This guy tossed a cat onto a fire and I'm supposed to feel bad for him having lost 18 years of his life? I'm not even fifteen minutes into this series and already think this guy is a piece of *beep* And then you have the other BS he's done. But as one of his apologetic white trash friends or family says; "He's done a lot of stupid things, but he always owns up to it." If this guy lived near me I'd actively dislike him at the very least.
shareI grew up about 4 miles or so from him and I remember vividly hearing about that incident. We all thought who does such a thing and wow good for them for arresting him for it. I also had heard about him running his cousin off the road but didn't know exactly which Avery that was. The reason why is that it was one of those things where you heard could happen over on Avery Rd. You always would hear things about cars getting shot at, etc.
The other thing that was glossed over was the burglary of the bar. He did WAY more than steal some beer etc. They completely trashed the place and cleaned the place out.
Now I have no opinion either way on whether he is guilty or not but just wanted to share some background.
Steven Avery is not a good guy. But we should all be concerned about wrongful convictions. Steven didn't commit the crime he was first convicted for.
There are a few important things about that:
1) It can happen to anyone, including you and people you do care about
2) The actual rapist went free for about 10 of those same 18 years, and he committed more rapes and assaults during that time -- which could have been prevented had they caught the right guy the first time
3) Because our prison system is not geared toward rehabilitation, people generally come out of it far worse and more dangerous than they went in
If Steven once again isn't guilty of this second crime, the same things apply. If he is, it may well be in great part because of the third one.
Dislike him all you want. I don't like him either. But a miscarriage of justice is a thing that matters in and of itself for a good many reasons having nothing to do with liking people, or not.
"Look, Alex, we've done a bad thing, okay? Just try and enjoy it."
Sounds like you already have your mind made up. No need in watching the rest of the series or learning about the case.
shareIf I could do it all over again, I would read the CASO, the Civil Suit, all of Avery's arrests reports and statements, and trial transcript first. Then go watch MaM.
shareWhere did you get "tossed a cat onto a fire"? Obviously the guy had some issues, but the cat/fire thing sounded like an accident. Saying it the way you did makes it sound like he purposefully burned that cat. In fact, at the end, he specifically mentions being with his animals as one of the things he is looking forward to.
shareAn accident? Get real. It was SA's idea to soak his own family cat in oil and gasoline, the two men threw it into the fire and watched it burn to death. He served 9 months in jail for animal abuse. SA was 20 years old at the time.
The point is not that burning a cat alive makes him a murderer. The act shows SA to be a callous bully indifferent to the suffering of others. MaM glosses over his actions, letting him tell the story. What next? Jack the Ripper's version of doing medical experiments on poor prostitutes to further research?
Does chasing the family cat down, dousing the cat with gas/oil then tossing the poor thing into/over the fire bring it home for you?
🐘🐘🐘🐘🐘🐘🐘🐘🐘🐘
My Memory Is Just A Memory! Oh No! Not the Mind Probe!!
Yeah I realized immediately after my post that the show left out details. I've heard people talk about the show, which is why I wanted to watch it, but I never heard anyone bring up the fact that a lot of stuff was left out.
I will say, while I don't know the full details in the case, it still seems pretty clear many witnesses for the prosecution were caught in blatant lies.
Can you give us one or two "blatant lies"?
shareFrom memory.... i watched this a long time ago.... but didnt one of the officers call in the plates that belonged to the green rav 4, 2 days before the car was even found?
And he had absolutely no explanation why..... He was obviously caught out in a lie and he most likely found the car 2 days earlier and planted the evidence in it then drove it to the Avery property.
You fell hook, line and sinker for the MaM edited and deceptive version which showed AC answering a question he was never asked. There is no evidence whatsoever that AC found the car. If you listened to the whole call, it is an ordinary, friendly conversation between AC and the dispatcher (which AC knows is being recorded).
AC is checking to make sure he got the correct info (BOLO) from another county. He was likely driving when he got the info and scribbled it down quickly. Police do this all the time. Notice that AC says a "99 Toyota". How would he know it was a 1999 unless he had that info already?
The RAV was found without plates. Are you suggesting AC was looking at the plates when he called, then took the time to take off the plates in the dark and put the plates in another vehicle? Why would a framer do that?
"And he had absolutely no explanation why"
Why would anyone need an explanation for something that never happened and he clearly denied?
which AC knows is being recorded
Deceitful editing could make the Pope look like a criminal. AC's treatment by MaM is a classic case of deceit. Having AC answer a question he was never asked, shifting words and phrases around, mood music, using facial expressions from another time. If anyone doubts this read SAIG Wiki "The 'suspicious' phone call..". I dare you.
Real testimony from Strang and AC:
Q. Actually you who suggests this is a '99 Toyota?
A. I asked if it was a '99 Toyota, yes.
Q. And the dispatcher confirmed that?
A. Yes.
Q. Were you looking at these plates when you called them in?
A. No, sir.
Q. And your best guess is that you called them in on November 3, 2005?
A. Yes, probably after I received a phone call from Investigator Wiegert letting me know that there was a missing person.
AC gets a call from another agency about a missing person and AC scribbles it down. AC phones in to dispatch to confirm he wrote the info down correctly. Dispatcher jokes, "Do you speak Spanish Andy?"
This is a routine call. If AC had actually found a missing person's car and planned a conspiracy, why would he phone it in? He had the info from Wiegert. Are you saying he is so dumb he doesn't know all police dispatch calls are recorded, but then hatches an elaborate conspiracy plot worthy of a criminal mastermind?
If AC had actually found a missing person's car, he would have been an excited hero.
Just to be clear, are Avery supporters suggesting AC found the car in the pitch dark within minutes or an hour or two of receiving the vehicle info, then on the spot plans to commit a criminal act (which would land him in jail if caught) and decides to PHONE THE POLICE DISPATCH to run that vehicle's info while looking at said vehicle???? That makes no sense.
Run this scenario by any 12 year-old. He WHAT? Phoned POLICE? The 12 year-old would laugh. Anybody who's ever watched Dateline knows police dispatch calls are recorded. Even if AC was so dumb he didn't know that, why would he SHARE his soon-to-be felony CRIME with a police dispatcher? ABSURD! (BTW anyone ever listen to a police radio? Wouldn't you prefer to use a cell phone?)
How exactly would AC have found the vehicle right away in the dark? Is AC a) in on the "conspiracy" (then why would he phone police?) or b) just stumbles on a vehicle while making his rounds (in a quarry????). If AC is not part of some conspiracy that killed an innocent woman, then he must be hatching his own criminal act right there on the spot. Which is it? Either way he wouldn't PHONE POLICE.
The defense thinks AC found the RAV on Nov. 3 the day TH is reported missing at 2:52 pm. AC says he got a call from Wiegert with the info. The vehicle info and plate number is sent out at 6:37 pm. according to MTSO dispatch logs. Avery supporters think AC found the car either in the quarry or at ASY (IN THE PITCH DARK!), yet constant mockery is made of PS finding the car in broad daylight in one area in less than a half hour.
Why would AC be driving around a quarry or salvage yard in pitch dark in hopes of finding a car of a missing person who might be off drinking in Green Bay?
Most times pizza parlours just have pizza.
The guy deserved 18 years in prison for the torture and murder of the cat, but he did NOT deserved to do time for a crime he didn't commit, and what is worst, the true rapist was out hurting more women.
Please excuse my terrible redaction, english is not my native language
There are actually a ton of people living in the country or on a farm who view cats as vermin. Especially barncats that mate all the time. I am not condoning what he did by any means I own a cat and I love cats but honestly this isnt that uncommon. Ive heard of tons of people killing cats like they would a rat or racoon, keep in mind its not a house pet or your beloved Mr. Whiskerson, it's a wild cat. Again not saying it is a pleasant thing or that it wasn't cruel or awful because it definitely was and I like him less for doing so. But to say he deserves to be locked up for murder for half his life because of that is a little over the top.
Dear Warden, You were right. Salvation lies within.
I agree it was a terrible thing he and the others did. Cruelty is never excusable or justified. Never.
Having said that, the attitude of country people toward animals is often not enlightened, and will always be abhorrent to city folk and those who see things differently. They deal with vermin constantly -- rats, raccoons, skunks, snakes, moles, voles, etc. -- and sometimes look at ever breeding cats the same way. In this case, however, I believe he said the cat was a household cat. It was not feral. He and his friends were drinking and/or drunk and committed a malicious and horrible act. No doubt about it.