Making A Murderer

[razor]

Just finished watching the whole thing.

 

I was so upset for Brendan more than anyone, as I truly believe he did exactly as he said he did and made the whole thing up due to the power of suggestion and coercion.

 

When he said he wanted to get home to watch Wrestlemania, it said everything about his view of what was happening. 

 

In later episodes it also explores the idea that he couldn't distinguish between the police and his own lawyers.  They kept saying they were "helping him", when, in the case of his lawyers - especially the one that looks like that scrawny Hollywood actor William H Macy - nothing could be further from the truth.  Did that bloke even have a law qualification...?  Never has a man's self perception and public perception been so markedly opposed.  If I were as obviously moronic as him, I'd have stayed away from the camera, not openly flaunted how stupid I was.  Even in his court appearance he comes across as smug and self-satisfied.  His religiously-twisted aide is another that needs to be held to account.

 

I have to admit I cried after episode 9.  When Brendan was brave enough to take to the stand and was coherent in his testimony I really thought he would win.  The cousin's testimony was another incredible moment.

 

On the issue of suggestion and coercion, I picked up this interesting piece:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/the-confessions/etc/introduction.html

 

Overall, I don't know if Steven was innocent, or Brendan for that matter.  We have an edited, mediated view of the whole event.  From what we have seen, it is reasonable to assume that the trial was never fair.  When that Ken Kratz started giving evidence to the public through the media, the old adage that a lie is half way around the world before the truth has its shoes on rang true.  Events are framed by the first to frame it - everything after that is just a futile attempt to rectify.

 

I have come away from it with a deep respect for Dolores and Alan Avery, for their dignity and for their humanity.  Reminds me so much of issues closer to home.

 

The line I will take from it more than any other is "Poor people lose all the time."

[Josef Svejk]

Really enjoying this, love real life stuff like this. I finished episode 8 last night, just unbelievable. Been trying my hardest not to google the outcome. Best thing I've watched for a good while, really is a must see. Done a bit of searching for similar documentaries to this & have come across these two. Next on my list. Anyone seen them?

 

Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills (1996)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0117293/?ref_=nv_sr_2

 

The Thin Blue Line

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0096257/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

 

Similarly excellent. Both. Especially the former (as part of a trilogy).

[Special K]

Just finished this.

 

After reading some of the stuff that's NOT in the series I'm in two minds whether or not he actually did it. However, there's no doubt he's been stitched up on some level

[Ted]

Finished it myself last night. That shady cunt crying on the stand over the blue ribbon made my blood boil.

 

He's fucking sold  a kid down the river and taken his life away from him, then he has the fucking cheek to sit on that stand and pretend he gave a fuck about any of it. Utter fucking RAT.

 

The whole thing made me sick. 

[Ted]

That Ken Kratz did his best Brendan Rodgers impression after the trials. 

 

New teeth giving him the confidence to try and finger anything that moves. Probably got a sunbed installed in his kitchen too. CUNT.

[Saintslfc13]

Just finished 6 myself, haven't read what wasn't in the series though and would appreciate a link to that. So far I think it's evident that Avery was stitched up and Brendan honestly should be ruled an incompetent witness against himself (I suspect he would've been ruled such had he been brought into Steven's trial, but so far he's only been mentioned). There is plenty of evidence of coercion in Brendan's case and evidence tampering if not outright fraud in Steven's that I can't see how the trials were even allowed to be prosecuted.

What I feel really bad about is I even get hints of animosity towards the victim's family when they're on as well, even though I know that in that situation all they can do is trust the police and prosecution whilst hoping they've got the right offenders. Still I can't help but wonder how they hear all this during the trial and not think to themselves "fuck man, something isn't right here".

[razor]

Just finished 6 myself, haven't read what wasn't in the series though and would appreciate a link to that. So far I think it's evident that Avery was stitched up and Brendan honestly should be ruled an incompetent witness against himself (I suspect he would've been ruled such had he been brought into Steven's trial, but so far he's only been mentioned). There is plenty of evidence of coercion in Brendan's case and evidence tampering if not outright fraud in Steven's that I can't see how the trials were even allowed to be prosecuted.

 

What I feel really bad about is I even get hints of animosity towards the victim's family when they're on as well, even though I know that in that situation all they can do is trust the police and prosecution whilst hoping they've got the right offenders. Still I can't help but wonder how they hear all this during the trial and not think to themselves "fuck man, something isn't right here".

 

I had one flash of that, too.  Then I remembered how harrowing the whole situation must be for each one of them.  Hearing about the rape and mutilation of someone they loved and cherished.  What else could you do in that situation but place your trust in the police?  They weren't part of the problem.

 

I really don't like the (American?) model of holding press conferences after each day of the trial to report how you think it went.  That is insanity.  It really shouldn't be allowed to happen.

[Bobby Hundreds]

You have to remember the family sat through weeks of evidence and witness testimony not just a 10 hour documentary like us. Although they seemed convinced it was him from the off. The evidence, how it was collected and by whom puts a taint on the whole thing. At the very least the case needs reviewing in my eyes. Unless there is more evidence on Brendan other than his own statement he should be released.

[Special K]

Just finished 6 myself, haven't read what wasn't in the series though and would appreciate a link to that. So far I think it's evident that Avery was stitched up and Brendan honestly should be ruled an incompetent witness against himself (I suspect he would've been ruled such had he been brought into Steven's trial, but so far he's only been mentioned). There is plenty of evidence of coercion in Brendan's case and evidence tampering if not outright fraud in Steven's that I can't see how the trials were even allowed to be prosecuted.

 

What I feel really bad about is I even get hints of animosity towards the victim's family when they're on as well, even though I know that in that situation all they can do is trust the police and prosecution whilst hoping they've got the right offenders. Still I can't help but wonder how they hear all this during the trial and not think to themselves "fuck man, something isn't right here".

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

[Spy Bee]

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

There's a lot of dubious stuff in that link, and the things that are legitimate are generally circumstantial.

[Dr Nowt]

One of the most depressing things of course is that the vast majority in Steve Avery's position within society, starting out with pretty much a presumption of their guilt, would never normally have available to them legal counsel at the level he did, so that much of the state malpractice toward him was at least investigated and put on show at his trial in the way it was in the first place, for all the good it did the poor bastard.

 

How many don't even stand as much of a chance as he did? It's quite literally a level of defence only money can buy, and available to him purely due to having already been fucked over for 18 years of his life and then paid off an insultingly inadequate $400K for it. Without even that relatively meagre payoff his murder defence would likely have come from a public defender, and surely wouldn't have gone in to the many forensic levels of investigation of potential state corruption Buting and Strang's work did.

 

Be interested to know whether they've ever worked in Manitowoc or Wisconsin again. The constant pretend outrage at any suggestions those in officialdom may be susceptible to corruption, and speaking as though simply raising examples of dubious behaviour was itself unspeakably evil, were almost too much to watch. Along with that Len Cachinsky vermin and the guy working for him as already mentioned by Ted, it's impossible to watch someone piously feign offence at suggestions they're capable of acting a way they do habitually and not want to see them get hit by a speeding truck.

 

Special mention for the female cunt involved in fitting up Avery for the 80's rape, who later responded to written confirmation she had said you needed to take a shower after being in his presence with "I do not converse with this type of verbiage". Here's hoping someone clawhammers your brains out, you fucking harpy. See what verbiage you converse with then.

[Special K]

There's a lot of dubious stuff in that link, and the things that are legitimate are generally circumstantial.

I don't deny that. It's just food for thought. There's a few more articles knocking around but I'm on my phone so I can't go looking for them at the moment

 

Ultimately, the show is about the injustice of the justice system framed (excuse the pun) by this particular trial

[Saintslfc13]

I had one flash of that, too.  Then I remembered how harrowing the whole situation must be for each one of them.  Hearing about the rape and mutilation of someone they loved and cherished.  What else could you do in that situation but place your trust in the police?  They weren't part of the problem.

 

I really don't like the (American?) model of holding press conferences after each day of the trial to report how you think it went.  That is insanity.  It really shouldn't be allowed to happen.

 

I know buddy. That's why I feel so bad about it honestly. It's obviously a troubling time for them to say the least about the situation. I can only imagine in a similar situation I would probably jump on the first lead in front of me. I would hope that I would be able to analyze things but I suspect I would just be wanting blood and jump at the first chance to place guilt on whoever they put in front of me with any kind of ties to the events.

 

As far as your second point, I do understand the concern but I really don't find too much negative about that. What I do think is ridiculous is when the either party puts their side of the case in the media BEFORE the trial. No matter how you look at it you're essentially getting away with jury tampering because any one person of the thousands or millions that see the news footage have an automatic bias against the other side unless of course they inherently distrust either the government or the people suspect. Even in that scenario there is still bias it's just predetermined by individual parties.

[Saintslfc13]

Another thing I will say is most people who've watched the series are up in arms about poor people or intellectually challenged people being denied the presumption of innocence because of this documentary. I would mostly disagree with that statement. I think that, in general, it really doesn't matter how smart you are, where you come from, or how much money you have (though your ability to actually fight a charge is certainly dependent on the latter). I would say that most people are denied the presumption of innocence in America as it is currently, and that the lack of that presumption is certainly exacerbated when a case is brought before the public through the media before a trial has began, or even before a charge has been made in some cases. I do realize that in a small portion of cases publicizing trials works in the defenses favour, with the OJ Simpson trial being a prime example for me in that regard, but that is a rarity. Within that example I would say the main reason for the presumption is that he was a sports icon and there were racial tensions in the area at that time. It's anecdotal but from what I've seen most people presume guilt the second they hear about a suspect, despite the contradicting anecdote of most people I know also distrusting the police.

[Bob]

I read the sports pages on the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinal to follow the Green Bay packers, so thought I'd search steven Avery on their site.

 

A reporter who covered the trial was live tweeting as he watched the programme and a few of his tweets are very interesting.

 

http://m.jsonline.com/news/crime/reporter-tom-kertscher-tweets-reactions-while-watching-steven-avery-series-making-a-murderer-b996460-364227561.html

 

I've only seen episode 1 and 4, but I was saying tony ex as we watched ep4 together that you can't take what we've seen into account when the judge is making decisions, such as not allowing Dassey to request a new lawyer, as at that time the stuff we'd seen wasn't available to him so he didn't know. Without making that distinction yourself it can feel like even more of a ditch up than it does already.

 

The thing that probably makes me as angry as anything is unrelated to Avery or Dassey - other than them just being part of that system - and it's the way tv and media are so involved in it all before and during trial.

 

That Len can say Avery is "pure evil incarnate" live on the news days after being appointed to the case and never having met him, well actually fuck that, that he can say it at all, is disgusting and nobody can have a fair trial when jurors will jab heard that.

 

Then seeing Abery being interviewed by AP from prison, it's all just odd.

 

Those things in themselves would have stopped the case in the UK, wouldn't they?

[skend04]

I've not seen this because I don't think I would be able to without getting a little bit angry about it but I did watch a Sky News special over Christmas about Richard Glossip and the one thing that is clear is that the American Justice system is broken if not entirely fucked up.

 

Glossip is on death row and the only evidence against him is the testimony of the guy who has confessed to murdering the motel owner/manager. Yet the guy who actually committed the murder had his sentence reduced to life. How in the actual fuck is that even possible?

[Bobby Hundreds]

That Lawyer Len was fucking weird he just seemed to love the attention and that was it, grinning from ear to ear. Having no money gets you a defence like that, you are fucked. You can't call it justice if its wealth dependant.

[Bobby Hundreds]

I've not seen this because I don't think I would be able to without getting a little bit angry about it but I did watch a Sky News special over Christmas about Richard Glossip and the one thing that is clear is that the American Justice system is broken if not entirely fucked up.

 

Glossip is on death row and the only evidence against him is the testimony of the guy who has confessed to murdering the motel owner/manager. Yet the guy who actually committed the murder had his sentence reduced to life. How in the actual fuck is that even possible?

 

Theres another documentary on Netflix about a judge getting paid backhanders to give children longer sentences from the private prisons who profit from their long term incarceration.  

[Special K]

Just read an interesting point

 

Kratz ended the Avery case by telling the jury that there was only one person responsible for the murder of Halbach and it was Avery. He got his conviction. Then he turned around and prosecuted Branden for the same murder.

 

It's official with the State of Wisconsin that Halbach was shot and killed by Avery in his garage. Halbach then resurrected. Dassey then raped and stabbed her to death in Avery's bedroom.

 

I appreciate that Steven's trial didn't include the bedroom at all because there was absolutely no evidence to validate it without Brendan's testimony. In Brendan's case, they contend she was raped/stabbed in the bedroom, then taken to the garage and shot. Although there's really no physical evidence to support that theory either.

 

[Ezekiel 25:17]

I think at this Juncture it's pretty safe to say people are posting spoilers, so here's some more, well not totally, I actually beleive he's guilty, but there was corruption along with it, and becuase of that he should have got off with it. I've read almost everything that's been out about this now, and although there's plenty of things that don't add up, I fail to see how the murder and car situation could have taken place on his property without his knowledge or involvement.

 

It has also been mooted that  the documentray was extremeley one sided and the victim had complained of harrasment from Avery, that coincided with the testimony about her ignoring her mobile becuase of someone persistently calling her. I think the officials planted evidence because they wanted the conviction, they knew it was him but also knew with what they had he wouldn't go down, I reslly don't know what to make of Brendan but my suspicion is he played no part in any of it.

 

Also it was barely mentioned that in his trailer Avery had leg irons, chains, restraints, as described by Brendan, he admitted to purchasing them to use on his bird, nothing at all was made of that. He should have also bought a Harpoon and a cattle prod.

[Josef Svejk]

Fairly or not, the documentary hinted at the involvement of the victim's housemate and ex-boyfriend. Or is that a false memory?

[Josef Svejk]

Theres another documentary on Netflix about a judge getting paid backhanders to give children longer sentences from the private prisons who profit from their long term incarceration.  

 

Link, Sir?

[Spy Bee]

I think at this Juncture it's pretty safe to say people are posting spoilers, so here's some more, well not totally, I actually beleive he's guilty, but there was corruption along with it, and becuase of that he should have got off with it. I've read almost everything that's been out about this now, and although there's plenty of things that don't add up, I fail to see how the murder and car situation could have taken place on his property without his knowledge or involvement.

 

It has also been mooted that  the documentray was extremeley one sided and the victim had complained of harrasment from Avery, that coincided with the testimony about her ignoring her mobile becuase of someone persistently calling her. I think the officials planted evidence because they wanted the conviction, they knew it was him but also knew with what they had he wouldn't go down, I reslly don't know what to make of Brendan but my suspicion is he played no part in any of it.

 

Also it was barely mentioned that in his trailer Avery had leg irons, chains, restraints, as described by Brendan, he admitted to purchasing them to use on his bird, nothing at all was made of that. He should have also bought a Harpoon and a cattle prod.

Being a kinky fuck doesn't make you a weirdo. The reports of her being harassed are second hand and I've phoned somebody 3 times in one day without murdering them.

 

I'm only up to episode 3 though.

[Sugar Ape]

Link, Sir?

Kids for Cash it's called. There are a few more decent crime documentaries listed here:

 

http://www.onnetflix.co.uk/category/crime-documentaries

 

And here:

 

http://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/7-true-crime-documentaries-to-stream-on-netflix.html/?a=viewall

[Josef Svejk]

Kids for Cash it's called. There are a few more decent crime documentaries listed here:

 

http://www.onnetflix.co.uk/category/crime-documentaries

 

And here:

 

http://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/7-true-crime-documentaries-to-stream-on-netflix.html/?a=viewall

 

Cheers. Will look into documentary and links...