Making a Murderer
- Thread starter Apathy
- Start date
I'm about to watch episode 6.
I, too, have gone through and read some of the reactions from those involved as well as evidence left out of the documentary. The documentarians defended the piece saying there was just not enough time to include all the evidence, which is probably true to some level. I already know the outcome of the case as I remember some of the national coverage of it from about 10 years ago.
There are a lot of extremely, extremely shady things that happened outside of his initial rape conviction that cost him 18 years of his life. There's no denying this. The blood vial, the prosecution having a witness talk about the joke of "getting rid of a body" which I think easily tainted the jury, the missing voicemail messages from the victim's phone, Sgt. Colbert talking about the license plate and vehicle to dispatch as if he knew something... The list goes on.
However, there were also a lot of things that made you think twice about Avery.
My overall opinion is that he didn't do it, but, based on a lot of the evidence submitted, the general climate of the situation in the state, and the fact that all the jurors came form Manitowoc County, I'm not surprised that ...
I, too, have gone through and read some of the reactions from those involved as well as evidence left out of the documentary. The documentarians defended the piece saying there was just not enough time to include all the evidence, which is probably true to some level. I already know the outcome of the case as I remember some of the national coverage of it from about 10 years ago.
There are a lot of extremely, extremely shady things that happened outside of his initial rape conviction that cost him 18 years of his life. There's no denying this. The blood vial, the prosecution having a witness talk about the joke of "getting rid of a body" which I think easily tainted the jury, the missing voicemail messages from the victim's phone, Sgt. Colbert talking about the license plate and vehicle to dispatch as if he knew something... The list goes on.
However, there were also a lot of things that made you think twice about Avery.
My overall opinion is that he didn't do it, but, based on a lot of the evidence submitted, the general climate of the situation in the state, and the fact that all the jurors came form Manitowoc County, I'm not surprised that ...
he was found guilty based on the way the system is set up. His lawyer was right in many ways when he said building a defense for Avery was extremely difficult. In the court of public opinion, Avery was guilty - no questions asked. Few people presumed he was innocent, which our system says, innocent until proven guilty. But, I certainly have a reasonable doubt about his conviction.
Last edited by a moderator:
Apathy
All-American
Both my wife and I think that there is something odd about the victims brother. He's always the spokesperson for the victim rather than the parents lol seems odd? Both him and the victims ex boyfriend were in charge of the search.
I'm close to my sister but I don't know my sisters password to her phone so for him to guess the password on her phone to listen to the voicemails was really odd and for one of the voice messages to have been deleted too was odd.
Also the victims ex boyfriend figured out his ex girlfriends Cingular password on the cell phone companies website was odd too
I'm close to my sister but I don't know my sisters password to her phone so for him to guess the password on her phone to listen to the voicemails was really odd and for one of the voice messages to have been deleted too was odd.
Also the victims ex boyfriend figured out his ex girlfriends Cingular password on the cell phone companies website was odd too
Sorry for the spoiler, everyone. I figured one of the most significant criminal trials of the 21st century would've been more widely known than it is.
A popular fan theory (which is a weird way to put it) is that the brother had something to do with her disappearance.
Apathy
All-American
I find it funny and unprofessional for the deputy that was in the civil lawsuit filed by Steven Avery to escort both Avery and his nephew to and from court.
If I was that deputy, I would've removed myself from both the court room and any contact around Steven Avery.
When I was a correctional officer, the county judge removed himself from a case because the defendant was being accused of stealing at Wal-Mart and this judge shops at Wal-Mart.....true story. That deputy should take note and learn to back away from the fire.
If I was that deputy, I would've removed myself from both the court room and any contact around Steven Avery.
When I was a correctional officer, the county judge removed himself from a case because the defendant was being accused of stealing at Wal-Mart and this judge shops at Wal-Mart.....true story. That deputy should take note and learn to back away from the fire.
Stumpy1
All-American
My wife has the same thoughts about the brother, ex-bf and her roommate. I kind of think that Bobby Dassey might have something to do with it also. He gave his testimony that he seen her at 2:45 taking pics and then walking up to Avery's trailer but the mail lady said that she seen her around 3:30-3:40 taking pics of the van. That is an hour difference in time. I'm no photographer but I don't think it takes an hour to photo a van.
Stumpy1
All-American
Not only that but they should have been completely removed from the whole investigation.
teachercd
Head Coach
Sure it does, you gotta make that van feel special, feel sexy, the van has to get comfortable and trust you so that the van can really show off the goods.
adc7236
Starter
I have not seen it yet but hope to soon. I have heard the prosecution come out and denounce it, but that means little to me. I do have a question for any lawyer types though, as I know we have a few on the board. Why does it seem like the prosecution almost never admits to mistakes in what is or appears to be wrongful convictions? I will use the Duke Lacrosse scandal with Mike Nifong as one extreme example, but I think I have seen other times when it puzzled me how much they stuck to their position regardless of evidence, new or old.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm no lawyer and there very well could be a legal explanation for this. But, outside of the law, I think part of it is ego. Put yourself in the prosecutor's shoes - you spend months, sometimes years, where the whole point of your job is to provide evidence that someone committed a crime. You're also charged with refuting every attempt by the defense to clear their defendant's name. You're also facing a lot of pressure from higher-ups and local law enforcement to build a case that sticks. And, instead of presuming the person you're trying to convict is innocent, you're trying to prove (and operating under the mentality) that this person is guilty.
If and when you win your case, the law is now officially on your side backing you up. You're not going to be easily swayed of your opinion or quick to believe the person you convicted is innocent. We have a tendency in this country to make sure someone is blamed and held accountable rather than making sure it's the correct person. A lot of people also don't like to admit they're wrong, particularly when murder is involved.
When you do get a chance to watch the documentary, you'll notice law enforcement officials STILL refuting Avery's innocence in the rape case he served 18 years for. Deputies, under oath, questioning DNA evidence that exonerated Avery. It's a pretty incredible sight to see.
Last edited by a moderator: