Some of it IS evidence. In that it was catalogued and presented as "evidence" in the trial, just wasn't presented in the Documentary. Transcripts, phone records, witness accounts, etc.
I'm not saying he's 100% guilty. Just that I'm on the fence with the evidence. Kind of like what the author of that article said, the process was tainted, but maybe the jury got it right anyway?
I agree that a lot of what happened was more than enough for "reasonable doubt" and mistrial or aquittal. There's a LOT that doesn't add up. But that doesn't necessarily mean that he didn't actually do it.
-- The documentary said that part of Avery's criminal past included animal cruelty. To my recollection, it didn't specify exactly what that animal cruelty was. I know that for some of our readers, knowing is enough to want to see Avery get the death sentence regardless of whether he murdered Halbach: He doused a cat in oil and threw it on a bonfire (this is not relevant to the murder trial, but it certainly diminishes the sympathy some of us felt for him).
Objection: Immaterial-Is not relevant to the case.
-- Past criminal activity also included threatening a female relative at gunpoint.
Objection: Immaterial-Is not relevant to the case
-- In the months leading up to Halbach's disappearance, Avery had called Auto Trader several times and always specifically requested Halbach to come out and take the photos.
Objection: Immaterial-Is not relevant to the case
-- Halbach had complained to her boss that she didn't want to go out to Avery's trailer anymore, because once when she came out, Avery was waiting for her wearing only a towel (this was excluded for being too inflammatory). Avery clearly had an obsession with Halbach.
How would this even be presented? This isn't even close to evidence. What is the objective here?
-- On the day that Halbach went missing, Avery had called her three times, twice from a *67 number to hide his identity.
They were trying to schedule an appointment. Nothing to see here. This could easily be explained two ways. 1) wasn't his phone and didn't want people to have the number. 2) he's a "celebrity" and didn't want her to have their number.
-- The bullet with Halbach's DNA on it came from Avery's gun, which always hung above his bed.
This is the only true evidence in that article. Easily faked, but this is the only real "evidence" that I won't try to dispute.
-- Avery had purchased handcuffs and leg irons like the ones Dassey described holding Halbach only three weeks before (Avery said he's purchased them for use with his girlfriend, Jodi, with whom he'd had a tumultuous relationship -- at one point, he was ordered by police to stay away from her for three days).
Objection- Misstates evidence. Defendant was led into answering with "describe the chains". And he drew a picture of chains.
Reminds me of Dave Chappelle describing michael jackson's dick: "Sir, I have never seen Michael's alleged penis, but I bet you that I can describe it all right? Let me guess... there's a head, a shaft, some balls, hair - maybe pressed, permed hair, with glitter sprinkled on it.".
-- Here's the piece of evidence that
was presented at trial but not in the series that I find most convincing: In Dassey's illegally obtained statement, Dassey stated that he helped Avery moved the RAV4 into the junkyard and that Avery had lifted the hood and removed the battery cable. Even if you believe that the blood in Halbach's car was planted by the cops (as I do), there was also non-blood DNA evidence on the hood latch. I don't believe the police would plant -- or know to plant -- that evidence.
Objection: fruit of the poisonous tree. also, relevance. this isn't evidence that a murder was committed.
I'm not defending him, all i'm saying is that the article you posted wasn't "evidence". It was details to sway an opinion of him.