Making a Murderer (spoilers)

[awesome dawson]

It's been suggested in the TV thread that this documentary series needs it's own thread so we can discuss the million or so issues that arise as a result of watching the ten part series.

Mods, merge it if you want but the spoiler situation would make that a shame for those who haven't finished it.

Anyway, I've just finished it. Unbelievable and sad but fascinating and blatantly unjust. The state of Wisconsin should hang it's head in shame for allowing that lack of justice to occur. The nephew is going down the same route at Avery as well. The show does present the case from the defences side but it's hard to ignore the countless incidents of wrong doing, throughout the guys entire lifetime.

Not sure how to even begin discussing this show but I'm glad I've watched it. For the record, I can't see any guilt in either Steven or his nephew Brendan. I hope high pitched sex pest prosecution lawyer is suffering since he was exposed. Absolute t0sser.

 

[AuroRaman]

I finished it a couple of days ago and have tried to read as many articles as possible portraying both sides. It's so difficult to make a final decision on whether Avery/Brendan were framed or not. My mind changes with each new bit of information. The series itself left out some very telling evidence on the prosecution side. But I don't think it an be in question that there was some foul play on the law enforcement side (at least the Manitowoc force).

I was erring on the side that Avery probably did it, but evidence was planted to ensure a conviction, otherwise there was not enough to put him away. And Brendan was threatened by his uncle to help him dispose of the body. But today my feelings are that Brendan had nothing to do with it, and the fact Avery is pouring so much of his own time educating himself into appealing makes me wonder if he has actually been framed too.

I'm sure my opinion will change as I read more into it. I even read the full transcript of Brendan's 'confession' yesterday!

 

[Dayo]

I still can't believe when Steven was found guilty they said there was one man and one man alone responsible. Then the nephew gets done with no evidence pinning him to it other than him saying he did it after being heavily persuaded to say and sign things by those he came into contact with.
I think the ex boyfriend has a lot to answer for, far too many coincidences there.

 

[awesome dawson]

Why would Avery, after being in prison for 18 years, be let out free, living with his family and in love with that blonde bird, then decide to commit a murder. No great motive. He seems a good guy, he never gets in a temper about anything despite all he's been through.

 

[AuroRaman]

Why would Avery, after being in prison for 18 years, be let out free, living with his family and in love with that blonde bird, then decide to commit a murder. No great motive. He seems a good guy, he never gets in a temper about anything despite all he's been through.

And about to probably win a multi-million dollar lawsuit.

 

[dawaxman]

I thought Avery was guilty all along, until they gave him the guilty verdict, and then I saw the look on his face and I knew he was innocent

I agree with the defence attorney though, that I kinda hope he is guilty otherwise the alternative is that he's spent almost his entire life in prison for nothing

And how they gave Dassey the guilty verdict when there was NO evidence of him ever being there was disgusting - and the denial of all appeals too

 

[Rock Strongo]

The series itself left out some very telling evidence on the prosecution side. But I don't think it an be in question that there was some foul play on the law enforcement side (at least the Manitowoc force).

What telling evidence? A couple of phone calls? Some of the "evidence" put out was just plain stupid btw, I mean a copy of Auto Trader Magazine and a blank bill of sale??

The fact that they didn't find any DNA from Halbach was incredible when you think of what the prosecution said had happened. And nothing ever indicated she had been molested or raped in any way, that was just something they produced from the Dassey interragation, which itself was just an outrage.

The defense had a very good case and picked apart anything the prosecution had. Any sane jury should have said innocent beyond reasonable doubt. But like Kratz said; reasonable doubt is for the innocent. What a statement!

 

[Robbo]

Where's the blood, I ask. Where's the blood. You just don't cut someone's throat and leave no trace of blood on the bed where you did it - unless you're Dexter, of course, and Steven Avery doesn't seem quite as sophisticated.

I thought I was watching a movie when I saw this series. What a plot. And there were so many WTF moments - especially that tiny pin hole in the blood container.

I'm left with so many questions after watching this. Don't think this case is over just yet.

 

[Robbo]

This is interesting:

www.pajiba.com/netflix_movies_and_tv/is-steven-avery-guilty-evidence-making-a-murderer-didnt-present.php

 

[Rock Strongo]

Didn't find it very interesting... The cat thing and gun threat were both covered in the series.
Avery requesting Teresa to take the photos, well, seems natural to me if she's been there before and done so.
Anything Brendan confessed to should not in any way be used, the kid said what they told him to say.
As for cutting her throat and shooting her 5 times... Like you said, where is the blood?

I just can't find any sustainable evidence what so ever that pins the murder to Avery and or Dassey.

And wtf is wrong with Teresa's brother and ex? All too suspicious.

Ken Kratz has the most punchable demeanor in the world and Len Kachinsky with his PI....Jesus, how do they sleep at night? Len's a fycking macaron, is he even for real? Fargo turned real when he entered the series.

 

[dawaxman]

Didn't find it very interesting... The cat thing and gun threat were both covered in the series.
Avery requesting Teresa to take the photos, well, seems natural to me if she's been there before and done so.
Anything Brendan confessed to should not in any way be used, the kid said what they told him to say.
As for cutting her throat and shooting her 5 times... Like you said, where is the blood?

I just can't find any sustainable evidence what so ever that pins the murder to Avery and or Dassey.

And wtf is wrong with Teresa's brother and ex? All too suspicious.

Ken Kratz has the most punchable demeanor in the world and Len Kachinsky with his PI....Jesus, how do they sleep at night? Len's a fycking macaron, is he even for real? Fargo turned real when he entered the series.

The purchase of the handcuffs and leg irons is pretty revealing isn't it!!? Especially as his girlfriend was in prison at the time (wasn't she serving 7 months for a DUI charge?)

 

[Robbo]

Didn't find it very interesting... The cat thing and gun threat were both covered in the series.
Avery requesting Teresa to take the photos, well, seems natural to me if she's been there before and done so.
Anything Brendan confessed to should not in any way be used, the kid said what they told him to say.
As for cutting her throat and shooting her 5 times... Like you said, where is the blood?

I just can't find any sustainable evidence what so ever that pins the murder to Avery and or Dassey.

And wtf is wrong with Teresa's brother and ex? All too suspicious.

Ken Kratz has the most punchable demeanor in the world and Len Kachinsky with his PI....Jesus, how do they sleep at night? Len's a fycking macaron, is he even for real? Fargo turned real when he entered the series.

You don't think it's interesting that Avery called Auto trader and specifically asked for Halbach to come? That she was reluctant to go because of a previous episode? That the bullet was fired with Avery's rifle and that they actually found his DNA on the hood of her car?

I don't believe you!

Agreed about her brother though. He had his mind made up from the start. And that lawyer, Len, what a character. I wouldn't trust him with anything, let alone my entire future.

There were quite a few characters in the series, actually...like that crying investigator in the last episode. I mean, WTF!

Another thing that stuck with me is the practice of opening/closing statements, which frankly was just scare mongering from the state side. It's a very odd practice.

First they empathise the need to make a decision based on facts, not feelings, then there's the ending which is nothing but emotional propaganda which paints a picture of the accused as a monster/saint - depending on whose end statement it is.

And the judge needing to tell everyone that he thinks Avery is the most dangerous person his court room has ever seen...well, it doesn't make you look very impartial, does it.

Also the brother getting a say in the sentencing...strange. I guess all of this is common practice in American courts (probably other countries' courts as well), and I do recall seeing it on LA Law in the 80s and 90s, but I don't think it's very appropriate in a courtroom. Not that I'm an authority on the dos and don'ts of the court system, but still.

Anyway, detour. I'm still unconvinced he did it, although I wouldn't rule it out either. What I'm very confident of, though, is that there was a lot of fishy stuff going on from the police.

 

[dawaxman]

You don't think it's interesting that Avery called Auto trader and specifically asked for Halbach to come? That she was reluctant to go because of a previous episode? That the bullet was fired with Avery's rifle and that they actually found his DNA on the hood of her car?

I don't believe you!

Agreed about her brother though. He had his mind made up from the start. And that lawyer, Len, what a character. I wouldn't trust him with anything, let alone my entire future.

There were quite a few characters in the series, actually...like that crying investigator in the last episode. I mean, WTF!

Another thing that stuck with me is the practice of opening/closing statements, which frankly was just scare mongering from the state side. It's a very odd practice.

First they empathise the need to make a decision based on facts, not feelings, then there's the ending which is nothing but emotional propaganda which paints a picture of the accused as a monster/saint - depending on whose end statement it is.

And the judge needing to tell everyone that he thinks Avery is the most dangerous person his court room has ever seen...well, it doesn't make you look very impartial, does it.

Also the brother getting a say in the sentencing...strange. I guess all of this is common practice in American courts (probably other countries' courts as well), and I do recall seeing it on LA Law in the 80s and 90s, but I don't think it's very appropriate in a courtroom. Not that I'm an authority on the dos and don'ts of the court system, but still.

Anyway, detour. I'm still unconvinced he did it, although I wouldn't rule it out either. What I'm very confident of, though, is that there was a lot of fishy stuff going on from the police.

That's a victim impact statement, happens here in the UK too

 

[Robbo]

That's a victim impact statement, happens here in the UK too

Funny thing. I don't know if we have that here in Norway (don't think so), but what's the purpose? I'm guessing victims always would seek the maximum penalty. Or am I wrong?

What if a victim wants a very low penalty for a severe crime, for some reason - is the judge obliged to take that view into consideration?

 

[dawaxman]

Funny thing. I don't know if we have that here in Norway (don't think so), but what's the purpose? I'm guessing victims always would seek the maximum penalty. Or am I wrong?

What if a victim wants a very low penalty for a severe crime, for some reason - is the judge obliged to take that view into consideration?

The statement is the opportunity for the victim or the family of the victim (in the case of a homicide) to explain the impact the crime has had on them. It's probably less meaningful in a homicide trial - you're basically explaining how the person that was killed meant a lot to you, but with other crimes, you can explain to the judge and/or jury how the crime has impacted on your life (in my wife's case for example, how the stalking has meant the loss of certain liberties etc)

 

[Superted]

Why would Avery, after being in prison for 18 years, be let out free, living with his family and in love with that blonde bird, then decide to commit a murder. No great motive. He seems a good guy, he never gets in a temper about anything despite all he's been through.

This is the problem, I think he's not a good guy and does get a temper but it's not shown in the series at all. You get a feel for it with the letters he wrote his first wife. They were disturbing.

The bloke has a very low iq. He doesn't think like you and me. His family are loathed by the community and not just because they are poor.

The documentary does a good job of victimizing Avery and now the whole world is up in arms and demanding a pardon, and Anonymous have come out to fly the flag of justice. But here's the thing.

We've seen maybe 4 hours of trial in the series - tops. All heavily edited to sway the viewer towards the defendant. I don't want to live in a world where judgements can be reconsidered based on a one-sides documentary like this. There was a trial, I thought the judge was fair, and a jury. They're in a far better position to make a call than us.

One question I had - why didn't Avery testify? Maybe a legal mind can tell me the strategy as I'm interested, but that was the jaw dropping moment for me.

For what it's worth, I think both he and Dassey did it but they weren't alone and by no means the main instigators.

 

[Robbo]

The statement is the opportunity for the victim or the family of the victim (in the case of a homicide) to explain the impact the crime has had on them. It's probably less meaningful in a homicide trial - you're basically explaining how the person that was killed meant a lot to you, but with other crimes, you can explain to the judge and/or jury how the crime has impacted on your life (in my wife's case for example, how the stalking has meant the loss of certain liberties etc)

Fair enough...but shouldn't this already have been covered in the trial itself? From the witness stand, the closing statements, the attorney's arguments, etc? To me it seems misplaced to have the victims of the crime actively involved in the sentencing process like that.

 

[billyiddo]

I think the documentary makers must have left out some compelling evidence which pointed towards Avery because what they showed wan't really enough to secure a conviction 'beyond a reasonable doubt' - in my mind at least.

If she was killed in the garage or detained in his trailer I'm sure there would be evidence that would prove so beyond doubt, surely? The single bullet just doesn't cut it for me

As for the cousin/nephews trial - I honestly don't know how he was convicted seeing as the only evidence on him was the statement he made under duress, that trial particularly stank

 

[awesome dawson]

Pretty smart way of getting tips!

 

[Greg]

Watched the first episode last week, thought it was brick.