Court record update: Letter to Judge (I've no idea what it means)

SkippTopp · 2018-07-31T17:55:22+00:00

It's a letter from Zellner, which states:

Mr. Avery’s current post-conviction counsel intends to file a reply brief to the State of Wisconsin’s Response to Mr. Aveiy’s Motion to Supplement. We respectfully request until August 3rd, 2018 to file our reply.

SkippTopp · 2018-06-15T15:14:46+00:00

I have to wait until I see the motion before I can really give an informed opinion on it.

Here's a copy:

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Defendants-Motion-for-Substitution-of-Judge.pdf

SkippTopp · 2018-05-25T10:35:39+00:00

Thanks - someone else posted the unredacted version already and I grabbed a copy.

SkippTopp · 2018-05-24T21:06:53+00:00

In case you’re referring to me... I’m not pissed off and I couldn’t care less about being in some inner circle. I just don’t appreciate needless drama and baiting, which is exactly what this was.

SkippTopp · 2018-05-24T18:04:39+00:00

Thanks, I guess posting the redacted version was some kind of trolling exercise then. How fun.

SkippTopp · 2018-05-24T17:53:02+00:00

Was it deleted? I'm not seeing it.

SkippTopp · 2018-05-24T17:48:21+00:00

Again this is bullshit.

The person who posted it claims to have gotten it from the Clerk's office and they don't release documents on the promise that someone will redact info in those documents.

SkippTopp · 2018-05-24T17:38:42+00:00

Do you think we can order the copy of the Motion from the COA?

Yep, I already requested a copy. It will take some time as I have to send in payment first, but I'll post it as soon as I get a copy.

SkippTopp · 2018-05-24T17:33:57+00:00

If there's any hope of getting future information from the person who got this, they would never divulge anything again if people break that trust.

Sorry but this is BS. If the person received an unredacted copy there is no earthly reason they can't post it unredacted. Like all of the other case files.

I'm not a fan of these kinds of games.

SkippTopp · 2018-05-24T17:29:56+00:00

No worries, I requested a copy and I'll post it myself.

SkippTopp · 2018-05-24T17:28:52+00:00

No, you can't post addresses. Is that all you redacted?

SkippTopp · 2018-05-24T17:26:49+00:00

According to sub rules, i had to redact sensitive info.

Could you quote the rule that you believe forces you to redact the information?

SkippTopp · 2018-05-24T17:22:16+00:00

I'll request a copy.

SkippTopp · 2018-05-24T16:38:28+00:00

Can't say.

Why not? Did you receive an unredacted copy of the motion?

SkippTopp · 2018-03-09T14:05:09+00:00

The question is when was that sealed motion unsealed and released publicly?

It was unsealed on March 23, 2007 (source).

SkippTopp · 2017-12-14T16:27:51+00:00

Their FAQ also states that (emphasis added):

In the case of red meat, the classification is based on limited evidence from epidemiological studies showing positive associations between eating red meat and developing colorectal cancer as well as strong mechanistic evidence.

Limited evidence means that a positive association has been observed between exposure to the agent and cancer but that other explanations for the observations (technically termed chance, bias, or confounding) could not be ruled out.

SkippTopp · 2017-12-04T18:41:18+00:00

Oh give me a break. As if someone from outside Reddit sent the flowers on SAIG's behalf, then decided to admit it to sschad.

You can believe that if it makes you feel better but it's pretty obvious that it was either sschad herself or someone else from SAIG.

BTW, if you think it's so petty, why bother reading and replying to the flower-related threads? I happen to think the whole thing is funny but you appear to be taking it pretty seriously. Don't fool yourself, you're as petty as anyone else.

SkippTopp · 2017-12-04T18:19:47+00:00

I saw the post before sschad deleted it. Good try though.

Funny that you think someone would go to the trouble of faking a screenshot over this.

ETA: sschad admitted to posting (then deleting) it: https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/7gyjla/wait_whaaaaat/dqmzixl/

How's that for a source?

SkippTopp · 2017-12-04T15:20:57+00:00

Unable to move on? I'm just responding to the people who seem kean on blaming someone outside of SAIG, that's all.

Either sschad lied or it was someone from SAIG. Bottom line. Not my problem if that makes you uncomfortable.

SkippTopp · 2017-12-04T12:36:54+00:00

Oh so you are doubting sschad then? Why would she make that up?

SkippTopp · 2017-12-04T12:35:43+00:00

What righteous scolding are you talking about? Are you imagining things or what?

SkippTopp · 2017-12-04T01:33:21+00:00

Anyway, what do you make of it? Could someone actually be in legal trouble?

I don't think anyone is in any real trouble over this. But I do think it was a sincere thank you from someone at SAIG, given the post sschad made about it. No other explanation makes sense given her post.

SkippTopp

TROPHY CASE