nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Making A Murderer [Netflix - Documentary Series]

Also Starring LeVar Burton

New 10-Part Documentary on Netflix

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxgbdYaR_KQ

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Tell me how

Gianni Crashing Kitty wrote:

"If" Brendan were to get a large windfall I'd like to see him move away from his family and that small little town and start fresh somewhere and hire some sort of financial adviser to over see his money.. he genuinely isn't intelligent enough to manage his own money imo

I think that that's what it takes to stand any chance of not being taken advantage of. However, I think being near family would be more important to him than money but that makes it very difficult. When you start talking about compensation, it generally starts and ends with money.

I agree with your cautionary "If" too by the way. Nothing is guaranteed.

MadDog76

gizmo555 wrote: »

One of the most bizarre things about the two convictions is that while, for Brendan's trial, the prosecution case was that he and Steven raped and killed the victim together, in Steven's trial the same prosecutor vociferously argued that Steven killed her acting entirely on his own and Brendan's confession wasn't used as evidence. This is apparently perfectly OK under their legal system.

The "we'll just make the glove fit" approach .............

mad m

They might get him to sign something like they did Steven, the county/state weren't liable or something and give him a small payout like Steven got.

MadDog76

mad m wrote: »

They might get him to sign something like they did Steven, the county/state weren't liable or something and give him a small payout like Steven got.

They'd have to put Brendan in the same position that they put Stephen in for that to happen, ie. frame him again and force him to take a small pay-off in order to pay for his defence attorney.

serfboard

Penn wrote: »

Seems like the overturning of his conviction is more based on the actions of his first lawyer and how he was questioned by the detectives rather than "Here's definitive evidence he didn't do it".

There is no "definitive evidence [that] he didn't do it". But then, there's no evidence at all that he did do it, except for his coerced confession, during which he was fed the facts and he embellished the rest with fantastical ideas.

Penn

serfboard wrote: »

There is no "definitive evidence [that] he didn't do it". But then, there's no evidence at all that he did do it, except for his coerced confession, during which he was fed the facts and he embellished the rest with fantastical ideas.

I agree, I'm just saying this has come about due to a judgement based on how he was arrested/questioned/represented rather than some new evidence which exonerates him.

serfboard

Penn wrote: »

I agree, I'm just saying this has come about due to a judgement based on how he was arrested/questioned/represented rather than some new evidence which exonerates him.

Yeah, but his laways didn't need to exonerate him - all they needed to show was that there was no evidence to convict him. How he was convicted in the first place, with just that flimsy confession, is beyond me, but then, he had an atrociously bad lawyer, and some outrageous pre-trial publicity, the like of which would never be allowed here.

I think the evidence to exonerate him will come in Stephen's case.

Ageyev

Penn wrote: »

Seems like the overturning of his conviction is more based on the actions of his first lawyer and how he was questioned by the detectives rather than "Here's definitive evidence he didn't do it". But still, it's a great move in the right direction.

Nope, judge didn't accept the ineffective counsel argument wrt creepy first defence attorney

http://uproxx.com/tv/how-brandon-dassey-won-appeal/#./

Judge Duffin rejected the claim of inadequate counsel but concluded that Dassey’s confession was involuntary

Stephen was convicted on physical evidence not Brendan's confession but the details of that confession were made public before trial. From what I've followed from Strang and Buting, Stephen still needs new physical evidence for a new trial.

MadDog76

Penn wrote: »

I agree, I'm just saying this has come about due to a judgement based on how he was arrested/questioned/represented rather than some new evidence which exonerates him.

If there had been actual evidence to prove his guilt then there would have been no need to frame him and rail-road him into a cell for a crime he clearly did not commit.

Elmo

Penn wrote: »

I agree, I'm just saying this has come about due to a judgement based on how he was arrested/questioned/represented rather than some new evidence which exonerates him.

no evidence to convict him either.

Penn

MadDog76 wrote: »

If there had been actual evidence to prove his guilt then there would have been no need to frame him and rail-road him into a cell for a crime he clearly did not commit.

All I'm saying is that the overturning of his conviction is based on breaches of his constitutional rights, not that new evidence was found that proves he didn't commit the murder. That's it. That's the reason. I'm not talking about the reason he was convicted, I'm talking about the reason his conviction was overturned.

MadDog76

Penn wrote: »

All I'm saying is that the overturning of his conviction is based on breaches of his constitutional rights, not that new evidence was found that proves he didn't commit the murder. That's it. That's the reason. I'm not talking about the reason he was convicted, I'm talking about the reason his conviction was overturned.

And all I'm saying is there never was any evidence to prove he did commit the murder, that's it.

Penn

MadDog76 wrote: »

And all I'm saying is there never was any evidence to prove he did commit the murder, that's it.

And I agree. I fully agree. I wasn't saying there was. I just didn't think there was a need to preface every post with that. I didn't think I'd be jumped on for not putting #DasseyIsInnocent at the end of every post.

#DasseyIsInnocent

Edit: Basically what I was saying:
http://www.thejournal.ie/brendan-dassey-2929471-Aug2016/?utm_source=twitter_self
Reason for overturning the conviction means he hasn't been proven innocent or guilty, and it will likely go to a retrial, which means he'll likely still be in jail for several more months between the 90 days and organising a new trial date, prosecutors etc.

m1ck007

Last time i checked you needed to prove the party was guilty, not innocent. Innocent until proven guilty, and the guilty verdict was overturned so he is innocent.

Ageyev

The recent decision was from a federal judge ruling on a motion of habeas corpus which goes back centuries in English law. It's basically a petition to challenge why you're in prison. It's a pretty good decision afaik.

Look up the West Memphis 3 - they agreed to an Alford plea which afaik accepts the evidence but you can also assert your innocence. Brendan's in a pretty good spot from the best I can tell.

Penn

m1ck007 wrote: »

Last time i checked you needed to prove the party was guilty, not innocent. Innocent until proven guilty, and the guilty verdict was overturned so he is innocent.

Yes, but the first court case and all the appeals concluded that he was guilty, and until such a time as another trial takes place (which is quite likely), he will still be in jail until that trial is concluded whether he is innocent or not.

I think he's innocent. I've thought so since seeing the show. But people are acting like he'll be released in 90 days from the date of his conviction being overturned. All I'm saying is he probably won't be because they will likely go for a new trial, and he'll be in prison until that's done either way. It's not like some new evidence has proved his innocence, it's that evidence on which his trial was based (his confessions) were obtained in a way which violated his constitutional rights.

Enigma IE

My feeling is that there won't be a retrial and he will be out within the the 90 days. Hopefully he will have a support framework in place so he can get back living his life.

Penn

Enigma IE wrote: »

My feeling is that there won't be a retrial and he will be out within the the 90 days.

Depends. I'd say they'll definitely be looking to go for a retrial (given the publicity around the case and likelihood of payment of damages due if Brendan got out), but since his confessions can no longer be used they might not have enough evidence to go to trial with.

MadDog76

m1ck007 wrote: »

Last time i checked you needed to prove the party was guilty, not innocent. Innocent until proven guilty, and the guilty verdict was overturned so he is innocent.

Correct, as it stands today Brendan Dassey is legally innocent ......... the onus is now on the Prosecution to prove he's guilty which they couldn't do first time round so I doubt they'll be able to this time even if they have the gall to put him on trial again.

DaDoRonRonRon

From RTE.ie - New suspects' revealed in Making a Murderer case

The lawyer attempting to overturn the murder conviction of Steven Avery, the subject of Netflix documentary sensation Making a Murderer, has revealed there could be a huge twist to come in the case.

Avery is currently serving a life sentence for the murder of Teresa Halbach, whose remains were found close to Avery's home in 2005.

The case has since become the subject of a 10-part documentary series Making A Murderer on Netflix, with the possibility of a second series being discussed.

Kathleen Zellner, who is currently representing 53-year-old Avery, said there are new key suspects involved in the case and said that they all knew Halbach.

"Half of my exoneration cases have led to the apprehension of the real killer," Zellner told Newsweek in an in-depth feature. "I’ve probably solved way more murder cases than most homicide detectives."

In terms of new suspects, Zellner said: "We have a couple. I’d say there’s one, leading the pack by a lot. But I don’t want to scare him off, I don’t want him to run."

Steven Avery's appeal is expected to go to court within the next year. Avery and his nephew Brendan Dassey are nine years into life sentences for the murder of Teresa Halbach.

Uriel.

DaDoRonRonRon wrote: »

From RTE.ie - New suspects' revealed in Making a Murderer case

The lawyer attempting to overturn the murder conviction of Steven Avery, the subject of Netflix documentary sensation Making a Murderer, has revealed there could be a huge twist to come in the case.

Avery is currently serving a life sentence for the murder of Teresa Halbach, whose remains were found close to Avery's home in 2005.

The case has since become the subject of a 10-part documentary series Making A Murderer on Netflix, with the possibility of a second series being discussed.

Kathleen Zellner, who is currently representing 53-year-old Avery, said there are new key suspects involved in the case and said that they all knew Halbach.

"Half of my exoneration cases have led to the apprehension of the real killer," Zellner told Newsweek in an in-depth feature. "I’ve probably solved way more murder cases than most homicide detectives."

In terms of new suspects, Zellner said: "We have a couple. I’d say there’s one, leading the pack by a lot. But I don’t want to scare him off, I don’t want him to run."

Steven Avery's appeal is expected to go to court within the next year. Avery and his nephew Brendan Dassey are nine years into life sentences for the murder of Teresa Halbach.

This is very old news now

[Deleted User]

Uriel. wrote: »

This is very old news now

Excellent contribution.

Uriel.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Excellent contribution.

Thank you

bennyineire

DaDoRonRonRon wrote: »

From RTE.ie - New suspects' revealed in Making a Murderer case

The lawyer attempting to overturn the murder conviction of Steven Avery, the subject of Netflix documentary sensation Making a Murderer, has revealed there could be a huge twist to come in the case.

Avery is currently serving a life sentence for the murder of Teresa Halbach, whose remains were found close to Avery's home in 2005.

The case has since become the subject of a 10-part documentary series Making A Murderer on Netflix, with the possibility of a second series being discussed.

Kathleen Zellner, who is currently representing 53-year-old Avery, said there are new key suspects involved in the case and said that they all knew Halbach.

"Half of my exoneration cases have led to the apprehension of the real killer," Zellner told Newsweek in an in-depth feature. "I’ve probably solved way more murder cases than most homicide detectives."

In terms of new suspects, Zellner said: "We have a couple. I’d say there’s one, leading the pack by a lot. But I don’t want to scare him off, I don’t want him to run."

Steven Avery's appeal is expected to go to court within the next year. Avery and his nephew Brendan Dassey are nine years into life sentences for the murder of Teresa Halbach.

This is new news to me, thanks

serfboard

bennyineire wrote: »

This is new news to me, thanks

The original Newsweek article is here.

Agent Coulson

The state of Wisconsin has appealed Brendan Dassey's overturned conviction so he won't be released for a while yet.

Subacio

Agent Coulson wrote: »

The state of Wisconsin has appealed Brendan Dassey's overturned conviction so he won't be released for a while yet.

It's "an appalling vista", to be fair.

dublinjen

I have two tickets to Dean Strang, below cost price if anyones interested

gizmo555

Agent Coulson wrote: »

The state of Wisconsin has appealed Brendan Dassey's overturned conviction so he won't be released for a while yet.

His lawyers have filed a motion seeking his release on bail pending his retrial.

fin12

If they release Brendan Deasy won't they have to release Stephen Adler as well.