It's a 40 acres of trash owned by borderline retarded rednecks. I'd say they burned shit all the time.
They had bonfires all the time. Witnesses and obvious physical evidence. Thinking it was more than a coincidence is just confirmation bias, which is not innocent until proven guilty.
Also, the chains and ropes. It's a salvage yard, guessing some of you have never stepped foot on one of these or you've never pulled an engine from a car. Not saying that's what they were used for but it certainly isn't a smoking gun.
Avery may have did it. I tend to believe he is innocent. State did nothing to ensure a prosecution, not to me at least and that's with the Manitowoc SD actively planting key evidence all over the scene. Still not enough. I believe Dassey was intended to be used as a witness alone against Avery buy the investigators and State underestimated his ability to process practically anything beyond the scope of an 8 year old. Once he started his story there wasn't stopping it. I think that snowballed further than than they anticipated.
So Avery's new attorney just won an appeal to have new DNA testing done on the blood found in Holbach's RAV-4, using testing with carbon dating.
You don't believe that Dassey raped and participated in this woman's murder to warrant the charges / conviction?
Been over a year since I watched it, but I think my final stance on him was that I was 50/50 on if he helped or not, and if he did, I was 100% sure he probably wasn't smart enough to know what he was doing.
What card said. Also, the way they got the "confession" was unethical. I'm no lawyer, but hard to see why a recanted confession of a minor with no legal counsel or guardian is good enough for conviction by itself. He can't legally buy a pack of cigarettes or apply for a loan by himself but can legally confess to capital crimes without counsel or a guardian?
From the court's opinion: Link: http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-b...C:16-3397:J:Hamilton:aut:T:fnOp:N:2074184:S:0
Did the courts listen to the recordings, or read the investigators' report. As I recall, those are in conflict.
Even if I agreed it was "unethical" (i'm not sure that I do), that doesn't constitute it being any more "illegal" than it may have also been "coerced". He was repeatedly given his Miranda rights, both orally and in written form, acknowledged his understanding of them each time and still wished to speak to investigators. Investigators shought his mother's permission before each interview, and she consented to each request. Whether or not that, or the decision to allow him to do so without counsel present, was both unwise and not in his best interests is a valid point, but even if true, is not one which overrides his actual confessing to the crimes against him, and which he did. The investigators even probed his suggestibility, asking about a fictitious tattoo that she was alleged to have on her stomach, and Dassey declined to consent to knowing of its existence or to having seen it. Having a low-functioning intellect, a naive mother and the absence of effective counsel does not serve as a Get Out of Jail Free card for having raped, murdered and mutilated the body of an innocent woman. At least yet - and thankfully.
I genuinely don't know - they heavily cited the lower courts detailed account of the interrogations, and whose ruling framed each in terms which seem beyond dispute by either side, but i'm not sure if they also watched the actual tapes themselves, or not.
I don't think having a low intellect and understanding consequences of words go together. After the interview he asked to go back to class because he had a test. That is not an individual that understands shit.
