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

8-10

Mam of 4 wrote: »

It's so sad , isn't it ?

There's another programme on Netflix - True Confessions , well worth a watch .

It's so easy for anyone to say oh I'd never confess to something I hadn't done , but until you're in that position , and maybe not in the right frame of mind , it's so easy to be coerced into saying it was you .

Central Park 5 also a good example

Mam of 4

8-10 wrote: »

Central Park 5 also a good example

Had forgotten about that tbh

shellycub

8-10 wrote: »

Mam of 4 wrote: »

It's so sad , isn't it ?

There's another programme on Netflix - True Confessions , well worth a watch .

It's so easy for anyone to say oh I'd never confess to something I hadn't done , but until you're in that position , and maybe not in the right frame of mind , it's so easy to be coerced into saying it was you .

Central Park 5 also a good example

Is this on netflix also?

Mam of 4

shellycub wrote: »

Is this on netflix also?

I can't remember where I watched it , but it's online on Netflix Movies if that's any help to you .

2 Scoops

Hard to know what to think but imo Avery is guilty. Looking at his past he's had some serious problems. He raped his 13 yo niece and was involved with killing the family cat in a bonfire, which to me signifies someone who has psychopathic tendencies. He rang the girl who was murdered something like 40 times? The blonde's motives are questionable after appearing on Dr Phil among other places.

The new Woman did a great job but felt it was a bad tone to criticize the previous 2 lawyers as much as she did, wasn't subtle about it at all. Brendan Dassy deserves a retrial, he may he innocent in all this and the way he was coerced by those interrogators was morally wrong. As bad as Ken Kratz comes across ( or smart depending on how you look at it ), he's not in the same ball park as this guy, he makes my skin crawl. ( afaik currently banged up for stalking )

Shergar6

2 Scoops wrote: »

Hard to know what to think but imo Avery is guilty. Looking at his past he's had some serious problems. He raped his 13 yo niece and was involved with killing the family cat in a bonfire, which to me signifies someone who has psychopathic tendencies. He rang the girl who was murdered something like 40 times? The blonde's motives are questionable after appearing on Dr Phil among other places.

The new Woman did a great job but felt it was a bad tone to criticize the previous 2 lawyers as much as she did, wasn't subtle about it at all. Brendan Dassy deserves a retrial, he may he innocent in all this and the way he was coerced by those interrogators was morally wrong. As bad as Ken Kratz comes across ( or smart depending on how you look at it ), he's not in the same ball park as this guy, he makes my skin crawl. ( afaik currently banged up for stalking )

I keep reading about this rape... How was he not in jail for that?

retro:electro

2 Scoops wrote: »

The new Woman did a great job but felt it was a bad tone to criticize the previous 2 lawyers as much as she did

I think she had to do this in order to find any kind of holes or leeway that would allow for a retrial. I don’t think Buting and Strang took it personally. They seemed to understand that she was limited in what she could poke holes in.

Deise Vu

retro:electro wrote: »

I think she had to do this in order to find any kind of holes or leeway that would allow for a retrial. I don’t think Buting and Strang took it personally. They seemed to understand that she was limited in what she could poke holes in.

Whatever the profession, the easiest job in the world is to review someone else's work. Everything the previous guy or gal did is done under time and budget pressure. All you have to do is find one or two quibbles and you look like a genius even though, if the positions were reversed, you might do a job from scratch that would omit a dozen pertinent points.

gmisk

Mam of 4 wrote: »

It's so sad , isn't it ?

There's another programme on Netflix - True Confessions , well worth a watch .

It's so easy for anyone to say oh I'd never confess to something I hadn't done , but until you're in that position , and maybe not in the right frame of mind , it's so easy to be coerced into saying it was you .

Is this a different one to "the confession tapes" on netflix?

It is really good

we'llallhavetea

I thought this would be a long padded out rehash but actually we were totally glued to it!
I'm gonna base my opinion on MAM only, don't think he did it tbh. I mean, she covered everything I would have used against Steven and blew it all out of the water. Find it very tough to watch his parents, even if he ever gets out (I don't think he ever will, either of them) they will be dead before it happens I think

poor yoda

we'llallhavetea

Shergar6 wrote: »

I keep reading about this rape... How was he not in jail for that?

Because it's just hearsay.

retro:electro

I’m on episode 5 now and loving it so far. I find the technical side of it so interesting, and love learning about the judicial system and how and why certain decisions are made. There’s no major bomb dropping moments like we had in season one, but that was to be expected. I think it acts as a good footnote to season one.

Mam of 4

gmisk wrote: »

Is this a different one to "the confession tapes" on netflix?

It is really good

You're right , it's The Confession Tapes , sorry

It is compelling viewing alright ,

Mam of 4

retro:electro wrote: »

I’m on episode 5 now and loving it so far. I find the technical side of it so interesting, and love learning about the judicial system and how and why certain decisions are made. There’s no major bomb dropping moments like we had in season one, but that was to be expected. I think it acts as a good footnote to season one.

I've just finished watching it , and I think Kathleen is one tough cookie !
Like a dog with a bone , she is not letting go of this and imo , has brought up quite a lot of questions , and theories , that need to be answered and explored .

Yes , I know that's what she's hired for lol , but she's done an excellent job so far .

Not saying anything else as I don't want to spoil it for anyone .
I just feel so sorry for SA's parents , as someone else posted , they are old and very frail at this point . I found watching his father tough going at times for some strange reason .

Mountainsandh

Deise Vu wrote: »

Whatever the profession, the easiest job in the world is to review someone else's work. Everything the previous guy or gal did is done under time and budget pressure. All you have to do is find one or two quibbles and you look like a genius even though, if the positions were reversed, you might do a job from scratch that would omit a dozen pertinent points.

Good point and agreed, but she's good on top of that imo.
Love her drawl too

I agree with retro, I think she had to pin the two previous lawyers down to inefficacy so she could proceed with ... procedures :P

Where did you see he called the woman killed 40 times 2 scoops ? I must have missed that.
I've seen something about the cat, where he explained he was young and stupid (and regretted doing it).

Haven't seen anything about rape in Google either, that was a quick search alright.

His cousin (woman with bangs and really blue eyes) is the one speaking my mind all the time.

inforfun

Kathleen reminds me of Sharon Raydor of Major Crimes for some reason.

enfant terrible

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Where did you see he called the woman killed 40 times 2 scoops ? I must have missed that.

The purpose of the show is to try and make you believe Avery in innocent, so they are not going to show any of the evidence of his guilt.

Have a read of this link to try undue the 20 hours of one sided propaganda you watched.

https://www.reddit.com/r/StevenAveryIsGuilty/wiki/evidence

Obviously the guys on reddit don't have the resources of a Netflix funded show buy you'll get the basic facts anyway.

Mountainsandh

enfant terrible wrote: »

The purpose of the show is to try and make you believe Avery in innocent, so they are not going to show any of the evidence of his guilt.

Have a read of this link to try undue the 20 hours of one sided propaganda you watched.

https://www.reddit.com/r/StevenAveryIsGuilty/wiki/evidence

Obviously the guys on reddit don't have the resources of a Netflix funded show buy you'll get the basic facts anyway.

Thanks for the link, I'll explore a bit more later, but tbh, so far to me, it just looks like someone's opinion and a few links to how the evidence was found without really demonstrating anything definite that could annihilate the theories on Making a Murderer.

And there is no reference to the 40 calls that I can see ?

Is it alleged that he called her 40 times that day ? or within a few days ? or is that the number of times he ever called her ?

If the latter, then it's absolutely not incriminating, since he seems to have been in contact regularly for cars that needed selling.

I do remember her colleague saying that she received lots of calls from an unwanted caller, I think the colleague assumed it was an old boyfriend or some such, he offered to talk to the caller to end this, and she declined saying it was annoying but she was grand.

Nowhere have I seen it said that the caller in question was Steven Avery.

Shergar6

retro:electro wrote: »

I’m on episode 5 now and loving it so far. I find the technical side of it so interesting, and love learning about the judicial system and how and why certain decisions are made. There’s no major bomb dropping moments like we had in season one, but that was to be expected. I think it acts as a good footnote to season one.

I thought the fact Bobby was lying about seeing Teresa going to Steve's house was pretty big. And his computer history.

Shergar6

I'm listening to Bobby Dassey full interview from last year and he is shady as ****. Especially when they start asking about the computer and the history.

Said he doesn't know if they had Internet at that time.... That he doesn't think he used it ever because he was so busy working... Said the computer was never in his room because he shared a room with his brother and there was no room... But he hummed and hawwed over which brother he shared the room with... "it was _______ I believe???"

Like sorry but its been 23 years since I shared a room with a sibling. Pretty sure I remember which one.

They asked him why there was 3 folders on the computer under Teresa, Galbach and DNA .... "couldn't tell ya"

He did it.

seligehgit

Shergar6 wrote: »

I'm listening to Bobby Dassey full interview from last year and he is shady as ****. Especially when they start asking about the computer and the history.

Said he doesn't know if they had Internet at that time.... That he doesn't think he used it ever because he was so busy working... Said the computer was never in his room because he shared a room with his brother and there was no room... But he hummed and hawwed over which brother he shared the room with... "it was _______ I believe???"

Like sorry but its been 23 years since I shared a room with a sibling. Pretty sure I remember which one.

They asked him why there was 3 folders on the computer under Teresa, Galbach and DNA .... "couldn't tell ya"

He did it.

Any link to the interview?

Potential Underachiever

From the 2nd season a big thing for me was this independent witness that said he saw the Rav4 parked near the Tadych property, he then reports it to the dodgy cop Colborn? and sure enough he calls it in presumably looking at the car but he looked so dodgy when being questioned in season 1. Also interesting that the witness messaged Tadych about it and he was more or less fobbed off by him.

Cockadoodledoo

I don’t think they are going to get anywhere. Brendan has been totally screwed over.

I also thought it was odd that they asked the Halbach family for their input on Brendan’s release. Is that normal procedure??

Why would they have an input if he was going to be considered innocent??

Shergar6

seligehgit wrote: »

Any link to the interview?

https://youtu.be/kE9-fnW4S7g

It's 50 minutes and nothing too notable but he is very evasive at times. Remembers certain things but has no memory of things nobody would forget. He's like 30 not 70. It wasn't that long ago.

Mam of 4

Shergar6 wrote: »

I'm listening to Bobby Dassey full interview from last year and he is shady as ****. Especially when they start asking about the computer and the history.

Said he doesn't know if they had Internet at that time.... That he doesn't think he used it ever because he was so busy working... Said the computer was never in his room because he shared a room with his brother and there was no room... But he hummed and hawwed over which brother he shared the room with... "it was _______ I believe???"

Like sorry but its been 23 years since I shared a room with a sibling. Pretty sure I remember which one.

They asked him why there was 3 folders on the computer under Teresa, Galbach and DNA .... "couldn't tell ya"

He did it.

I started watching the first Series again , with new eyes as they say .

Always thought Bobby came across a little bit shifty , but the computer , and what was on it , goes a long way in casting reasonable doubt in Stevens guilt I think .

No wonder he wouldn't go visit him in prison .

Shergar6

Shergar6 wrote: »

https://youtu.be/kE9-fnW4S7g

It's 50 minutes and nothing too notable but he is very evasive at times. Remembers certain things but has no memory of things nobody would forget. He's like 30 not 70. It wasn't that long ago.

One more thing. He said Barb had just started dating Scott for like "a week" before Teresa was killed....... (would love to get the dating history verified) That he didn't get on with Scott back then and didn't talk to him....

Distancing himself from Scott??

Frank O. Pinion

If Brendan and Bobby's mother, Barbara, maintains that they're both innocent and that Steven and Scott are innocent, who does she think done it? Teresa's ex-boyfriend, Ryan?

we'llallhavetea

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

If Brendan and Bobby's mother, Barbara, maintains that they're both innocent and that Steven and Scott are innocent, who does she think done it? Teresa's ex-boyfriend, Ryan?

That bitch knooooows :pac:

Mountainsandh

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

If Brendan and Bobby's mother, Barbara, maintains that they're both innocent and that Steven and Scott are innocent, who does she think done it? Teresa's ex-boyfriend, Ryan?

Is he the ever present, attention loving, camera courting guy who was directing searches, and gave the car finder directions to go into the yard with a direct line number to the sheriff, ya know, just in case like ? He has such an Ian Huntley sort of presence in the case and yet according to Kathleen he was hardly looked at.

Potential Underachiever

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Is he the ever present, attention loving, camera courting guy who was directing searches, and gave the car finder directions to go into the yard with a direct line number to the sheriff, ya know, just in case like ? He has such an Ian Huntley sort of presence in the case and yet according to Kathleen he was hardly looked at.

Yes and another good point Zellner brought up about him was that he had Theresas daily planner which was odd because she showed that it really should have been in the car as she had took bookings that day and she never made it home.