Making A Murderer [Netflix - Documentary Series]

Tipsy McSwagger

Maxpfizer wrote: »

Is the point of the documentary really to show that Avery is innocent though?

Even taking Avery out of the equation it still looks like every piece of evidence in the case has a massive question mark looming over it.

I think at the very least we could say that the story presented by the prosecution is not the way things went down?

Do you really believe that Brendan Dassey's confession is entirely 100% true?

I get that you think Avery did it and I'm not convinced that he didn't myself.

However, the documentary quite clearly exposes some worrying behavior from law enforcement and the prosecution and the 2nd season exposes some troubling actions from those even higher up in the system.

If behaviors like this are a trend in the the US system then it's likely that there are many innocent folks out there in prisons for crimes they did not commit.

After a point the question of Avery's guilt or innocence becomes secondary to the fact that the whole system is corrupt and those with power are frequently abusing that power.

Making a Murderer exposes some of these worrying trends.

Listen you’re playing to the masses. There’s isn’t a person in here who believes the US Justice system is perfect. That’s why documentary or no documentary everyone should research cases themselves. Avery is guilty, Dassey is an idiot who just did what his uncle told him to do.

There’s so much circumstantial evidence against Avery the only thing missing is a video of him committing the murder. Most murder cases are solved by confessions and circumstantial evidence. In regards the circumstantial evidence let me put it this way, if I woke up in the morning and went outside and seen puddles of water everywhere and my car was wet, I would say well it rained, Avery supporters would say the cops come with buckets of water in the middle of the night and poured them everywhere.

Maxpfizer

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

Listen you’re playing to the masses. There’s isn’t a person in here who believes the US Justice system is perfect. That’s why documentary or no documentary everyone should research cases themselves. Avery is guilty, Dassey is an idiot who just did what his uncle told him to do.

There’s so much circumstantial evidence against Avery the only thing missing is a video of him committing the murder. Most murder cases are solved by confessions and circumstantial evidence. In regards the circumstantial evidence let me put it this way, if I woke up in the morning and went outside and seen puddles of water everywhere and my car was wet, I would say well it rained, Avery supporters would say the cops come with buckets of water in the middle of the night and poured them everywhere.

Do you think Dassey's confession is the actual story of what happened?

The analogy doesn't work because in this case you'd be looking at a situation where there is circumstantial evidence that it rained BUT ALSO circumstantial evidence that the water was poured everywhere by someone else.

Is it outside the realms of possibility that she showed up on their land and Avery killed her? I think it's possible. I certainly haven't seen anything to convince me that he definitely didn't do it.

On the other side there are so many niggling doubts. The cops had motive. That's undeniable. That's one of the things we'd look for right? Did anyone out there have a motive for potentially planting evidence to make sure Avery went away?

The DNA evidence is suspicious.
How the RAV4 ended up where it did is suspicious.
Brendan D's story of what happened is highly questionable.

Almost every bit of evidence in this case has some kind of BS surrounding it.

From the coroner not being allowed to access the crime scene to other suspects not being considered at all. They were breaking protocol and acting shady from day one here.

So what are we saying here? He did do it but not in the way the prosecution say he did it but that's fine because in the end they got the right guy?

So, I'll ask again, do you think Dassey's confession is the actual story of what happened that day?

The Nal

Is there anything more pathetic than the people who campaigned for Averys released based on the documentary? What a bunch of losers.

Tipsy McSwagger

Maxpfizer wrote: »

Do you think Dassey's confession is the actual story of what happened?

The analogy doesn't work because in this case you'd be looking at a situation where there is circumstantial evidence that it rained BUT ALSO circumstantial evidence that the water was poured everywhere by someone else.

Is it outside the realms of possibility that she showed up on their land and Avery killed her? I think it's possible. I certainly haven't seen anything to convince me that he definitely didn't do it.

On the other side there are so many niggling doubts. The cops had motive. That's undeniable. That's one of the things we'd look for right? Did anyone out there have a motive for potentially planting evidence to make sure Avery went away?

The DNA evidence is suspicious.
How the RAV4 ended up where it did is suspicious.
Brendan D's story of what happened is highly questionable.

Almost every bit of evidence in this case has some kind of BS surrounding it.

From the coroner not being allowed to access the crime scene to other suspects not being considered at all. They were breaking protocol and acting shady from day one here.

So what are we saying here? He did do it but not in the way the prosecution say he did it but that's fine because in the end they got the right guy?

So, I'll ask again, do you think Dassey's confession is the actual story of what happened that day?

I honestly believe the only person who knows what fully happened is Avery. Dassey was probably told by Avery it was an accident and he needed Brendan’s help cleaning up the crime scene. Dassey is so stupid it probably only hit him a few days later what actually happened. He had no idea the hole he was digging himself into while being interviewed. I feel sorry for him tbh but it was right he got sent to prison, not for life though.

You stated in an earlier post if you took Avery out of this case there are still question marks regarding the evidence. I strongly disagree. The whole settlement Avery was looking to cash in on is the key to believing he is innocent. But to think the cops would kill an innocent woman, then plant her burnt remains under Avery’s nose is beyond preposterous.

Tipsy McSwagger

The Nal wrote: »

Is there anything more pathetic than the people who campaigned for Averys released based on the documentary? What a bunch of losers.

Well sending threatening letters to the prosecutor hoping his daughter is raped and murdered is even worse.

8-10

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

But to think the cops would kill an innocent woman, then plant her burnt remains under Avery’s nose is beyond preposterous.

Did anyone suggest that the cops killed her? I don't think either side would agree that that likely happened.

Tipsy McSwagger

8-10 wrote: »

Did anyone suggest that the cops killed her? I don't think either side would agree that that likely happened.

A lot of people think that’s how it happened. Just a quick google brings up this YouTube video, check the comments too.

https://youtu.be/AKZIR04AB9s

Commanchie

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

A lot of people think that’s how it happened. Just a quick google brings up this YouTube video, check the comments too.

https://youtu.be/AKZIR04AB9s

Nobody on this thread or wider supporters believe that for me -

Bobby And Scott
Randandt Quarry worker
Ryan Hillegus

Then SA

8-10

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

A lot of people think that’s how it happened. Just a quick google brings up this YouTube video, check the comments too.

https://youtu.be/AKZIR04AB9s

I think you're way too deep in the conspiracy theories there! I am 100% sure that the police didn't kill her. Evidence doesn't point that way even slightly.

Even Zellner doesn't believe that they planted the blood which was the original defence

Mountainsandh

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

I honestly believe the only person who knows what fully happened is Avery. Dassey was probably told by Avery it was an accident and he needed Brendan’s help cleaning up the crime scene. Dassey is so stupid it probably only hit him a few days later what actually happened. He had no idea the hole he was digging himself into while being interviewed. I feel sorry for him tbh but it was right he got sent to prison, not for life though.

You stated in an earlier post if you took Avery out of this case there are still question marks regarding the evidence. I strongly disagree. The whole settlement Avery was looking to cash in on is the key to believing he is innocent. But to think the cops would kill an innocent woman, then plant her burnt remains under Avery’s nose is beyond preposterous.

Nahh. I think Barb and Scott know exactly what happened. And Bobby.
Brendan probably has a foggy idea of the whole thing, highly likely that Barb manipulates what Brendan has to understand and how much he should understand.

The whole family is rotten, maybe except for the old parents. All the children, and their children are accusing each other of things, they all have previous convictions for abusive behaviour and such.

I'd say they all just have issues, and are not very smart, so it's a constant back and forth of emotional blackmail.

Barb and Scott took it a whole gigantic step further by framing Steven, instead of one of their children getting caught for the murder (Bobby).
Then when the computer was being looked at, they probably thought the least likely to get in trouble in the family would be Brendan, so they hung him up instead of Bobby.

The police are possibly aware of all these goings on behind the scenes, and indicated somehow that they would play along. Picking on Steven suited them.

I wouldn't be surprised if Steven had some kind of involvement in the thing, like maybe he knew Bobby was after her and said nothing.

The bottom line really should be that if it is indeed Bobby who murdered Teresa, then himself, Barb and Scott should fall, not Steven and Brendan.

8-10

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Nahh. I think Barb and Scott know exactly what happened. And Bobby.
Brendan probably has a foggy idea of the whole thing, highly likely that Barb manipulates what Brendan has to understand and how much he should understand.

The whole family is rotten, maybe except for the old parents. All the children, and their children are accusing each other of things, they all have previous convictions for abusive behaviour and such.

I'd say they all just have issues, and are not very smart, so it's a constant back and forth of emotional blackmail.

Barb and Scott took it a whole gigantic step further by framing Steven, instead of one of their children getting caught for the murder (Bobby).
Then when the computer was being looked at, they probably thought the least likely to get in trouble in the family would be Brendan, so they hung him up instead of Bobby.

The police are possibly aware of all these goings on behind the scenes, and indicated somehow that they would play along. Picking on Steven suited them.

I wouldn't be surprised if Steven had some kind of involvement in the thing, like maybe he knew Bobby was after her and said nothing.

The bottom line really should be that if it is indeed Bobby who murdered Teresa, then himself, Barb and Scott should fall, not Steven and Brendan.

I still think Steven is probably the most likely to have done it. The whole reenactment of Bobby following her out in his car around to Q road could easily have been Steven following her if he didn't like the interaction they had at his trailer and going after her in a rage. He has prior experience of doing that. That just wasn't the State's case.

I just have issue with how the prosecution case fits. The main points that would give me reasonable doubt as a juror (I've served on 2 juries previously, 1 for sexual assault of a minor and another for murder) would be:

- Bobby's search history and hard drive images. My word they're deranged. To say that these have no evidentiary value is crazy, especially given how he was characterised as a witness. They could easily have been used as leverage - must have been borderline illegal if not definitely illegal.
- The handling of Bobby's computer evidence, being mislabeled in more than 1 document as Brendan's and having the CD retained in Fassbender's custody is something I'd like the defence to present to me as a juror.
- The coroner's story of being refused access to the site - prosecution objected it as irrelevant but as it fits the defence story they should have been allowed the witness, the prosecution can argue to the jury that she is disgruntled and have her admit to her leaving her job on cross-examination but at least then it's up to the jury to assess relevance
- The dog trail evidence and human remains found at more than 1 location in the quarry
- The witness report of the car not reported by Colburn, should have been brought up
- The planner and cellphone evidence, I don't buy either of these as being strong enough evidence but should at least have been considered
- Better opinions on the DNA and blood evidence. The mislabelling of the swab and the blood spatter don't appear to have been explored by the previous defence team


There are question marks in my mind I'd have about why some of these weren't argued better or allowed to be brought in. I'd put some of the blame on his defence team and some on prosecution tactics. I think the State clung to a version of events too early and it forced their hand at a couple of steps. He may have done it but I don't think the Jury got all the evidence and I don't think that the prosecution's story fits correctly. The fact that they prosecuted 2 people for the same murder with a different series of events is something that just boggles me about the system.

Mountainsandh

I think a more recent statement of KZellner is that Bobby and Scott's phones pinged in the same location as Teresa right before her last phone action.

Now I'm not sure, but I think Scott actually lives on the Q Highway, the one that's behind the Avery's Yard and the quarry... His house looks directly onto the Q Highway I think, either before or after the turn for Kuss road, not sure but I'd say before the turn.

edit : I have since clarified that and I was wrong about his location.

but I think the actual location(s) where he lived were also problematic for his alibi with Bobby (crossing each other on highway). (he had 2 residences, a trailer and some other place I think)

Tipsy McSwagger

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Nahh. I think Barb and Scott know exactly what happened. And Bobby.
Brendan probably has a foggy idea of the whole thing, highly likely that Barb manipulates what Brendan has to understand and how much he should understand.

The whole family is rotten, maybe except for the old parents. All the children, and their children are accusing each other of things, they all have previous convictions for abusive behaviour and such.

I'd say they all just have issues, and are not very smart, so it's a constant back and forth of emotional blackmail.

Barb and Scott took it a whole gigantic step further by framing Steven, instead of one of their children getting caught for the murder (Bobby).
Then when the computer was being looked at, they probably thought the least likely to get in trouble in the family would be Brendan, so they hung him up instead of Bobby.

The police are possibly aware of all these goings on behind the scenes, and indicated somehow that they would play along. Picking on Steven suited them.

I wouldn't be surprised if Steven had some kind of involvement in the thing, like maybe he knew Bobby was after her and said nothing.

The bottom line really should be that if it is indeed Bobby who murdered Teresa, then himself, Barb and Scott should fall, not Steven and Brendan.

You are only speculating now and have no idea what happened. Avery had the motive, no alibi, was a sick bastard, was the last person to see Teresa, talked about her in the past tense while she was listed as only a missing person, hid his number to get her out to his house, there’s tons of circumstantial evidence that points to him, his DNA is on her car. This is more than enough for a conviction.

I duly await your reply and mamof4 to thank it.

Mountainsandh

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

You are only speculating now and have no idea what happened. Avery had the motive, no alibi, was a sick bastard, was the last person to see Teresa, talked about her in the past tense while she was listed as only a missing person, hid his number to get her out to his house, there’s tons of circumstantial evidence that points to him, his DNA is on her car. This is more than enough for a conviction.

I duly await your reply and mamof4 to thank it.

Hey whatever, just read a bit more about it, and finish season 2.

That's my theory on things right now, and it's not always been, I've changed my mind a few times.

What helped define things a bit better for me is the full length phonecall with Steven, Scott and Barb. Have you listened to it ? There's also a transcript available of it online, if you prefer reading.

StringerBell

It's pretty weird to be that obsessed with thanks.

Mam of 4

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

You are only speculating now and have no idea what happened. Avery had the motive, no alibi, was a sick bastard, was the last person to see Teresa, talked about her in the past tense while she was listed as only a missing person, hid his number to get her out to his house, there’s tons of circumstantial evidence that points to him, his DNA is on her car. This is more than enough for a conviction.

I duly await your reply and mamof4 to thank it.

I thank the posts that in my opinion , make valid points .

I thought that's what the thanks function was for .

ETA ,
I thanked M's post , just as you predicted

Mountainsandh

Mam of 4 wrote: »

I thank the posts that in my opinion , make valid points .

I thought that's what the thanks function was for .

*thanks Mam of 4*


:pac:


I love thanking posts. Costs nothing, and helps remember how far you've gone in a thread.

Mountainsandh

and Tipsy I forgot to say, of course I'm speculating. That's ok too.

Tipsy McSwagger

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Hey whatever, just read a bit more about it, and finish season 2.

That's my theory on things right now, and it's not always been, I've changed my mind a few times.

What helped define things a bit better for me is the full length phonecall with Steven, Scott and Barb. Have you listened to it ? There's also a transcript available of it online, if you prefer reading.

I look forward to listening to the call

retro:electro

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

I duly await your reply and mamof4 to thank it.

At least both of them have added more to this thread than pissing all over the well informed posts of others. Get a life.

8-10

Scott said on the call that he wasn't on the property on the 31st. I don't know his whole testimony but has he always claimed that?

8-10

Scott said on the call that he wasn't on the property on the 31st. I don't know his whole testimony but has he always claimed that?

Tipsy McSwagger

retro:electro wrote: »

At least both of them have added more to this thread than pissing all over the well informed posts of others. Get a life.

You change your mind more times than your underwear, anything you say would be contradicted a while later by yourself.

retro:electro

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

You change your mind more times than your underwear, anything you say would be contradicted a while later by yourself.

I think I’ve changed my mind once. Which isn’t all that remarkable in a case like this where there is such a massive divide in opinion. I’m not too proud to admit I’ve gotten some things wrong.
But sure whatever makes you feel like you’re better than the rest of us :rolleyes:

Mountainsandh

8-10 wrote: »

Scott said on the call that he wasn't on the property on the 31st. I don't know his whole testimony but has he always claimed that?

Not sure, he reckons he arrived at whatever time Bobby was leaving. I'm going to see if I can find some of his testimonies. It'd be interesting to see also what brought him up there.

Checkmate19

One thing that i homed in on after watching Dassey full interrogation on youtube. I know there where interviews not recorded before that. Dassey says sort off without and hinting that he heard screaming when he knocked on steven's trailer. I don't know have the officers planted that in his head before these taped interviews but i found that an odd detail to mention if he didn't know about it and was been coerced.

extra gravy

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

I honestly believe the only person who knows what fully happened is Avery. Dassey was probably told by Avery it was an accident and he needed Brendan’s help cleaning up the crime scene. Dassey is so stupid it probably only hit him a few days later what actually happened. He had no idea the hole he was digging himself into while being interviewed. I feel sorry for him tbh but it was right he got sent to prison, not for life though.

You stated in an earlier post if you took Avery out of this case there are still question marks regarding the evidence. I strongly disagree. The whole settlement Avery was looking to cash in on is the key to believing he is innocent. But to think the cops would kill an innocent woman, then plant her burnt remains under Avery’s nose is beyond preposterous.

I've noticed a few of your posts now calling Dassey stupid, an idiot, the biggest idiot you've ever seen etc. I think you've a bit of a cheek calling out another post as the most disgusting one on this thread when your own ones haven't been any better. He was a socially awkward, vulnerable 16 year old with an IQ that's on the border of intellectual disability. Such youths can be easily manipulated and more compliant than their more intellectually capable peers. Of course, this doesn't mean that's he incapable of committing horrible acts but he had a right to be treated with special care as set out by the Supreme Court over the years. Is it just him you have this attitude towards or people with intellectual disabilities in general?

Mountainsandh

There are 3 interviews with Scott on that page http://www.stevenaverycase.org/police-interviews-and-interrogations/

Even though the 3 interviews ask the same questions, his answers differ. (some of the estimated times too)

He is steadfast on : going to the hospital to see his mother.
Changing clothes and preparing gear for hunting.
Heading off to hunt, and seeing Bobby's car on the road, and explaining that Bobby's allowed to hunt on the grounds at the back of his (Scott) house.
He consistently says he was hunting at his own spot between 3.00 (3.30 in one interview) until 5 pm.
Then he says he went to the Avery's to collect Barb to bring her up to the hospital to see his mother.
They come back, and he drops Barb at the Avery's, he goes home around 8pm.
She goes to his house around 8.30 pm.

Things that change :
First statement, he says when he went to the Avery's to collect Barb, he saw her standing outside Steven Avery's with one of her sons and Steven.

Second interview, he says she was in her mobile home, but he sees 2 shapes behind Steven's garage looking onto a fire, he guesses Steven and maybe a son of Barb's, can't tell which one as it's dark and they're just silhouettes.

Third interview, he's on about the fire again, and this time he's positive it was Brendan with Stephen.
In the third interview, he really lays into Steven, going on about how he behaved with Barb's children, how the whole family (except parents) hate him, saying Steven had a big influence on Brendan, took him up North a lot, and that he (Scott) got the feeling Steven was having a sexual relationship with Brendan.

In the first interview, he says himself and Barb are just friends, and that she just calls to him sometimes, and that she didn't spend the night at his house.

In the second interview, same as above.

In the third interview, he says she spent the night at his house, and basically admits they're in a relationship.

I think also in the first interview, he just waits in his car for Barb to come out.
In the other interviews, he goes inside the mobile home to fetch her, but can't say what sons were there or not there.

That's just what I can recall off the top of my head, there may be mistakes. I'm going to read Bobby's interviews now, because I was nearly sure Bobby had said he had talked to Scott, both in their vehicles, when he was on his way to hunt. Scott just said in his interviews that he saw the Blazer on the road and they waved at each other.

Tipsy McSwagger

extra gravy wrote: »

I've noticed a few of your posts now calling Dassey stupid, an idiot, the biggest idiot you've ever seen etc. I think you've a bit of a cheek calling out another post as the most disgusting one on this thread when your own ones haven't been any better. He was a socially awkward, vulnerable 16 year old with an IQ that's on the border of intellectual disability. Such youths can be easily manipulated and more compliant than their more intellectually capable peers. Of course, this doesn't mean that's he incapable of committing horrible acts but he had a right to be treated with special care as set out by the Supreme Court over the years. Is it just him you have this attitude towards or people with intellectual disabilities in general?

He’s one of the most stupidest people I’ve ever laid eyes on. I still feel sorry for him though, his uncle ruined his life. Now be a good boy and jog on.


Edit- let’s not forget he’s a convicted murderer and rapist either in the eyes of the law so I’m pretty sure the Halbach family would call him a lot worse

extra gravy

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

He’s one of the most stupidest people I’ve ever laid eyes on. I still feel sorry for him though, his uncle ruined his life. Now be a good boy and jog on.

"Jog on"...what age are you? 12? Though judging by your posts, that doesn't surprise me. One piece of advice: don't apply for the school debate team - you don't have the requisite skills or manners.