Making a Murderer (spoilers expected) did Steven Avery do it?

[jerphisch]

Re: Making a Murderer (spoilers expected) did Steven Avery do it?

Exactly.

There is no question the Netflix series glossed over or underplayed some of the more unsavory aspects of Avery. If I were making such a series, I wouldn't have done this for credibility sake. If you think there was insufficient evidence Avery is guilty of killing Halbach, present your case. There is a pretty strong case to be made for that viewpoint. But don't weaken your argument by trying to paint the guy as a normal guy. At the end of the day, whether Avery soaked the cat in gas and threw it over or into the fire, or whether he "made a mistake" by throwing a cat over a fire as he was goofing off and it mistakenly caught fire, the incident has zero to do with whether he killed Halbach.

The makers were on The Daily Show last week, they tried to get both sides of the story but no one from the other side was willing to participate, to the point that Kratz tried to have all of their footage taken from them (Judge Fox ruled in their favor). So it ended up one sided because only one side would participate. They also said it was not intended to be an advocacy film about Avery or about Avery at all, just that they chose this case because they thought it would be an interesting look at the workings of the justice system. Essentially they lucked into this.

On the rebutting podcast....yikes. I've made it through 3 and don't think I can go on. The key couldn't have been planted by Lenk because it didn't have Lenk's DNA on it is the type of reasoning it's using.

[trixR4kids]

Re: Making a Murderer (spoilers expected) did Steven Avery do it?

The key couldn't have been planted by Lenk because it didn't have Lenk's DNA on it is the type of reasoning it's using.

HAHAHAHA. I commend you for suffering through 3 episodes...

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: Making a Murderer (spoilers expected) did Steven Avery do it?

The makers were on The Daily Show last week, they tried to get both sides of the story but no one from the other side was willing to participate, to the point that Kratz tried to have all of their footage taken from them (Judge Fox ruled in their favor). So it ended up one sided because only one side would participate. They also said it was not intended to be an advocacy film about Avery or about Avery at all, just that they chose this case because they thought it would be an interesting look at the workings of the justice system. Essentially they lucked into this.

On the rebutting podcast....yikes. I've made it through 3 and don't think I can go on. The key couldn't have been planted by Lenk because it didn't have Lenk's DNA on it is the type of reasoning it's using.

From what I've heard, according to the other side of this, the makers weren't all that interested in asking for the prosecution's side of things until they got very close to a final deal with netflix and by then many on that side felt the product was slanted towards the defense. There was one article I read about the woman that was the center of Avery's overturned rape conviction choosing not to participate because of the apparent slant of the documentarians.

[SanTropez]

Re: Making a Murderer (spoilers expected) did Steven Avery do it?

Being within 40 miles of where it happened you'd have to be as less competent than Dassey to believe that Making a Murderer is what really happened.

If you live within 40 miles of the crime scene you don't get to have an opinion, sorry.

#guiltyuntilproveninnocent

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: Making a Murderer (spoilers expected) did Steven Avery do it?

If you live within 40 miles of the crime scene you don't get to have an opinion, sorry.

#guiltyuntilproveninnocent

You certainly do get to have an opinion, but the rest of us that didn't go through this the first time are allowed to be completely skeptical of what those people have to say because most are probably tainted by how the media covered all the things Kratz and other spoon fed them.

[haulin oats]

If you live within 40 miles of the crime scene you don't get to have an opinion, sorry.

#guiltyuntilproveninnocent

I honestly don't care one way, or the other. I have my life to live. Just fun stirring the pot.

[PrezdeJohnson09]

Re: Making a Murderer (spoilers expected) did Steven Avery do it?

I've tried to stay out of this....but this is another interesting twist...how believable? I don't know...

http://globalnews.ca/news/2494856/ex...098feaf8af5d77

[jerphisch]

Re: Making a Murderer (spoilers expected) did Steven Avery do it?

I've tried to stay out of this....but this is another interesting twist...how believable? I don't know...

http://globalnews.ca/news/2494856/ex...098feaf8af5d77

The mystery note in that link specifically says she was burned in an aluminum smelter. Scott Tadych happened to work at an aluminum smelter, have a long history of violence towards women and all his co-workers gave statements that he was nuts. But why look into that...

[jerphisch]

Re: Making a Murderer (spoilers expected) did Steven Avery do it?

Here's yet another theory https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurd..._rav4_she_may/

[solovsfett]

Re: Making a Murderer (spoilers expected) did Steven Avery do it?

Here's yet another theory https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurd..._rav4_she_may/

I apologize in advance if my post wanders a bit...I've had a few bottles of thinner tonight (still in celebration mode since Wisconsin won 2 consecutive games recently).

I recently watched the series and have held off on commenting online and bringing up with friends etc., until this week.

Prior to watching the show I guess you could say I had a vague resonance of this case somewhere in my brain but I had 0 knowledge of the first case (meaning the one Avery was eventually exonerated of). I'm guilty of tuning out the news generally on these types of cases as I find them much too depressing to consider for very long...but this series has changed that for me in a big way.

2 or 3 of the theories recently posted make sense but...what's the deal? Are there that many effing shady/creepy people visiting this lot or living in Manitowoc?

Anyway, initial reaction: I was dubious of the ex-boyfriend and his behavior (and TH's brother for that matter) when they showed him/them in episode 3 (iirc) and he/they were attempting to answer why they were on the lot etc assisting in the search and essentially wandering within a crime scene unsupervised and when I later heard the ex-boyfriend erased voicemails on TH's phone it really got my dander up.

I must say I'm shaken but not surprised by the actions of the Manitowoc Sheriff's office, the Calument DA, the original public defender for Dassey etc. It's like high school all over again. Someone doesn't like person or family x and woe unto them.

But that's neither here nor there in the end. Regardless of what one thinks about the guilt or innocence of Steven Avery or Brendan Dassey (and I'll admit I actually feel they're both innocent based on what I've read and watched thusfar), the main point this documentary drives home for me is that neither guy got a fair trial, and the evidence was so flimsy as to be ridiculous. Leads were not followed, questions about the "evidence" that WAS found by Manitowoc cops, NOT Calumet cops or the WI DOJ guys were not answered properly and I feel the WI DOJ and Calumet Sheriff's totally ****ed up by allowing Mantiwoc Sheriff deputies to wander around at times unsupervised (and given their history vs. Avery and his lawsuit at that time this is the definition of egregious).

Anyway, this is an incredibly interesting and incredibly daunting case...I can't help but think of Franz Kafka's The Trial and that opening line: "Someone must have been telling lies about Joseph K., for without having done anything wrong he was arrested one fine morning."

also how that book ends "As he looked round, he saw the top floor of the building next to the quarry. He saw how a light flickered on and the two halves of a window opened out, somebody, made weak and thin by the height and the distance, leant suddenly far out from it and stretched his arms out even further. Who was that? A friend? A good person? Somebody who was taking part? Somebody who wanted to help? Was he alone? Was it everyone? Would anyone help? Were there objections that had been forgotten? There must have been some. The logic cannot be refuted, but someone who wants to live will not resist it. Where was the judge he’d never seen? Where was the high court he had never reached? He raised both hands and spread out all his fingers.

But the hands of one of the gentleman were laid on K.’s throat, while the other pushed the knife deep into his heart and twisted it there, twice. As his eyesight failed, K. saw the two gentlemen cheek by cheek, close in front of his face, watching the result. “Like a dog!” he said, it was as if the shame of it should outlive him."

[jerphisch]

Re: Making a Murderer (spoilers expected) did Steven Avery do it?

http://www.newsweek.com/2016/04/08/k...ry-441470.html

A pretty thorough article on Avery's new lawyer and the case she is putting together, as well as a couple pieces of "new" evidence. Most interesting is that Halbach's cell records show that she left the property and the final ping was 12 miles away. The defense had that info the whole time and never used it.

[bigblue_dl]

Re: Making a Murderer (spoilers expected) did Steven Avery do it?

http://www.newsweek.com/2016/04/08/k...ry-441470.html

A pretty thorough article on Avery's new lawyer and the case she is putting together, as well as a couple pieces of "new" evidence. Most interesting is that Halbach's cell records show that she left the property and the final ping was 12 miles away. The defense had that info the whole time and never used it.

If true, that is a very significant piece of info. It completely blows up an already flawed prosecution theory.

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Making a Murderer (spoilers expected) did Steven Avery do it?

http://www.newsweek.com/2016/04/08/k...ry-441470.html

A pretty thorough article on Avery's new lawyer and the case she is putting together, as well as a couple pieces of "new" evidence. Most interesting is that Halbach's cell records show that she left the property and the final ping was 12 miles away. The defense had that info the whole time and never used it.

Why wouldn't they use it?

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: Making a Murderer (spoilers expected) did Steven Avery do it?

Why wouldn't they use it?

probably because it can't prove anything, other than someone took her phone somewhere, whether or not it was her...who knows?

[SJHovey]

Re: Making a Murderer (spoilers expected) did Steven Avery do it?

probably because it can't prove anything, other than someone took her phone somewhere, whether or not it was her...who knows?

Yeah, something isn't right here. I don't care what this new lawyer says, his two trial lawyers were not complete idiots. It's not like they would fail to recognize the significance of evidence placing her twelve miles away from Avery's home. We're not being told something here.