Tipsy McSwagger wrote: » The Thin Blue Line holds that title
The Nal wrote: » Jinx is the best of the three by a country mile. One of the best true crime docs ever. Maybe the best ever.
jayo26 wrote: » Oh yes this is very good too probably even better then mam and the jinx.
NIMAN wrote: » The show itself is one of the worst things I've ever seen. Basically its a 1hr documentary that theyhave managed to stretch out to 10 x 1hr episodes. I got very bored watching it. Don't believe the hype.
seligehgit wrote: » Where'd you view it?Netflix? Just started reading The Innocent Killer by Michael Griesbach based on Making a Murderer.
Tipsy McSwagger wrote: » The Staircase is even better
NIMAN wrote: » Maybe its just me so, but if they ever make any more documentaries on the case, I won't be watching. Now, The Jinx was a completely different story. That was a proper documentary.
jayo26 wrote: » The jinx was class documentary excellent story.
anna080 wrote: » You have a point about The Keepers but MAM would never have been able to be compacted into 2 hours. Too much info, too many twists to the tale, too many tales too tell. No way no how. I think whatever side of the fence you fall- re guilty or not guilty, bias viewing or not- the majority of people found it to be absolutely compelling television and I actually yearned for it when it was over.
Pelvis wrote: » Wrong. Normally I don't watch 10 hours of TV if I consider it one of the worst things I've ever seen. So either you didn't actually watch it, or you're talking through your hoop.
MrMac84 wrote: » No way do you tell that story in 1 hour! After 10 hours there are still parts of it untold
The Nal wrote: » Only if you go by the film makers version sure. They cherry picked and left a load of stuff out. Key evidence.The petition to the white house is one of the worst things Ive ever seen.
seligehgit wrote: » Outrageous miscarriages of justice IMO in both trials.Stephen Avery's attorneys presented a case par excellence which cast reasonable doubt on Avery's guilt.
Benzino wrote: » It's not like the police blindly chose Avery for no logical reason. Yes, they should have followed other leads better than they did, but she was last seen at Avery's. Her car was found at Avery's. Her remains, at Avery's. He also has history of violence towards women and animals. He is naturally the first person you would look at in this case.
Drumpot wrote: » Because if you are white, live in suburban areas and are considered "respectable" you are less likely to be a Person of Interest. . White Trash or poor white people to a lesser degree are not on that list. My point is that whether you are black, white trash or respected white person you should be afforded the same respect and treatment and presumption of innocence. Just look at the boyfriend or brother in this case . . They should of been prime suspects, but the police were happy to put all their resources into Avery and completely ignore them. People are saying that "well we didn't see everything that happened in the courtroom" which is true. But I haven't read any evidence from anybody (juror or Kratz) that shows that Avery was definitely guilty. I am not aware (can be corrected on that) that people are not allowed to discuss what happened in the court, so its odd that after all the publicity of this case, a juror or Kratz (or somebody else with knowledge of the case) hasn't come out with some really hard damning evidence that gives us a better idea as to why the Jury found him guilty. Maybe the courtcase was as much a farce as it was portrayed. Maybe there is no other evidence or information that is missing and the documentary wasn't bias, its just the courtcase was so farcial its difficult for people to accept it.
