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

[The Rube]

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

There is certainly some evidence pointing to Avery that was not included in the documentary, but it still doesn't outweigh the rest that just doesn't make sense.

No DNA in the bedroom even though her throat and stomach were supposedly sliced there. The mysterious key. The fact that some of the crucial "evidence" only showed after Lent and Colbourn showed up, even when they weren't supposed to be there. The tampered evidence kit.

Then they took testimony that was changed eleventy threeve times by Dassey, a kid who doesn't even know what inconsistent means, nor did his mother know, because apparently rural Wisconsin is Deliverance of the north.

The brother and ex boyfriend of Halbach were incredibly annoying and suspiciously calm through the entire thing with their statements, and even in informal settings like the search party.

If Avery did it, it was certainly not in the manner the prosecution set forth. He may be guilty of murder, but was definitely framed no matter what by police. Either they planted evidence to make it look like he did it, or they planted evidence to make it easier to convict him, though they did a terrible job at it regardless.

I think the mother was dumb for dumb's sake. Never bothered with a proper education. IIRC, the kid was evaluated at about a 70 IQ. He has more problems than just simple schooling. It's really sad. I do know they stated that he had a 4th grade reading level, as a junior (soph, maybe?) in HS. How does he get passed along? Tragic.

 

[SanTropez]

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

It's surprising to me that not 1 person on the jury thought, maybe this guy did it but there is no way some of that evidence being presented is legit against him. I hear the prosecution mentioning evidence that isn't in the netflix series, that's fine, but trying to explain the crap that was out there is mind boggling.

 

[Shirtless Guy]

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

It's surprising to me that not 1 person on the jury thought, maybe this guy did it but there is no way some of that evidence being presented is legit against him. I hear the prosecution mentioning evidence that isn't in the netflix series, that's fine, but trying to explain the crap that was out there is mind boggling.

Didn't you hear the latest stuff about one juror coming forward and being scared for their safety based on knowing that 2 members of the jury were family of Manitowoc county sheriff department.

 

[burd]

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

Didn't you hear the latest stuff about one juror coming forward and being scared for their safety based on knowing that 2 members of the jury were family of Manitowoc county sheriff department.

Source?

 

[Shirtless Guy]

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

Source?

The 2nd post included a link to the makeup of the jury.
The fearful juror stuff came from the directors saying a juror contacted them.

http://time.com/4167915/making-a-murderer-steven-avery-juror/

 

[burd]

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

The 2nd post included a link to the makeup of the jury.
The fearful juror stuff came from the directors saying a juror contacted them.

http://time.com/4167915/making-a-murderer-steven-avery-juror/

thx. I asked because that kind of juror testimony would probably provide the basis for mistrial and I suspect that evidence was submitted for those purposes if a juror was, in fact, willing to testify to that effect.

 

[Shirtless Guy]

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

thx. I asked because that kind of juror testimony would probably provide the basis for mistrial and I suspect that evidence was submitted for those purposes if a juror was, in fact, willing to testify to that effect.

Yeah, sounds like the juror came forward to producers recently so it could be the basis of a mistrial.

 

[SNC SID]

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

Yeah, sounds like the juror came forward to producers recently so it could be the basis of a mistrial.

Do you guys know what a peremptory challenge is?

 

[burd]

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

Do you guys know what a peremptory challenge is?

Those are used to strike potential jurors without cause before the jury is impaneled, though, and unless I am mistaken we are talking about something quite different here.

 

[Shirtless Guy]

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

Do you guys know what a peremptory challenge is?

Yeah, I have no idea why the defense would have allowed anyone related to Manitowoc county sheriff department people on the jury.

Maybe because of the rural nature, there were too many to remove all of them.

 

[SNC SID]

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

Yeah, I have no idea why the defense would have allowed anyone related to Manitowoc county sheriff department people on the jury.

Maybe because of the rural nature, there were too many to remove all of them.

Usually each side removes six apiece, and I also believe the judge removed 15 potential jurors for bias during voir dire. So that's at least 27 people deemed more biased than the people who ended up on the jury. The defense certainly had its opportunity to remove the relatives though so to come back later and say the jury was tainted, welp, they had their chance to remove them and didn't.

 

[burd]

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

Usually each side removes six apiece, and I also believe the judge removed 15 potential jurors for bias during voir dire. So that's at least 27 people deemed more biased than the people who ended up on the jury. The defense certainly had its opportunity to remove the relatives though so to come back later and say the jury was tainted, welp, they had their chance to remove them and didn't.

That's true, but I (probably mistakenly) assumed there were things said or done by jurors after they were impaneled that contributed to or caused the intimidation, even though they are not to deliberate until the evidence is in.

 

[PrezdeJohnson09]

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

Why didn't the defense try to have the trial moved way away from Manitowoc County? Calumet doesn't count...It's the next county over. I'm talking entirely different part of the state or a different state.

 

[burd]

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

Why didn't the defense try to have the trial moved way away from Manitowoc County? Calumet doesn't count...It's the next county over. I'm talking entirely different part of the state or a different state.

All these questions underscore how different justice can be depending on what you can afford. This defense counsel might have been diligent and well intentioned but he or she was no OJ Dream Team.

 

[SNC SID]

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

Usually they will keep the locus the same but import the jury from another county. Not sure if the defense requested moving it or asked for a jury from elsewhere in Wisconsin. If they didn't ask for it, then it won't happen for sure.

 

[SanTropez]

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

If I was on that jury and saw just some of the evidence presented in this series, even with other evidence against Avery not shown, it would be hard to explain some of those important things away, and would leave doubt in my mind about the whole thing. When you take into account his history with police, suing the cops, wrongful imprisonment etc...

Innocent until proven guilty beyond a doubt...

 

[St. Clown]

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

It appears there's another documentary in the works on this same subject, one that seems to think there were glaring omissions from Making of a Murderer that could be the cause of the visceral reactions we're seeing in the media.

 

[MinnesotaNorthStar]

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

If I was on that jury and saw just some of the evidence presented in this series, even with other evidence against Avery not shown, it would be hard to explain some of those important things away, and would leave doubt in my mind about the whole thing. When you take into account his history with police, suing the cops, wrongful imprisonment etc...

Innocent until proven guilty beyond a doubt...

Beyond a reasonable doubt....not beyond all doubt.

 

[Kepler]

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

If the documentary is correct on the facts I have very little doubt that the department set him up again, both to avoid the payout and to save themselves (and also for revenge).

I quite understand that the documentary has an agenda (as the pro-police one being made will), but the actuality of malfeasance and sheer corruption running through all the facts of both cases is about as close to irrefutable as you can get -- this was (is?) is very, very bad bunch.

It's scary to realize that if you make the wrong enemy you can be put away despite innocence. That is obviously not the way the justice system is designed to work, but without significant reform (pairing both the police and the DA with adversarial civil rights departments and officials whose job it is to look after the rights of the accused and to prevent not just abuse but also bias) the system plus human nature will lead to this sort of thing. The media play along and are captured by the prosecution by the same forces as capture the DA: working together with the police every day, careers to be made by going along, creating and then satisfying a public bloodlust for advancement (or simply ratings).

The moral may simply be something we already knew, and that Avery himself says at one point: the poor always lose.

 

[The Rube]

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

If the documentary is correct on the facts I have very little doubt that the department set him up again, both to avoid the payout and to save themselves (and also for revenge).

I quite understand that the documentary has an agenda (as the pro-police one being made will), but the actuality of malfeasance and sheer corruption running through all the facts of both cases is about as close to irrefutable as you can get -- this was (is?) is very, very bad bunch.

It's scary to realize that if you make the wrong enemy you can be put away despite innocence. That is obviously not the way the justice system is designed to work, but without significant reform (pairing both the police and the DA with adversarial civil rights departments and officials whose job it is to look after the rights of the accused and to prevent not just abuse but also bias) the system plus human nature will lead to this sort of thing. The media play along and are captured by the prosecution by the same forces as capture the DA: working together with the police every day, careers to be made by going along, creating and then satisfying a public bloodlust for advancement (or simply ratings).

The moral may simply be something we already knew, and that Avery himself says at one point: the poor always lose.

Agreed to a point. Even WITH the doc's bias...can't argue against the actual court footage of changed testimony/lying, the actual evidence that "happened" to be found during a search that should never have been performed by the certain individuals, etc.