Making a Murderer Netflix series.

[YoNoSe]

Police misconduct was disgusting.
Reading about the omitted evidence, seems likely he really did it.
Overhead shots of the family business reminded me of

 

[meth head]

Spoiler:

So the juror that left the trial at the end because of a family emergency, has spoken how two of the jurors that convicted Avery are in fact related to Manitowoc County employees. One juror was the father of a Manitowoc County Sheriff's deputy, and another juror, his wife works for the Manitowoc County Clerk's Office. This case is just so damn dirty!

Another thing, how did the initial deliberations start with a vote of seven innocent, three guilty and two undecided, but then spin to a unanimous guilty verdict? Again, I can't help but think foul play occurred here as well.

 

[KitFisto]

Yea, it was hard to watch or give a **** about the guy knowing he tossed a cat on a bonfire.

If he did that.......**** him.

 

[Rambler]

If he did that.......**** him.

He forgot one part of that. He doused it in gasoline first THEN threw it into the bonfire.

 

[Remy]

Spoiler:

Fascinating! When you say strong case Avery made them calls, what does that actually mean? Can you define that more clearly?Surely with all the available technology today, they could prove or disprove who made them calls? I also thought that evidence/confession from her colleague was a pivotal piece of evidence and could potentially have lead to her assailant, but that trail went cold. I think the film-makers did precisely as you described in that it seemed to implicate the ex boyfriend or possibly her room-mate was making them calls. I am still trying very much to get my head around the series after completing it last night. Do I think Avery had issues? Yes. Was he an angel? No. Like how the series set out, it explained this fella did some pretty silly things, and that cat situation was disgusting, but does that justify the level of hate/social control that was pressed upon this fella by the state/local law enforcement? No. His defense lawyer nailed it for me at the end, when he said he hoped he did do it, because if he didn't, that is just something that he couldn't live with. A second time wrongly convicted. This docu-series has shaken me up, I got to be honest. I can't remove it from my head!

Spoiler:

What I meant is that this show is a lot like a Defense lawyer's presentation. Its job is to make you see things through Avery's side, and see all the evidence that may point elsewhere. Casting doubts.
If I remember correctly...I may be wrong on this, but I believe, when the show was focusing on the ex-bf...there's an implied presentation here that made it look like he may be sketchy. And I think this is also when they presented that Teresa was getting harassing phone calls. So it just makes you think that maybe the ex may have something to do with this.
But what I'm saying is, those harassing phone calls may be happening when Avery was calling her, and maybe that's why he even *67 when he called her, which conceals the caller's identity.

So let me put this another way, if the show didn't omit the part where Avery *67 her the day she disappeared...let's say, now they talk about this...and at this same time, talk about when Teresa is getting harassing phone calls...then now, the focus would be back on Avery possibly be the one calling her.
But the show didnt do that. They omitted that little information, and at the same time, when they talked about Teresa getting harassing phone calls, they were also misdirecting...and casting doubts towards other parties involvement.

 

[meth head]

Spoiler:

What I meant is that this show is a lot like a Defense lawyer's presentation. Its job is to make you see things through Avery's side, and see all the evidence that may point elsewhere. Casting doubts.
If I remember correctly...I may be wrong on this, but I believe, when the show was focusing on the ex-bf...there's an implied presentation here that made it look like he may be sketchy. And I think this is also when they presented that Teresa was getting harassing phone calls. So it just makes you think that maybe the ex may have something to do with this.
But what I'm saying is, those harassing phone calls may be happening when Avery was calling her, and maybe that's why he even *67 when he called her, which conceals the caller's identity.

So let me put this another way, if the show didn't omit the part where Avery *67 her the day she disappeared...let's say, now they talk about this...and at this same time, talk about when Teresa is getting harassing phone calls...then now, the focus would be back on Avery possibly be the one calling her.
But the show didnt do that. They omitted that little information, and at the same time, when they talked about Teresa getting harassing phone calls, they were also misdirecting...and casting doubts towards other parties involvement.

Spoiler:

But even more f__ked up than that is the fact that the brother deleted voicemail messages and the ex boyfriend guessed her voicemail pin? What on earth were they doing? Why were they doing that after she was reported missing?

Can anybody tell me why the brother and ex boyfriend were never investigated? They orchestrated the search on the Avery's property and just so happened to give that one lady the camera that found the car within such a short space of time. I call bulls__t!

 

[meth head]

If he did that.......**** him.

He forgot one part of that. He doused it in gasoline first THEN threw it into the bonfire.

Spoiler:

He is no choirboy, we get it. Nobody is saying Steven Avery is a good person, but is he a murderer? Can you conclusively say with your hand on your heart the guy is a murderer? Based on the evidence presented you could sleep soundly at night knowing you rightly convicted a man to life in prison with no chance of parole?

 

[sarakawa]

Watching the show, it's crazy they convicted him on what they had. Her blood is no where in the house yet they say she is shot there by the bullet they found in the garage. And watching the nephew's confession video, jesus, anyone can tell he was coerced...like 4 hours of that doesn't convince a jury...no way. I don't know if he killer her or not but the defense proved WAY beyond a shadow of a doubt that he didn't.

 

[Rambler]

Spoiler:

He is no choirboy, we get it. Nobody is saying Steven Avery is a good person, but is he a murderer? Can you conclusively say with your hand on your heart the guy is a murderer? Based on the evidence presented you could sleep soundly at night knowing you rightly convicted a man to life in prison with no chance of parole?

I wasn't on the jury. I only remember what I read in the local papers at the time of the trial and what I watched over a 10 hour documentary. I didn't sit thru weeks of testimony. People watch just this documentary and are immediately experts on this trial. There is alot of other things that were presented that are hard to over look. Like him requesting the victim, calling her multiple times the day she went missing, sweat DNA on the rear hatch of the car, using a different name and phone number to request her to come out, purchasing shackles before she went missing.

However, There are way too many coincidences in this case as well. I don't know if he's guilty or not. Like I said above, the way the evidence was "found" is clearly questionable. I don't like how the defense was not allowed to implicate anyone else. I don't like how the investigation never was expanded past the two who were found guilty. No one else was ever fully investigated. They all assumed they were guilty from the get go. The ex-boyfriend and the father/son duo should have been looked into alot more.

Either way, people need to look past a one sided documentary and look at everything presented.

 

[Rambler]

I haven't read thru this all yet, but here's the complete Brendan Dassey interview:

https://convolutedbrian.com.s3.amazonaws.com/dassey/13May2006/13May06Transcript.pdf

 

[EVILFACE]

My wife keeps telling tidbits about.

I personally think he killed her, but should not have been convicted based on the evidence presented.

 

[KitFisto]

Spoiler:

He is no choirboy, we get it. Nobody is saying Steven Avery is a good person, but is he a murderer? Can you conclusively say with your hand on your heart the guy is a murderer? Based on the evidence presented you could sleep soundly at night knowing you rightly convicted a man to life in prison with no chance of parole?

I have no clue. I'm not judging his case at all. I'm simply saying that if he poured gas on a cat and threw it into a bon fire.........**** him and I don't care if he gets run over by a bus.

 

[Rambler]

My wife keeps telling tidbits about.

I personally think he killed her, but should not have been convicted based on the evidence presented.

This. This is exactly where I am leaning. I do think evidence was planted because the cops knew they didn't have enough to get him 100%.

 

[wanderlai]

No way he killed her. Where is the crime scene? It's not in his trailer as the DA said in that bs press conference and its not in his garage as they changed to. You can't brutally rape, shoot someone, and slit their throat without some DNA evidence being left behind. No DNA in the junk hole trailer. No DNA in that cluttered up garage. They dug up the concrete slab in the garage and nothing. No blood splatter anywhere. The guy isn't some professional type hit man. He is about as simple minded as it gets. He has a car crusher in the salvage yard but pulls her vehicle on the edge of the yard and attempts to hide it with a few tree limbs...oh come on. The only people to find any evidence just happen to be the shady cops that had it in for him before and that's after multiple searches. The key they found only had his DNA on it. Where was the girls?

 

[Matt S]

Watching the show, it's crazy they convicted him on what they had. Her blood is no where in the house yet they say she is shot there by the bullet they found in the garage. And watching the nephew's confession video, jesus, anyone can tell he was coerced...like 4 hours of that doesn't convince a jury...no way. I don't know if he killer her or not but the defense proved WAY beyond a shadow of a doubt that he didn't.

They didn't show the jury the last 90 or so min of the 4 hour tape.

What evidence was supposedly omitted from the documentary?

 

[YoNoSe]

They didn't show the jury the last 90 or so min of the 4 hour tape.

What evidence was supposedly omitted from the documentary?

He was apparently obsessed with the victim, calling her repeatedly and blocking his phone number. She had told her boss she didn't want to go to his place anymore. He bought shackles shortly before this happened. There was more trace DNA of his on her car....some more semi violent incidents from his past and possibly molestation allegations.

You can Google it and get a much better picture. Nothing concrete that nails hime, and most of it was not shown at trial. But certainly gives me pause.

 

[meth head]

They didn't show the jury the last 90 or so min of the 4 hour tape.

What evidence was supposedly omitted from the documentary?

To my recollection, this is where Dassey says to his mom that the investigators 'got to his head.' That was appalling that they felt they didn't need to show the jury that.

 

[wanderlai]

To my recollection, this is where Dassey says to his mom that the investigators 'got to his head.' That was appalling that they felt they didn't need to show the jury that.

Pathetic that his defense team agreed to leave that part out.

 

[Matt S]

He was apparently obsessed with the victim, calling her repeatedly and blocking his phone number. She had told her boss she didn't want to go to his place anymore. He bought shackles shortly before this happened. There was more trace DNA of his on her car....some more semi violent incidents from his past and possibly molestation allegations.

You can Google it and get a much better picture. Nothing concrete that nails hime, and most of it was not shown at trial. But certainly gives me pause.

ok, thanks will look into it

 

[WWEJedi]

The biggest thing that could possibly prove him innocent to me is the broken seal on the evidence of the blood vile with a needle hole in it. The EDTA tests are not reliable at all and produce invalid results. Why would that be there if someone didn't plant the evidence?

Also, how was he not guilty on the mutilation charges?

Lot of interesting theories out there though....