While I always like these true crime stories I know that we're watching it from the perspective of the defense. They want us to believe the guy is innocent because that makes the best story. So I wouldn't be surprised if there were important details left aside in order to push the agenda. But, based on only what we learned from this documentary, I find it difficult to convict either Steve or Brendan. Especially Brendan.

Is there something to the conspiracy the defense was trying to paint? Maybe. It's also possible that these were just a bunch of bumbling small town cops that were in way over their head (this applies to both the rape and murder case). Yes the defense was trying to paint a picture of a conspiracy but if I were on the jury (and again, based only on what we know from the doc) I'd have trouble convicting Averey simply because there was a very clear conflict of interest here and the Manitowic police simply should have handed the investigation over to another department. Period. Them handling it and the shady situation surrounding it would be enough to create reasonable doubt in my head and the prosecution would have to do a really really good job to convince me that those cops being involved created a fair investigation.

But that aside I think Averey did it. At the end of the day, someone murdered this woman. It's a lot easier for me to wrap my head around the idea that Averey, a criminal long before the wrongful rape conviction, did it than a bunch of cops did it and conspired against him.

My three big questions that seemed to be glossed over:

1. They mentioned that Steve's DNA was on the car keys. Am I recalling that correctly? I feel that's a big deal and wasn't really mentioned.

2. The cut and the blood in the car. Again, I may be recalling this wrong but there was a deep cut on Steve's finger when he got arrested. Possibly a coincidence but also gives credence to the idea that it was him that got the blood in the car. Also, based on the placement of the blood in the car, it does seem to have come from his finger.

3. The fire. There doesn't seem to be much doubt that there was indeed a fire in the Averey backyard that night. So what happened? If he was just burning other stuff, how did the body parts get in there? Did someone throw in burnt up body parts after the fact? Did someone else burn the body in the backyard without Steve being aware of it, even though he was home at the time? Or, did Steve burn the body himself as the prosecution says?

The only logical alternative to me is that the other Dassey guy and that Scott guy were involved. They would have access to the fire pit and framing Averey would be a breeze for them. They touched on this but you would think the defense lawyer, who seems like a really smart guy, would push this scenario.

Then there is the middle ground scenario. Maybe Steve killed her and the cops nudged the case along by making sure that possibly flimsy evidence was more firm.

1. Seriously? They mentioned this a dozen times. They felt it was extremely suspicious that the ONLY DNA found on her keys was Steve's. This was also the sample that the lab technician lady screwed up and introduced her own DNA into, and she also was under orders to try to find Steve's DNA (I forget the wording, but it was also a bit suspect). The key is obvious bullshit, as they searched the house many times, and it wasn't until the Manitowic police were alone that they "found" the key.

2. Yes, Steve had a cut, but there were also ZERO of Steve's finger prints found in the car. So even if he was competent enough to wear gloves, then the cut on his finger wouldn't of left blood. Of course that's ignoring if he got the cut WHILE he was wearing gloves, but honestly I wouldn't expect a person with that intelligence level to even wear gloves. I bet there aren't any people who work at a junk yard that don't have at least one cut on their hands at any given time. Not to mention why would he put her body in her car, if he killed her at his house or garage? I feel like the show spent at least an hour or two explaining why the blood in the car just didn't make sense.

3. People burn shit all of the time, hell ask my neighbors. That in itself isn't suspect, but obviously body parts in said fire is. However it doesn't prove that the body was actually burned there, and in fact all of the evidence showing random burned up bits left around at least 3 different locations on their property kind of indicates that it likely wasn't done there. Literally anyone had access to their salvage yard, it has wide open access at many spots. The whole "lets spread her burned up parts all around the property" was one of the biggest indicators to me that he was framed, besides the key. He also had access and knows how to use both the incinerator (which would of totally destroyed any DNA evidence of Teresa) and the car crusher but didn't use neither.

I totally believe that it's possible that the police THOUGHT he killed her and did what they (one, two, however many) could to create evidence of the fact. However the timing was especially coincidental with all of the depositions that were currently going on with Steve's legal battle.

One thing I don't see people bringing up much was that one detective who called in Teresa's car days before it was actually found. What the fuck? He didn't even have any excuse or explanation for this.

I was really wondering more about Teresa's brother and her ex-boyfriend. They seemed kind of shady, to say the least. I also wondered if they had any sort of relationship with anyone in the Manitowic police department. I'm guessing not, since they probably would of mentioned this, but I felt like the documentary didn't even want to explore that possibility (perhaps rightfully so).

This is what baffles me.

If Teresa was shot/killed in the garage, her DNA would be picked up somewhere in the garage. So we're to believe Steven went to the painstaking process of going over every thing in that extremely messy garage and wiped every single spot of her DNA from it - yet he would leave her car on his property covered by a few branches, leaving his easy-to-find blood inside it as well... and also not use the incinerator?

For someone who's trying to clean up evidence, it seems really unlikely that he was able to accomplish something that was almost-impossible while at the same time failing to do the simplest and most logical and obvious things.

1. Yeah, I guess that's the product of watching the whole show in basically one sitting. I do remember all of that now. I wouldn't jump to the obvious bullshit conclusion but yeah, it sure was fishy. This may fit in with my middle ground conclusion that the cops strongly felt Steven did it and worked in evidence to make it obvious. Still, the examiner was pretty confident in her conclusion, despite the contamination. I would like to hear more from her.

My guess after doing some more reading today: The key was left in the car. When it was found on Nov 5, it was slyly removed and planted in Avery's home on Nov 8. Thus making the case more clear cut.

edit: after some more reading, it seems that when the car was found it was the Calumet police that came to search the car. So I wouldn't know how the Manitowic police would get the key. (http://truecrimecases.blogspot.com/2...ven-avery.html)

2. They went over a lot of reasons why the blood in the car didn't make sense but I'm trying to see it from the other side of why the blood could have been there. The cut on the finger and placement of the blood is a big coincidence. My take is that there was no reason for the cops to take such a risk of getting the blood and planting it, especially knowing that that chemical could have been prevalent, which would have blown them up on the spot. The key could have been enough of a smoking gun.

As for him putting the body in the car: The link below makes note of that. According to the Brandon Dassey testimony, they put her in the back of the car when they were in the garage. The link has a lot of interesting tidbits, including how Steven went out of his way to ask for Theresa when he called Auto Trader magazine. It was written in 2006 so it doesn't make any mention of the documentary:

http://www.milwaukeemag.com/2006/05/01/blood-simple/

It's a good article. The Brandon Dassey part is most interesting. It paints a fucking grim picture of the crime.

3. I never said the fire itself was suspect. Reasonable doubt aside, I still believe that him setting the body on fire is the most logical conclusion. The alternative, that someone burned the body somewhere else (who?) and scattered the parts is more far fetched.

Again I think the best alternative is that Bobby Dassey and that Scott dude did it. But since the documentary barely touched on it and because the defense didn't go that route, I feel there's some reason why that couldn't have been the case.

The cop knowing the cars make and model was the biggest WTF moment for me. What I don't get is why the lawyer didn't press him and ask how he knew. It seemed that he put it out there to put the stink in the air and then just as quickly decided to move on.

So why would Avery burn the body there, and then scatter her remains at various locations around the property?

It's an unfortunate circumstance of the cops only ever looking at Avery as the suspect, which means there are no other possible suspects to investigate. I don't expect we'll ever find out what really happened.

I'm curious, where do you think Avery could of killed Teresa? Because it definitely wasn't in the garage or the house.

Watching the interrogation of Brendan Dassey definitely made me think of the interrogation of Jessie Misskelley of the West Memphis 3.

I pray to god I never get accused of a crime I didn't commit, because there's no way I would expect a jury to use common sense to come to a fair verdict.

I believe it was in the garage. I believe that the tidbit that lends credence to this comes from the article I posted previously. Brandon's mother calls the cops to say that Brandon was helping Steven with something in the garage on Halloween and came home with bleach stained jeans. This is what led the cops to question Dassey in the first place. That gives us a witness (the mom) that places Brandon and Steve in the garage with bleach.

Now, just to be clear, I never said that I think Avery is 100% guilty. I just believe it's the most likely conclusion.

You mention the scattering of the body parts. Definitely something that makes you go "hmmmm". For a guy that possibly meticulously cleaned his garage, he sure seemed flippant when it came to burning the body.

Here's an alternative: Someone burned the body elsewhere, drove it over to the Avery compound and silently dumped it on and around the Avery fire pit and left. But why? If you're the killer, your only concern is getting away with the crime and at this point you already have the car on the Avery compound and you know that Theresa can be placed there with the AutoTrader thing. You're in the clear. So why take this extra step? If you're burning the body go all the way with it, you have the time to take care of it since the cops aren't even looking at you. The only reason to go this far is if you're going out of your way to frame Avery. Fine. That brings us back to the cops. IMO, it's far more likely that Avery (lets not forget that this guy has a history of being a piece of shit) did it than the cops murdered an innocent 25 year old woman in cold blood, burned her body and planted it on Avery.

The more I think and read about the case the more I'm reaching the middle ground alternative. I believe it's most likely that Steve did the crime and that the cops did what they could to make sure he got pinned for it. So why were the body parts scattered? Maybe the cops found them and scattered them around to make sure they would be found.

If we're asking why the evidence is so flimsy we can bring the cops into the situation. If we're asking if there is reasonable doubt I would say probably yes. But if we're asking "Who killed Theresa Halbach?", I believe the most likely answer is Steve Avery.

Yes, Steve Avery is not a great guy, he did some stupid shit when he was young, but none of it was violent. He has no history of violence.

So if he has no history of violent or psychotic behavior, what's his motive for killing Teresa?

Where did this whole bleach thing come from? Bleach was never mentioned in the documentary. There was no DNA evidence or evidence that bleach was used in the house or garage. I'm sure today's forensic technology can detect if bleach had been used on a floor, furniture, clothes, etc.

Your suggestion that Avery had the idea to bleach the place down but leave her car on HIS property with HIS blood in it (why wouldn't he have bleached down the car too?) just makes no sense.

No history of violent or psychotic behavior according to the documentary. In fact, that little crime where he says he accidentally dropped a cat in a fire? Well the truth is that he doused the cat with gasoline and lit it on fire, served 9 months in jail for it. And let's not ignore the incident with his cousin. He drove her off the road, threatened her with a rifle and was going to kidnap her until he saw that she had a baby in the car. He served 6 years in prison for that crime. (sources below)

The bleach stained jeans are mentioned in the sources I posted below. Basically, Dassey's mom called the police at the end of February and told the police that Brenden stained his jeans with bleach while helping Steve Avery clean the garage. The jeans are a fact. They were introduced as evidence and prosecution questioned it at the trial. Yes, the documentary left this out entirely.

http://www.milwaukeemag.com/2006/05/01/blood-simple/

http://truecrimecases.blogspot.com/2...ven-avery.html

http://convolutedbrian.com.s3.amazon...-02Mar2006.pdf

Not for a second do I believe the cops murdered Teresa, and I don't believe the defence was going with that angle either.

I think what's VERY plausible is that the cops found Teresa's body and already knew that the last place she was seen was at Steven Avery's... and that gave the cops the opportunity to frame Avery. That certainly seems like the case when Andrew Colborn called in Teresa's plate numbers and asked for confirmation on the type of car - 2 days before the car was officially found. Why would a cop call in a plate number and matched car description if he isn't looking at it right then?

The cops aren't murderers, but they have no problem letting the real murderer go free in order to frame Avery. Remember, these are the same guys that let a real rapist go free to rape again just so they could pin the blame on Avery the first time.

From what the doc showed, I'd say Avery and Dassey are innocent. Especially the stuff with the kid and how he's stuck in prison is pretty sad.
I feel sorry for the mom. She looks so tired and defeated after his conviction.

I think being part of a small town where you're generally disliked doesn't help any when people are looking to pin the blame on someone. It would probably be hard to get an unbiased jury with people taken from the surrounding area, and it sounds like it wasn't a fair jury.

I'm curious if anyone else seriously pursued any other leads about who might have killed Theresa Halbach or once they zeroed in on Avery they stopped looking for anyone else. The doc touched briefly on the ex-bf, but not much else.