that's where we're at. This is the motion; we have copies of it. It's got exhibits attached.

    QUESTION: Can you talk about the procedural aspect of this? This isn't a done deal; you have to get a judge to [approve it]?

    ZELLNER: Oh, we already have a court order from 2007. Judge Willis very wisely entered a DNA order saying that any future DNA testing that was done, that the defendant wanted to have done, could be done. So that's step one. Step two is under the Wisconsin statute, typically the state would have to pay for the testing. That's not going to happen here. The defense--we're paying for the testing. So that's already done.

    We foresee absolutely no problems getting this testing done. Because, if you think about it, no one who's guilty would ever allow this extensive testing to be done. From fibers, to contaminates, to DNA, to blood agents, all of those things are going to be done in this. I think the thing you most want to take away with this is read the motion. No one who's guilty would ever allow this to happen. Because these tests are going to establish definitely the age of the blood in the victim's vehicle. So we are going to know through radio carbon or DNA methylation whether the blood in the RAV was planted from the '96 vial.

    In addition to that, there were many, many items that should had been DNA tested that weren't. There was presumptive DNA testing done. There was not confirmatory DNA testing done. So for us, the case is amazing how much forensic evidence there is that can be tested. For the public, I think that it also will be very encouraging because we're going to find out one way or the other was the evidence planted. And we're also going to be able to get test results that we believe will completely exonerate Mr. Avery.

    The other thing we're going to do, and the petition is, we're going to lay out all of our investigation that we have done that will point to a third party. So that was not successfully done at the trial level. So, I think the most reassuring thing is that we are going to get to the bottom of who killed Teresa Halbach. And we currently believe that we will establish it was not Steven Avery.

    QUESTION: What have you learned from the testing you've done already?

    ZELLNER: Yeah, we're not going to disclose that until we do the post-conviction petition. But, I can tell you that the testing we've already done will establish Mr. Avery's innocence. But we are going to do the whole thing. We're going to do every conceivable test. We've been contacted by scientists all over the world. Volunteering, offering us ideas. And now we've got it pinned down to the testing we need to do to determine once and for all was the evidence in the vehicle planted? Was the DNA on the bullet planted? Was the car key planted? Was the DNA on the car key planted? We're going to be able to answer all of those questions because it's been almost 10 years since the verdict and there have been really huge developments in the forensic scientist [governance].

    QUESTION: How long do you think this will take?

    ZELLNER: Probably about three months. Maybe less. Some of it's going to be done really rapidly. So they're ready.

    QUESTION: Is the blood in the car the key for you? Is there one bit of evidence that's key to you?

    ZELLNER: Well you know what the contention is. The planted evidence is the blood in the car. It's Mr. Avery's DNA that shows up on the magically appearing car key. It was also her DNA on the bullet. We're requesting these ballistic tests that will establish whether the bullet--the fragment--even came from the shells Mr. Avery had. So what's great about this case is all the testing is out there. It's all developed. It's all validated. So we can take the mystery out of this mystery, and we think we know what the answer will be.

    QUESTION: What are you doing next? You said you're going to see Mrs. Avery?

    ZELLNER: Yeah, I am. So, anyway that's all I have to say. We have copies [of the filing] why don't you hand those out.

    QUESTION: Do you just have one suspect in mind or are you looking at multiple suspects?

    ZELLNER: In fairness, yeah we are looking at multiple people but we are narrowing it down, so...

    QUESTION: How many pages? Of the top of your head?

    ZELLNER: It's like 48.

    QUESTION: Would you like to say something to the Avery family group [on Facebook]?

    ZELLNER: Oh, yeah. Just that we're excited. This is going to answer everything. It's testing that wasn't done, testing that didn't exist at the time. But we are going to exhaust it when we go back through. Many of the swabs weren't tested. Presumptive testing was done. Presumptive blood testing wasn't done. Now we can do confirmatory tests with the Carbon-14 we are going to be able to--within a year--date this blood. So we can answer that.

    QUESTION: If the tests come back and shows the blood is from 2005?

    ZELLNER: Gee, that will be the risk that we're taking. Every client I represent I tell them "You want to be innocent when you hire me because I'll get to the bottom of it with the testing." And so Mr. Avery has encouraged us to do all of these tests. He is just like every other innocent client I've represented where he has no hesitation about it. But remember there are a lot of things planted in this. So we're not just talking blood. We're talking buccal swabs. There's a lot of different variations on this. So that's the problem, if you do something or if you did plant the evidence, that science is going to catch up to you. That's what we're going to see in this.

    QUESTION: Does Brendan Dassey's case have any impact on this?

    ZELLNER: It does, yes. Particularly on the hood latch. Because the court really zeroed in on Dassey's testimony about the hood latch. Because remember that the hood latch swab was not taken until March, not tested until April. After the confession on March 1st, then they go back and they get the swab and then they test that swab. We're going to be able to, I think, show that that's saliva on the hood latch. So now the test exists so you can tell if it's saliva, or blood, or just epithelial cells. There's no such thing as sweat DNA. So we've got, I think the best scientists in the country and they are going to answer all of those questions.

    QUESTION: And who is this media crew with you?

    ZELLNER: They're not with me. No one’s with me. I'm with the people that work with me.

    QUESTION: But who are the people that drove up with you that have cameras and audio equipment? You don't know who they are?

    ZELLNER: There are people all over. Don't know.

    QUESTION: Any idea how long these tests are going to take?

    ZELLNER: I think they should take about three months. One of the tests is going to be done in Vienna, Austria. But we're thinking on that, the actual test, the Carbon-14 test phase (have to use a mass spectrometry machine) will probably take about two months to take the data and results from it.

    QUESTION: So you're going to have to wait until everything gets back before Steve can even be considered to be released?

    ZELLNER: The procedure on post-conviction, ok, so Steve's been in 10 years from this conviction. Almost 10 years. So to undo a conviction like this, there's 27,000 pages of records. There's many, many swabs that were never tested. So we've had to go back through everything and we've had to find the scientists who can go through this very carefully because you don't get repeated chances to do this. So we've been working about seven months on it.

    Some post-convictions last a few years. We don't anticipate that because we have so much forensic evidence with us. So this one I think will go--I haven't had one that has lasted over three years so I don't imagine it will take this long once I get the tests. Because, he never made any incriminating statements, all right? The [Dassey] confession has been invalidated. So you're down to the evidence at the crime scene. You're down to the key, the hood latch, the blood in the RAV and the bullet.

    QUESTION: Have you talked to Steve today?

    ZELLNER: Yes. Today, no. Yesterday, yes.

    QUESTION: What did he have to say?

    ZELLNER: He was thrilled. He's absolutely thrilled. He can't wait for the results, so.

    QUESTION: Why did you decide to take this case?

    ZELLNER: I decided to take it because I knew that he's innocent. I thought when I watched the documentary, which I did--Steven Avery had contacted me in 2011 when I was on trial in Washington in a civil rights case. But I decided to take it because I think that the crime scene doesn't make sense. A couple other things that make absolutely no sense. There's no mixture of blood in the car. We've never seen that before. None of my forensic scientists have. You have all of Steven Avery's blood in the front, all of the victim's blood in the back. He's supposedly cut and he throws her in the car. So my scientists were saying they've never seen that where there isn't a mixture of the victim's blood along with the alleged perpetrator.

    The bones were moved. That was admitted. There was a human pelvis found over in the quarry. The bones were in different spots. The body was not burned whole. It's not possible to do that. So you've got the same bone in three different places. You've got only 30% of the bones recovered. You have 29 of the teeth never recovered. The bones look like they were planted. The property was closed down. The coroner from Manitowoc was not allowed on the property and actually was not notified it was a murder--that violates the Wisconsin statute.

    So when I looked at the case, I could see all kinds of problems, but I could also see a lot of evidence that could be tested. Evidence that could be retested. And that we could determine if the evidence was planted. So I thought, "great case,", you know, I want to be involved in it. I met with him 18 times. I'm positive that he's innocent. I won't have to prove he's innocent but I would like to because I absolutely believe that he's innocent.

    QUESTION: What can you tell us about the suspect?

    ZELLNER: Nothing. Nothing. Not until I file.

    QUESTION: Procedurally, does this federal hearing, do you know where [it stands]?

    ZELLNER: It depends on whether the attorney general agrees to the testing. As I said, there's already an order in place, so there's nothing to talk about on the DNA testing. Judge Willis entered that in 2007. So that's done. The rest of the testing, I would think, they would want that done. Because it gives them the opportunity to [find out] whether the evidence is planted or not and we're paying for it, so.

    QUESTION: Has the AG received a copy of this?

    ZELLNER: No, but they will
     
  9. AelNire

    @RiotGrlErin Supporter

    I wonder who is footing the bill for those tests. But do ya thang.
     
  10. SmithBerryCrunch

    Trusted Prestigious

    Zellner said her team is paying for them.
     
  11. AelNire

    @RiotGrlErin Supporter

    Man oh man. I only had time to skim so I prob missed that.
     
  12. airik625

    we've seen the shadow of the axe before Supporter

    Assuming the media/camera crew with her is Demos, Ricciardi, and the rest of their crew.
     
  13. SmithBerryCrunch

    Trusted Prestigious

    She claimed that it wasn't, but I can't imagine they wouldn't be there with her.
     
  14. airik625

    we've seen the shadow of the axe before Supporter

    Yeah her answer was very vague though. She wouldn't be wrong though, they aren't "with her" necessarily. Plus I'm sure she's not going to come right out and reference a television show and divert attention away from her client.
     
  15. AelNire

    @RiotGrlErin Supporter

  16. irthesteve

    formerly irthesteve Prestigious

    sigh
     
  17. joe727

    A DILAPIDATED BOAT! Prestigious

    This just won the Creative Arts Emmy for "Outstanding Documentary Series". Maybe I should finally take the time to watch this.
     
  18. SmithBerryCrunch

    Trusted Prestigious

  19. suicidesaints

    Trusted Prestigious

    That's good news, but he's only being released pending his appeal. It's likely he'll be going back to prison the way things have been going.

    Also, any news on season 2?
     
  20. airik625

    we've seen the shadow of the axe before Supporter

  21. SmithBerryCrunch

    Trusted Prestigious

    Well, sort of. The judge overturned his conviction in August and ordered him to be released within 90 days. But the state appealed (obviously) but now the judge has granted him release while the appeal is ongoing.
     
  22. airik625

    we've seen the shadow of the axe before Supporter

    Oh okay I'm with you now. Good deal.
     
    Raditz likes this.
  23. SmithBerryCrunch

    Trusted Prestigious

  24. airik625

    we've seen the shadow of the axe before Supporter

    Poor kid
     
  25. suicidesaints

    Trusted Prestigious

    Doesn't surprise me one bit the way things have been going thus far. What a shit show.