Off The Record /// Making a Murderer | Forensic Files

[Applause] [Music] [Applause] [Music] [Applause] do you know why they're cheering they are cheering CU I
finally finally watched making a murderer oh you did did you watch the whole thing yes so it's easy to tear
right through it um I when I watched it I think I was a year late to the party what did it come
out 2015 I think I watched it in 2016 yeah I'm three years late which you know who knows I that could have been
six months late to the party I don't know but I I sat down with the intent of actually just watching one episode and
not uh planning to watch the entire series but it was so good it's so entertaining um that and it's it's well
filmed and there's good music and stuff like that like a good really cool kind of opening uh to to the episodes and it
it really just rolls you it's it's interesting enough that it rolls you right from one episode into the second
and then sometimes the third in the same setting yeah and and I think um it's been weird because it's been out
for 3 years I haven't watched it I've read a lot about the case mhm and I have always used this as like a
barometer so if we're talking Adon Sayad case with somebody where I'm talking West Memphis 3 with somebody joban ramsy
if they have some kind of off-the-wall theory one of the things that I'd always stop them and go hey stop for a second
this has happened 100 times at crime con I've stopped people okay stop right there stop what you're
debating me about or what you're trying to prove to me even though there's no debate you know how sometimes people
just start debating somebody's innocence and you're like well I I agree with you so I'd always stop and say what's
your thoughts on the stepen Avery case and based off of what they said there I would know
what kind of person I was dealing with is the way I viewed it so if so if I said stop right there and somebody and I
said let me know about Stephen Avery and they said well I don't think that they had enough to convict him or I don't
know if he got a fair trial okay I see that if they jumped right to it was a conspiracy theory and
the cops killed this innocent woman then that kind of lets me know where your head goes mhm and so I'd always use that
which is weird that I used a case that there is a documentary that I never watched right I
mean but I I did read a lot about it and I did watch a lot of the videos of what
they left out quote unquote M which the funny thing is I've seen so many of these what did they leave out videos
that I was expecting to be like watching this and going these filmmakers these ladies they purposely left this stuff
out now watching it I don't think they purposely left out anything I think some of the stuff just
got left out because it wasn't a part of the trial that they thought was interesting enough to put in the film
well and it was years what 10 years of filming or something crazy like right I mean you couldn't leave in everything or
we would still be watching season 1 right now 3 years after it came out right so um yeah tricky man It's tricky
because um with a lot of these cases and I found myself in this same group as well sometimes I don't know everything
that that is out there about the case and I maybe I formed an opinion or a theory based off of what I know yet I
don't I I've not found everything that's out there and yeah there's been times you know I've been in and I don't really
debate people too much with True Crime because would rather just talk I'd rather just hear what they have to say
because until something's solved any theory is in is one that I wouldn't mind hearing um yeah so well sometimes I've
been asked what my thought process on something was or or what what my Outlook was on something and
especially at like crime con you had a couple drinks somebody's asking about ad non Sayad or I keep bringing that up one
up but I'm bringing that one up because that's a hot case as far as if you think he's
innocent you're hardcore he's innocent and if somebody thinks he's guilty then you know you you might smash their face
so and not every case is like that but there are these cases that people are very passionate about and rightfully so
but sometimes if I know that they're really passionate about it I'll just kind of not want to give
what my thoughts are either way right who knows what kind of fire and also you're in a setting that you can't
explain everything uh I've gotten into tons of heated debates about that on Sayad case uh and and most of the time I
agree with 99% of what the other person is saying MH uh we just don't agree on one or two points so but this case was
strange because I thought I'd go in and watch it and my thought process has always been stepen Avery's guilty
period case Clos what happened what happened was he called her he got Teresa to go onto his
property they he got her her into his trailer he bound and tied her up to a bed he raped her he killed her uh
possibly slouched her throat uh shot her at some point um then set her on fire and
and that's what I kind of always believed mhm and I thought it's open shut case this guy's a
monster there's proof that he was a monster beforehand before now he was again for
for people that don't know he was convicted of of a rape back in uh 95 and spent 18 years in prison DNA
cleared him of that case so so but before that before he was put in jail I think there was some evidence of that
that's what I went into the documentary thinking I I think it was the second episode third episode I watched
something that was about 40 seconds long I can't explain the feeling I could can't
explain it to you uh what kind of feeling it was mhm other than like I'm just watching this documentary and I 40
about 40 seconds of this clip and I just went wait no that guy killed her and that's all I needed to know was
that clip I actually had to turn off I watched clip a couple times cuz I can't explain to you how overwhelming this
feeling was and so I had to stop the documentary and then I had to look like am I the only one that notic
this and come to find out that not only um did other people notice this but um you know there's 1,200 pages that um
Stephen Avery's new lawyer filed against this gentleman um I don't even know if you want to call him a gentleman and you
have to clue Us in on what you're talking about because I don't know that we know what you're talking about well
that's the point right now okay sorry I didn't know if you were gonna go into it
or not no I'm going to go into it but the so what happened uh and again I can't tell you what episode somebody i' have
to go back to like figure out which episode I stopped because basically after I saw this clip the clip
was uh Teresa's brother talking and her ex-boyfriend his name is Ryan um hillas I believe is how you say
his name okay and they're talking they're giving an interview to this is after they found
uh Teresa's U RAV four on the car lot right and they're giv an interview to the media
and one Ryan's lying he's lying about the statements he's giving to the media and he has this
giant giant Gump they ask a question and his throat sees is up so hard and this giant Gump
and I can't explain it other than I see this clip and just went what I mean it just like it was like the Gates of
Heaven opened up I'm not say anything bad about her brother I don't think the brother is
involved at all and I'm not 100% certain of any of this I should just be clear right mhm but what I saw was a very
fishy 40 some seconds of an interview where anytime there was these questions that he then gumps you know as
Adam apples moves up and down it seems like it's almost hard for him to talk and then a lie comes out of his
mouth and then a known lie a lie that's something that you know to be untruthful
something that you can prove that wrong about no no no that's I'm asking you something that you know is
untruthful right it's what I'm saying is you could hear what he said and then go
look up what he's talking about and you would find out he's telling them you know false information okay and he does
it twice and okay so then I just thought okay other people had to notice this right or am I the only one is there some
like higher power calling out to me saying hey look into this gentleman and like I said uh Stephen Avery's attorney
files 1200 page report and a lot of it has to do with Ryan Hast now what's interesting about this is in Wisconsin
the laws are different so the prosecution never had to prove a motive for Steven
Avery okay but the defense had to prove a motive if if they're going to bring up
another killer they have to actually prove motive so it's strange that the prosecution doesn't have to prove motive
but the defense has to and what people don't really understand too much about this case is that in order to find him
innocent which the first tally seven of the jurors found him Innocent but they would have to
believe the killer quote unquote that the defense is putting forward and their their defense was again framing so then
you'd have to believe that the police killed this innocent girl that's really hard stretch to get to MH and a lot of
people that watch this documentary think he was innocent uh think that the evidence was
planted and I think they're right about the evidence being planted but it's not by who they think it is the the
difficult thing about this case so that means the key was already there the blood
already was there what blood wasn't there some first off I haven't watched the thing in two
in over two years right so but there was a key what I'm saying is like if if you're going to say that the
evidence was planted but it wasn't planted by who they think it was planted by then
what does that mean all of the evidence was planted and it was planted by somebody that we don't know about well
okay so we have a situation where we have this guy that we think is the Killer and guess where her remains are
found burned on his property so that seems pretty open and shut what's different though is once you
start trying to figure out the timeline and yes Stephen Avery one of the things that it kind of left out in
the documentary is he called her with star 67 to block whatever he was you know to call her he claims that he
saw her leave based on cell phone ping technology chances are she left based on phone records and her calling her next
client at roughly the same time that Stephen said she left mhm well if you're going to go to your next client wouldn't
you call them mhm so all those things happen so there is evidence that she possibly left his property so if she did
leave Steven Avery's property then how did she get back for the murder to take place so that's one angle that you have
to look at the other angle that I think is pretty damning is that there's castoff splatter found in the Rav
4 so they believe that the cause of death is actually through like hammer or Mallet some type of
thing and there's so basically the back of the rav for is like a hatchback you'd
open up that door and there is castoff splatter on the top now that does not get there if you
move a body the castoff splatter only gets there if you're coming back with your hand with an object covered in
blood The Blood cast off of it and hits the back of the rra four so that's kind of
that's different than when the prosecution explained now at some point the prosecution says well she was tied
up no evidence of her being tied up no evidence of ropes being tied anywhere no evidence of shackles being tied to her
feet no evidence of that there's no DNA found in the bedroom of Teresa there's no blood evidence
there's no blood evidence and you're going to say that she you slit her throat in the bed there's no blood
evidence there's no evidence that she was tied to the bed there's actually no DNA evidence of her actually being in
the trailer so what do they do mid trial eh she was murdered in the garage well the problem
is again we don't have the DNA thought they found evidence excuse me they found evidence in the garage they they found
some evidence but it's just like look at the bullet they found they claim they find this bullet well they found 10
casings and they end up finding one where the casing looks like maybe it was used so one of the tests that they're
calling for is to prove that this didn't actually go through bone that it actually went through wood and there's
again not DNA evidence on the bullet so there's a lot of tests that are going to
that she uh and this is what I think making a murderer two part two is going to be about she calls for hundred of
test mhm and one of the things that we do know that we knew at the start of the documentary remains were
moved several times right so the remains are found in three areas one in the Cory
one in um like a drum and one in the the fire pit of the Avery's house now a lot
of experts that have looked at it think that the initial burning started at the Cory then the remains were put into the
barrel from the barrel those remains were then put into the fire pit at the Avery's house they can't tell if
there's if there was any any burning that happened to those remains at the Avery fire
pit so so that that that becomes that's not too weird I mean if if stepen kill he
could have took her out to the Corey and started burning her there and then moved
here the problem is even people that think that Steven was guilty cannot place that they saw a fire
or anything by the Corey where these some of these people were working so you have the prosecution
trying to create a story their first story doesn't make any sense and then when you look at the confession that
goes along with the prosecut 's first story which they change by the end of the trial so then the confession what do we
think of the confession well 71 times 71 times he denies any involvement so at some point we need to
change this justice system because how many times do somebody have to say I was not involved I don't know anything how
many times do they have to say that because this boy is then he is put in jail spends I don't know eight years or
or so he he's now out of jail but how many times does he has to have to say that he's not involved before we
just stop the interview well zero if he gets an attorney that will represent him
and tell the police to back off right but if you have an IQ of around 70 and your mom's saying hey it's okay to talk
to to the police that's that's a little bit of her fault though right can we agree on that yeah but you could argue
then what's her IQ you know here's the difference is police officers have to be police officers and
the prosecution have to start looking into what is the truth their job is to uncover the truth they may have in this
case not to get a conviction okay let's just talk about the confession what truth did they
uncover there I don't know I don't remember I mean you're asking me about something that I watched two two and a
half years ago I mean right but what I'm saying is okay if they were to uncover this truth then we she he claims she was
tied to the bed arms with ropes feet with shackles there's no evidence of that but there's also no evidence that
that didn't happen no I would say that if you can't find evidence of one rope shackles any
markings of shackles or rope that's your evidence that it didn't happen no I agree also you can't find his DNA
evidence in that bedroom right I agree proving a negative is much harder than proving a positive
right but at the same time it's we don't have um had her remains been found in a
certain way there would have been ways of looking at the body to determine if she was bound and and we didn't have
that because somebody went to the lengths of burning the remains right who knows what lengths they went to inside
that room um to to clean up that room yeah but if you look at the if you just look at after their
search that's not clean the garage was not clean the the I mean basically most investigators would say that garage is
so just normal garage right it that it would be hard to clean a bunch of blood evidence and blood splatter that's going
on to 20 different items you'd have to clean all the items it's not like it was like just a four wall room and there was
some splatter on the walls and you cleaned that off we're talking about if this shot happen
in the garage that you're talking about this could get on maybe a hundred different items right well if you don't
find any evidence of that then maybe it didn't happen and if you're trying to say that this boy's confession is
correct well then when he tells you that he got on top of her and he and his uncle forced him to Slit her
throat where's the blood where's the blood on the bed where's the blood on the headboard where's the blood on the
wall behind the headboard where's the blood in the carpet it's not there cuz it didn't
happen see what I mean well this is why I don't debate cases with people because you're throwing out wha ifs and
when I throw out wha ifs they're they're disregarded um well it's not a what if I'm not throwing out a what if what I'm
saying is they did not find that evidence so we've seen how many cases somebody's throat is slit there's going
to be tons of blood evidence that you find unless you clean it up mhm but normally if somebody cleans it up what
do we find the attempt of them cleaning it up right we don't have either one of those things in this so again and and
this is you know not to debate but what I'm trying to say is this story was wrong prosecution knew the story was
wrong so what did they do halfway through the trial they they changed the story this is not the story that they
gave to the jury when trying to um you know commit uh convict this guy right so they say trailer story doesn't make any
sense we have no DNA of her being in the trailer the only thing that we have in the trailer is a bill of sale and an
auto trader magazine okay was she in the trailer probably not we don't have the DNA evidence to back that up did she
hand him a bill of sale probably did she uh hand him a tra auto trader magazine probably now you could believe the
prosecution story that she was murdered in the garage but therefore if that's the story
the confession doesn't make any sense and therefore you have to then throw it out is what I'm saying mhm because they
fabricated a story they got a guy with a 70 some IQ to go along with their story
when you change the story mid trial therefore you're this this confession is awful now on top of
that you have Brendan's attorney an investigator but he but he's out of prison he's out of prison now yeah and
the reason why is cu his attorney and his the investigator that was assigned to him
were working with the prosecution when have you ever seen a case that the defense lawyer and the
investigator are working with the prosecution MH you never see that I me it's absolutely ridiculous
so anyways that's so to me that's where I stand as far as the confession I do think the
confession was false I think they had a narrative they made him follow that narrative that's what he
confessed to after 71 times of saying I didn't do anything I wasn't involved then he takes a stand and says I made
all that [ __ ] up and then on top of that the his defense attorney lets him talk
with the investigators again why he's on trial to have them try to trip him up again and say Hey you
better tell your mom cuz if you don't we're calling on there mhm so they knew that they could get the
call but here's where here's what's so funny to me a judge then comes in and says your attorney should have never let
you talk to the detectives again so I'm kicking your attorney off the case so then whatever is found after that should
have been thrown out and it wasn't they allowed that to be they allowed that that phone call to his mother to be
heard in court and they also didn't play the last hour and a half of their interrogation tape of him telling his
mom I didn't do anything they got to my head right now why his defense didn't say no we need cuz the defense the
defense agreed to that so that's where I stand on the confession do I think the the cousin had
anything to do with it don't think so I think it's a kid that was facing some challenges and
he didn't know how to overcome this again people say well people don't falsely confess
25% 40 40% in uh kids will false confess so I think just on those numbers okay so
he did some time now he's out I don't think they're going to press charges again so okay so now we're on to the
Stephen A so I see the well for let me let me address this before we move on CU it it
be be going back too far in attacking the system is not always fair in these particular instances when we have
failures by the defense it is not necessarily the system's fault or the system's wrongdoing if somebody is
misrepresent you know has does not have great representation or does not have great
Council well the council was appointed to him by the system but so what's the alternative did you and I pay for a
better defense for him or that you know because we kind of already are in the sense of taxpayer dollars right right or
does he just go with no representation at all no but what I'm saying is I've never heard of a defense attorney or
investigator signed to a case that works the I'm saying that's bad representation right a bad defense right
which they then kicked him off I'm I'm just saying sometimes people attack the system when it's not necessarily the
system's fault no I'm attacking that individual right why would you do that to a client that's
ridiculous why would you be I mean he told the media that his client was guilty and then he lied on the stand and
said I didn't say that then they had to play him a videotape of the guy saying it he's like well [ __ ] I guess I did say
that right I shouldn't have said that well this guy is just a guy that doesn't know how to do his job you know
these these people that are that are paid to defend these people it's supposed to be innocent until proven
guilty these people that are paid to do a job to defend somebody do the job and if you can't do the job and you suck at
the the job then you get fired and then our taxpayer money doesn't go to you because you're
inadequate it should go to people that and he was removed though he was removed from the case so in in that sense though
the system did what it's set up to do he received representation and then the representation was not great and was
removed right and I I think in this case yes did this kid go to jail yes but 70 71 times I think think it was that he
denied any involvement and then at some point he confessed now whether he's challenged or
not that is the consequence that you have to face the defense did the best they could to put on a a good trial I
think they made some horrible mistakes and then he had to pay for those as well which is not a attack of
the system because he's the one that ultimately confessed mhm so whether or not they have the tape of him talking to
the mother and confessing you still have the initial confession mhm but again I hate when
people say the initial confession because there's 71 times of somebody denying that they're involved so what's
the initial confession what they should say is the 70 702nd time that he confessed he said
that he did it 71 times he said he didn't do it so I do think that is some you know
um that's why you should never ever admit to something that you didn't do I think this should be taught to kids you
know well these techniques are um I don't know if they use the read technique when they when they
interrogated or questioned Brendan dassie but the read technique has been proven to lead to many many false
confessions and it's it's it goes back to for me this is where where you don't let your children speak to trained
interrogators trained interviewers to a child regardless if the guy's a genius or if he's walking around with a one IQ
right you know I don't I don't care there's been adults that that are of average IQ or better that have been
tricked into false confessions using read technique or similar techniques so I don't know that we need to I don't
want to get too much into Brandon ny's capabilities or not um I think that you could draw false confession out of
out of a lot of people using some of these techniques it does go back to for me uh Jason Baldwin you know Jesse Melly
and uh Brandon dassie and a lot of these these kids guys and girls their parents
should have stepped in and said nope the I will be in the room with you you can ask my son or daughter whatever you want
I will will be in the room with you I will be the mediator the questions will come to and through me and if at any
point I don't like what's going on in the room I'm going to lawyer up if if you haven't already you know some people
don't have the money and therefore they they got to kind of dip their toe in the
water or test the waters before they go to the expense of a of a lawyer and that
most certainly would have been true in the case of Jason Baldwin but um yeah this is you got to well and and then the
other thing too with the mom I mean she can sit there and blame all these people
and call these people snakes but you also have the opportunity to sitting there with your son and I frankly just
think she was too lazy to do it well and where I think these parents fall into trouble with not watching out not take
having their kids back so to speak is that I think it's some of it's in the wording you know if if I were to talk to
Jason Baldwin's mother and I'm I'm a investigator what I'm going to tell his mother is I need to talk to him because
I think he might have been a witness to a crime and a lot of times people go oh well he just go in there son and tell
him the truth and what what you're not realizing is that the investigator saying I think he witnessed the crime
because he was there and taking part of it right you know taking he had a hand in the in the deal or they actually have
to force your hand saying that you are more involved because they really need to secure your confession now now
regarding Wisconsin law and I'm not going to pretend to be up to speed on Wisconsin law but as far as Court
proceedings go in regards to proving motive or not having to prove motive that we're talking about two different
things here and and we we should be clear about that because from the prosecution's perspective they've
already held Grand jurries before that individual is tried in front of traditional court right so the Grand
Jury has already decided that the prosecution has a case against this individual right so that's why they
don't they don't necessarily need to prove motive they just need to prove evidence that the crime happened and
this was the perpetrator of such now for the defense they have to prove motive if
they're going to bring up an alternative suspect right because the the judge has
to decide what they're going to allow in court because if if they didn't have to
prove some kind of motive or at least convince a judge that there's reason to to mention Nick's name or the captain's
name as a possible suspect in this murder they have to do that because if I were the attorney I could just get up
there and spout off every person that lived in in the city right you know Betty did it oh well we think Joe did it
we think Tommy did it we think Bobby did it you know you could you just be there
for forever with and really just spinning your tires with a bunch of uh nonsense well so again as far as this
confession goes I think there's missteps again from Brendan from his mother from
his family from his lawyers from his defense team and the system and and that's how it went and he did some time
in jail and I think they got him out and I think most people that watch the documentary most people that follow the
case believe he should have been let out whether whether or not you believe him or
not uh some things didn't go the way they should have and so anyways that that wrong I guess is righted for now
right then it comes back to again I don't want this to sound like I don't think Stephen Avery is guilty or that
he's innocent I don't know that's my I don't know but here's what I find here's a couple points of interest that you
might have so this Ryan character he leads the search he's the reason why they're
searching around the Avery property claims that he hasn't been there don't know if we can believe him
on that one he sends somebody out that he doesn't know with a camera with a map she ends up finding the the car ra
relatively quickly so I don't doesn't bother me that she found it quickly what bothers me is I I think
this guy probably knew it was on the property mhm and why did he know that okay so that's kind of fishy let's
get into some more meat and potatoes he is sitting there on the documentary and he's sitting there
talking about the search how it's going to operate and how they're going to do it on his right hand his pink pinky is
black and purple mhm his right hand his pinky is black and purple and it goes all the way from his pinky up to his
wrist black and purple now he either had a hell of a time writing a letter or that was a bruise and that's
on his right hand if you look at his left hand it is clear as day that there is three big
scrapes on his hand huge scrapes somebody he got into a tussle with somebody so he has three cuts that I can
see on his left hand M that's bruising on his right hand I believe he's right-handed he's hitting that hammer
and we know that we have castoff blood what do we know about Ryan well they dated for 5 years no I mean
like are there other reasons that could explain away those injuries does he is he a logger is he in construction I
don't I I don't I don't know look I you can tell me that your cat attacked you all I know is that uh a
couple days after she goes missing you have a attack marks no I'm not saying that that that's not that you're not
speaking the truth I'm just saying if if we're going to be you know if if it's accusatory for um speculation like that
we do need to throw out that there are possibil they they may have ruled this guy out for a reason that that they're
not going to show in the documentary no no no no that's where you have to look at the case File and when you look at
the case File you realize oh it wasn't question it gets even worse hold on so he leads the search team so now he has
these bruises on his right hand he has these cuts on on his left hand I believe if you look at his testimony you can
still see um which it would been way later it looks like there's a like a almost a scar on his hand from from one
of the the cuts and then later on you can see another close-up version of the three cuts on his hand so you have that
that's kind of fishy so then we have this broken tail light that she has Cops want to know she have a broken
tail light so what does Ryan tell her ah she got a broken tail light a while ago
she put a claim into the insurance and she didn't have it fixed and she just paid for it or she just
took the money right right that's what the cops believe they don't check it out because
he's not a suspect because we only have one suspect in this case and he's lying that was a lie there and and we know
this and we know this because because they investigated him who did Stephen Avery's new
lawyer they they also figured out that um he's the one that magically came up with this he's lying in the sense that
she didn't call in the no insurance CLA claim got right so so again this damage and people question this damage saying
that it was not damaged until before which hey if you're hitting some with a hammer you might hit somebody's tail
light so he can't tell you when he talked to her last just watch his testimony on stand it's fishy as [ __ ]
but he's the one that finds the password information so they can get into her phone and get into her phone records
right now there's there's other people there with you but we have in the case where prosecution and defense are going
there's two calls there's two voicemails that are deleted why the cops didn't investigate
this because we have one suspect mhm we have two voicemails that are deleted we don't know why after her death right who
has access maybe the guy that come told you what the [ __ ] password was right maybe the guy that dated her for 5 years
and probably was the same password as always mhm so on top of that the guy that she was
living with that some people claimed that she was having sex with or at least an intimate relationship
with when they said something to him during this investigation that they believe they have a suspect the first
thing he said was you mean Ryan so what there what Stephen Avery's team is trying to prove through these
papers is that Ryan andri said they dated for five years I think there's some reports of
abuse there was some reports of him being controlling him being a little stalker
like at times and so he would see her on I believe that Sunday which he can't remember and so
their theory is that she went you know on the initial um she went to work and that somehow there's an
interference and that he would have um attacked her at some point and then knowing that she was on Stephen Avery's
property I mean this is kind of the theory that they're going on again I don't know how much weight I want to put
into it but once you see the bruising on the hands and you see the cuts on the other hand and then you then start
finding out that he's lying now here's the thing too here's what I here's where I'm
Falling Towards is we have voicemails that are deleted what's the answer for that we
don't know what the answer is but let's say that it was done then can they tell when they were
deleted I don't know for sure because I don't I don't think they know for sure because they didn't investigate
it no I I get that but is there a way to find out like one is there a way to find
out and who do they do they already know because it's one thing to say like there's deleted voicemails but it's if
if they can't prove that if they can't prove that they were deleted after she was killed no they were after or so
there is a way for them yeah and I think that's part of the test that she's trying to get them to let her do is then
she would be able to get that information so that's that's part of the whole I think and I really think this is
what making a murder 2 is going to be about not just him but other people that they didn't follow up as as far as
suspects go okay so here here's the thing is there's certain things in this case that make zero sense at all like
these voicemails if they have something to do with the case then Stephen A stepen Avery is innocent because we know
that he didn't delete the emails or the voicemails right so that's one thing in the case
that never made sense to me you have emails that would or voicemails that were deleted who are they deleted by
that might be your killer if that's the case that points more towards Ryan or somebody that knew her her did they
recover her phone I I don't know I think so cuz you you almost wonder I mean if somebody is in
possession of that phone after she's killed that person is also capable of of removing those voicemails right and in
the documentary it's weird because again they don't talk about Stephen Avery which I think one of the biggest damning
pieces of of evidence against him is that he's calling with star 67 why are you calling with star
67 now he might have made her feel uncomfortable and that's damning on Stephen Avery but
the other thing that I find that everybody finds fishy right follow me on this rabbit
hole for a second evidence there they search for eight days evidence is not found sometimes on
the first day sometimes not found till the third day mhm sometimes not found till the
fourth day like big pieces of evidence stuff about some of the ashes M didn't uncover this way they didn't take photos
of it I'm not going to blame the cops on this one right but there's this search happening now I know it's a big property
right but you don't find some of this stuff in the first eight days but here's what never made sense to me CU they go
oh well there was this key that they found on the third day or the fifth day or whatever it was right mhm the fact of
the matter is you're searching these places that aren't that big with a lot of people and you're not finding him on
the first couple days but then you find him on the next day okay so if Steven Avery
is is innocent then why were these things planted so you would say cops right that'd be the only answer no I the the
documentary and and other people watching it have said police planted these these items and and and and
obviously especially with the key that's the the key that's found in the trailer
yeah it the whole idea is that police returned later and placed it there and then it magically appeared yeah but the
thing that was always weird to me about the key was they made it seem like this key
would had to be cleaned now think listen to this this is what expert said that based off the way they found his DNA on
the key is that that almost the key had to be cleaned and then he touched it right
which is and they say that because they're not finding uh they're not finding the victim's DNA on the key the
person who had the key it was her key right MH is that right okay so the idea being if there if they should find any
DNA on the key it should be hers because the key was in her possession more than
anyone else's right so who cleans a key and then touches is it doesn't make a lot of
sense no and I'm not and I'm not I'm not saying that Stephen Avery didn't saying
just doesn't make a lot of sense right but of course and and there has to be questions in this case or there wouldn't
have been a show you know they wouldn't have been able to lock and lock Us in lock our attention in for how many
episodes was the first season was it 10 yeah it was long okay so it's like 10 episodes it was really long for me
because I had to stop like I said the second episode or the third episode whatever it was when they found that the
Rav 4 and go down these rabbit holes and I was sifting through I mean pages and Pages anything I could find online
because there's a lot of YouTubers that were saying hey this is what she found or this is what she filed and you could
believe that for so much but I I wanted to actually read it so again that so wait are you eating a little crow now
that we're that when you say that you would use this one as a litmus test for the yeah it was a barometer it was like
if you think that he's innocent if you and not so much if you thought he was innocent look you're you you're you have
the right to your opinion once people started saying that the cops planted all the evidence I was
like makes a lot of sense or that the fact that the cops killed her that theory always made me go okay I don't
that seems that seems crazy sorry I can't put it in any other terms well let's okay even if we don't say that it
seems pretty far-fetched so if you're willing to jump to the furthest far-fetched idea now what I'm trying to
say is that this individual Ryan that looks like a pretty good suspect dated her for 5 years there were some issues
there he talked to her a lot I believe he had access to her phone records I believe he had access to her
voicemail if he did have access to this then guess what it's not the first time he checked it then guess what the two
voicemails that were deleted guess what that's him supposedly she's living with Ryan's
best friend then the rumor around town was that roommate situation became intimate this is a this is a cell phone
we're talking about right yeah so what I don't understand is it would be extremely easy to figure out what
numbers left those voicemails it it's not going to be easy to to determine who deleted the voicemails but maybe the
number itself or the message itself is incriminating enough I hope and I think we'll get the answers in season two now
same guy best friend is now having sex with your on again off again girlfriend for The Last 5 Years some of that maybe
you think you're going to marry so now you can't can't cuz she's having sex with your best friend that's your motive
oh guess what she's on a property and that's proven that she was having okay another relationship let me just say
that I think all this will be proven in season two okay I I want you to be clear
cuz sometimes you say things in a way that make it sound like it's it's it's general knowledge hold on when it's
speculation what I want to say is I read so much about this that I couldn't tell
you what 100% was proven what was some things I can I can prove that he's lying to the media I can prove here okay so
the evidence that's found days later that we can't explain why it wasn't there before we have cops saying it
wasn't there before and then people going well it must have dropped from this dresser well
didn't you checked the dresser yeah I checked the dresser or the little cabinet or whatever it is was it there
no it wasn't there 3 days later it was why guess whose search party was allowed on the property
Ryan lies to the media and says we weren't on that property the cops invite the search party to help them because
it's so big so you're given a guy that should be a suspect you're giving a guy access to the crime scene
could he place any evidence that he wanted to yes now if you don't think that's shady
enough one thing that they did prove is that I think at least one time or maybe twice he was on property and he didn't
sign in and one of those times they caught him and said you need to sign in mhm and he refused to or refused to or
maybe he signed in at that point but he was being that's being shady you know you're
supposed to go to a area to sign in before you go search and he's caught on the property without being signed in
right so now you can't tell me and the cops can't tell me nobody can tell me how much he's on that property when he's
not supposed to be or at least not accounted for so if I'm not on that record and you find that key that day
you can't tell anybody that I put it there cuz wasn't even there right so again the bruising on the right hand the
cuts on the left hand again to me now now I'll say this to me you're going to create a you're going
to you're going to commit a murder knowing that she's going to be on the property of a guy that was convicted of
rape a guy that's in the news a guy that you Pro it's such a big property as long as I can get some of her remains
on that property they're going to go after this guy a guy that was wrongfully convicted of R
right but you have to be pretty witty to think of that idea mhm you know something happened so
the rumor is that on that Saturday which he doesn't remember what he did Ryan doesn't remember what he did a bunch of
other eyewitnesses say that's the day he learned that uh he um his ex-girlfriend and his best
friend were now intimate that that's the rumor so but you'd have to be pretty witty and pretty
nuts to think hey I can kill her and put her on this guy's property and they're going to look at him I understand that
that's that's a leap but what we do know in this case is those remains were mov were were moved that that was
scientifically proven so I'm just saying but here's where here's what I'm saying so you'd have to be like I said
pretty witty so if you do have these Cuts or these bruises from the attack then why wouldn't you put on [ __ ]
gloves when you can clearly see these bruise and these cuts and we're not talking
about little tiny Cuts we're talking about uh three cuts that you can see about 20 some feet away right on your
hand so he may have no reason to hide them right that's what I'm saying if he's not involved then it's like well
why the hell would I hide these and get again if he's not involved at all what this does prove to me though is Stephen
Avery's attorney that has gotten 18 18 people out of prison she's pretty freaking smart oh
yeah cuz she can turn and twist The Narrative but I'm just saying based off what I saw and then just rewatch his
testimony it is there some something doesn't seem right there uh I can't wait for uh making a murder part two I was
late to the party I watched making a murder part one a week before part two I can't wait I think there's uh I
think there'll be definitely a couple more off the Record discussions of of different things and look I'm not saying
that Stephen Avery's guilty or innocent I'm not saying that this Ryan guy did I'm just saying it was something in the
documentary that I noticed that like shook me to my core if no I get you but if Stephen Avery is
innocent he is the most unlucky the most unlucky wrongfully convicted person in the history of of Wisconsin
law well let me let me point a couple one thing is the taping of the confessions never was brought into law
until the Stephen Avery bill so it's funny that the bill is brought that you have to tape somebody's confession right
and that's not brought in until Stephen Avery's bill passes and then guess what the first
confession that they use was Brendan's so but here here here's a little thing that
I want to put out there for you because me and you both have talked for a long time and like I said my stance on this
before was he's 100% guilty and that's it let's move on with our lives we have an
individual what did he do so bad what was all these bad things that he supposedly did before he was wrong
wrongfully convicted of rape there's a bunch of rumors we have no proof of this stuff we do
have a we we do have a proof that who ran somebody off the road that the proof of that though his
reason and why he did it was CU she was making up rumors about him but here's a guy that committed some
crimes right every crime that he committed he admitted to there's not a single crime
that I'm I'm talking about before this murder right there's not a single crime that he committed small crimes small
crimes that he did not admit to and then you have a situation where he's on trial for a rape that he says
he's innocent of and then he's in jail longer because they won't Pro parole him because the first thing in the parole is
you have to admit your guilt mhm and he refused do when nobody believed him so then DNA gets him out of jail
mhm so he would not tell you that he did it and one of the things I thought was really interesting was when his sister
said cuz his sister went back and forth oh Steph did this Steven didn't do it Stephen did this but she said something
at the end if Steph did this he would have admitted to it by now and um and I don't know why that you know
there's no evidence or anything but there's just sometimes that you hear a truth or you hear a lie and that really
hits you and it's just like that 41 seconds when Ryan um hillas I think is how you say his name is talking to the
media and it just when she when Stephen Avery's sister said he would admit to it by now if he
did it that that statement Rings true inside hi me and when Ryan is lying to the
media it rings so loud that that's a [Music] [Applause] lie

Off The Record /// Making a Murderer OTR Episode 26 Recorded: 10-22-2018 Nic and the Captain discuss: Making a Murderer and New Theories. Thanks for the support. Subscribe to OTR on Apple or Patreon for New Episodes. Cheers

www.TrueCrimeGarage.com

Brief Summary

Hosts discuss <i>Making a Murderer</i>, Stephen Avery's case, and evidence implications.

Key points

Making a Murderer Revelation. A powerful moment leads to a shift in belief about Stephen Avery's guilt.
The Confession Dilemma. The discussion reveals inconsistencies in the confession and prosecution's story.
The False Confession Debate. A discussion on the prevalence of false confessions, especially among youth.
Defense Attorney's Failures. Criticism of the defense attorney's handling of the case and its consequences.
Suspicious Injuries. The search leader's injuries raise questions about his involvement.
Deleted Voicemails Mystery. The existence of deleted voicemails adds layers of suspicion to the case.

Episode highlights

Episode quotes

I can't explain the feeling... it was overwhelming.

Describing a powerful moment while watching the documentary.

7:18WatchMar 1, 2024

Tension

65/ 100Some tension

More from True Crime Garage TV

Solve the Crime

Read a real case one clue at a time, then see how your call held up against the investigators.