The state couldn't even prove Steven's burn pit was the primary burn site, so they misrepresented their own expert's testimony to fake the proof. Pointing that fact out is not insane, and pretending it is only distracts from the fact that the state never had the proof they claimed to.

INTRO: Why do state defenders consider it "borderline insane" to request "actual forensic proof that Teresa Halbach's remains were cremated in Steven Avery's burn pit with tires rather than the fabrications the state currently relies upon to advance that claim?"

 

Clear Evidence of Bad Faith

 

• During Steven's trial, the state failed to present conclusive evidence that Steven's burn pit was the primary burn site of Teresa's body, or even provide photo proof that her bones were actually in the burn pit. Further, witnesses who testified to seeing a burn pit fire at trial admitted under cross examination their initial statements either neglected to mention or specifically denied a fire. In one case, a witness confirmed the shift from "I didn't see a fire" to "I did see a fire" was motivated by police pressure. After deliberations, Steven Avery was acquitted of mutilating Teresa's body in his burn pit (but convicted of her murder).

 

• As we know, ever since the state failed to present proof of a primary burn site / failed to gain the mutilation conviction for Steven, state officials and defenders (like Kreepy Kratz, Grifting Griesbach, and BS Brenda) have all separately implied that the "bone in tire wire" evidence proves Steven's burn pit was the primary burn site, because said evidence proved she had to have been burned in Steven's pit with tires. However, DCI S/A Pevytoe very clearly testified he could not rule out burn pit bone planting, or even say which scenario (planting or in situ burning) was more or less likely. That means the tire wire bone evidence is diagnostically useless. In other words, if bones were found mixed among tire wire, that would support neither side more than the other, because such evidence could be explained by in situ burning or post cremation planting.

 

• Thus, it's a clear and desperate misrepresentation of what Pevytoe said for anyone to imply the bone in tire wire "evidence" proves Steven's burn pit was the primary burn site. State defenders know this, or should. But instead of addressing repeated misrepresentations by the state, defenders block and call others insane for pointing these misrepresentations out or asking for credible unmanipulated evidence or testimony. Attack the messenger. Never engage with an argument showing the state's failures, lies, or misrepresentations. Instead, conflate legitimate case critiques with unreasonable conspiratorial paranoia.

 

• These are textbook bad faith rhetorical tricks the state and its defenders love to exploit. But anyone honest would have to admit refusing to accept misrepresentations of Pevytoe's testimony, and instead asking for credible evidence to support a central but unproven aspect of the state's narrative (that Teresa Halbach's remains were cremated in Steven Avery's burn pit) is not insane or even borderline insane. It's the most basic function of someone searching for the truth in case where the state is actively avoiding it. Suggesting otherwise is what indicates intellectual bankruptcy, and intellectually bankrupt minds don't have any credible currency to evaluate anyone else's intellect or sanity.

 

• And if pointing out the lack of blood, deviations from protocol, and misrepresentations of Pevytoe's testimony is enough to get someone called "borderline insane," then what are we even doing here? IMO the message coming from state defenders has always been clear: They don't want to discuss or examine the bone evidence in good faith because they don't want anyone to question the narrative of the murder or cremation. If you do, you will be attacked and pathologized. Just a tip: trying to re-frame legitimate inquiry or criticism as a symptom of delusion is not a subtle red herring. All it does is show the goal isn't good faith debate, it's preventing people from looking too closely at the record, because especially in this case, the state's own record makes the system appear rotten to the core.

 

Let's list some insane things the state and its defenders apparently have no problem with re the handling of the burn pit and bone evidence:

 

• Evidence of off property human cremation and bone distribution with a barrel on Manitowoc County land, concealed by mislabeling County land as Avery land.

• Buried photos and HRD alert of human evidence on County land compared against the no HRD alert or photo proof of human evidence on Avery land.

• A broken and fabricated chain of custody for barrels and bones, including mislabeling ownership of property yielding bones, lies about the date of bone collection, and omissions re when bone evidence containers were opened and resealed.

• Evidence of Teresa's cremated bones and clothing (and the smell of fuel) magically appearing in previously searched barrels (that were being secretly mishandled by police) around the same time a pile of Teresa's cremated bones and clothing magically appeared on the surface level of Steven's burn pit.

• Witnesses who originally mentioned no burn pit fire or explicitly denied seeing a burn pit fire being pressured to change their statement to include a burn pit fire only after Teresa's burnt bones were reportedly found in Steven's burn pit.

• The Manitowoc Coroner being threatened and intimidated from doing her job in the Avery case (and facing continued intimidation to the point she resigned) and the Calumet ME never actually examining Steven's burn pit, or clarifying why he declared Teresa dead with DNA ID the state apparently required.

• And of course, the state failing to produce credible evidence that Steven's burn pit was the primary burn site, and as a result, misrepresenting and outright lying about their own expert's testimony re the tire wire to cover for their failure.

 

• And apparently, NONE OF THAT is a problem, but asking for credible undistorted evidence that Steven's burn pit was the primary burn site? That is "borderline insane"? So fabricating evidentiary support is fine, but demanding credible evidentiary support is insane? Bullshit. Sorry guys, but this kind of insane double standard only makes sense if your goal is not truth or justice, but defending the state's shit investigation and obvious lies about the bones at any cost.

 

• The only reason to shut down legitimate criticisms of this case with lazy ad hominem attacks, instead of engaging with the actual facts, is to avoid discussing what the record actually shows. A good faith debate would require admitting, for example, the state's primary burn site claim rests on distortion, not proof. But apparently, that's asking too much for some. Possibly because once you accept the state's burn pit claim rests on distortion, not proof, that admission opens a much worse question: why was cremation evidence found on police controlled land and magically appearing in police controlled barrels that were being mishandled just before a pile of bones were found on the surface level of Steven's burn pit? It's much easier to lie and keep the focus on Steven, than admit it's possible police secretly moved Teresa's bones using a mishandled barrel.

 

• In the end, if the state couldn't prove Steven's burn pit was the primary burn site, and had to lie to make it seem like they did, then asking for credible, undistorted proof that they never provided isn't insane, it's the logical response to their failure to provide they evidence they claimed to have. If demanding credible undistorted proof re unproven case claims is "insane," but lying about witness testimony to fabricate proof for your claims is just good lawyering, then I guess words and logic don't mean anything, and state defenders are just making up reality as they go based on their own needs. Anyone who rejects basic logic (where lies are fine as proof, but asking for credible proof is crazy) forfeits the right to judge anyone else's sanity.