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

Brendan Filone

I'm not sure a piece of media has pissed me off as much as this one. I really regret watching it.

Watching that poor kid's life systematically destroyed by the State AND the people who are supposed to be protecting his interests made me physically angry.

El Inho

In case anyone was getting excited about that Anonymous Twitter account releasing loads of info on the case...

http://goos3d.link/4wze5

Pierce_1991

Just watched this over the last two nights. Brilliant documentary, reminded me a lot of the serial podcast. Really hope

Brendan in particular gets justice, it was sick what happened to him. I can't understand how he didn't get a retrial. As his innocence project lawyers pointed out, the judge dismissed his lawyer for being incompetent but allowed him to be convicted on the back of evidence that only came from that incompetence. Bizarre!

Sunflower 27

Why does opening the door in a towel mean anything? How credible is the statement anyway given all the lies about him. I'd say there were a lot of people very jealous of him (the settlement). You aren't a murderer because someone doesn't like you. And maybe he was odd to teresa, a poor man, once convicted of a heinous crime and locked up for 18 years. Would you not be a bit odd? How many people go through that?

Why would steven, on the brink of a big financial settlement, murder a woman that had an appointment to be with him so he would be the last person to see her and leave her bones in a burn p it on his property?

How can anyone not believe this was a set up? The piece of incriminating evidence, the key, was found by the man that Steven's release had made a total fool of and the man he was suing. And found after so many prior searches. And it didn't even have Teresa's dna on it. So Steven wiped hers off and left his on it?

If you look at his demeanour in prison now and compare it to when he was in for the assault he never did, it is exactly the same.

Love that this is getting so much publicity

Sunflower 27

Pierce_1991 wrote: »

Just watched this over the last two nights. Brilliant documentary, reminded me a lot of the serial podcast. Really hope
Brendan in particular gets justice, it was sick what happened to him. I can't understand how he didn't get a retrial. As his innocence project lawyers pointed out, the judge dismissed his lawyer for being incompetent but allowed him to be convicted on the back of evidence that only came from that incompetence. Bizarre!

I think it comes down to saving face. The system does not want to admit that corruption happens. It was bad enough they got it so wrong with Avery the first time, but this is a new ball game.

There are so many reasons why both cases should be reopened. That lenk and his cronies was ever in that trailor or allowed near the car after their history with Avery is unthinkable. They were 100% biased.and voila, they find the key. It would be laughable if it wasn't so sad.

The fact the cases have not been reopened is if that sheriff's department is found to be guilty of framing two innocent men, then it brings the whole American justice system into question.

The judge also knew this so am not surprised he acted the way he did.

This is about more than Teresa's murder.

Anyone see that O'Kelly guy crying over the blue ribbon in the ladt episode when be was being questioned and in deep ****? It was so cringeworthy it turned my stomach.

Checkmate19

I would recommend anyone that hasn't watched this do so. I don't think i have ever seen anything that has made me so angry. I love documentaries and have seen loads of them. But never has one made me upset as this one. The kids lawyer is such a slime ball. His sleaze ball smile every time he see's the media is sickening. A lot of people have blood on their hands here.

Sunflower 27

Checkmate19 wrote: »

I would recommend anyone that hasn't watched this do so. I don't think i have ever seen anything that has made me so angry. I love documentaries and have seen loads of them. But never has one made me upset as this one. The kids lawyer is such a slime ball. His sleaze ball smile every time he see's the media is sickening. A lot of people have blood on their hands here.

Yeah, when Brendan's lawyer was caught out lying about comments on the stand he started chewing his lip like a bold child. He was seriously ****ting himself.

Brendan was used as a pawn. Tbey needed him to say he saw something to nail Avery. That was all it was about, never Teresa. The sheriff's department wanted Avery locked up so they would not face the backlash of framing him the first time.

I was so impressed with Avery though. That he hasn't given up on life completely after this is beyond me. I know I would not be that brave.

Checkmate19

Avery's demeanor doesn't change throughout which is a credit to him. He show's a lot of dignity throughout. In any fair legal system you shouldn't be able to lay out the case of what happened before trail. How are you supposed to get a impartial juror. That's messed up.

PressRun

Checkmate19 wrote: »

In any fair legal system you shouldn't be able to lay out the case of what happened before trail. How are you supposed to get a impartial juror. That's messed up.

My dad and I were actually saying this when we watched the episode with the press conference where they tell the media all the gruesome details of the crime before a trial has even happened. Surely that seriously interferes with someone's right to a fair trial. I don't know if you'd get away with that over here or in the UK.

[Deleted User]

I seem to be the only person that thinks they are both 100% guilty . like her truck disappeared on his land and she was burned on his land, who the hell else did it.
I didn't think it was very good tbh, dragged on way too long. I had lost interest by episode 6/

Thelomen Toblackai

Taboola wrote: »

I binged watched this on Christmas day. Just couldn't stop watching. I came across this http://www.pajiba.com/netflix_movies_and_tv/is-steven-avery-guilty-evidence-making-a-murderer-didnt-present.php

I've put a quote from the link in spoiler tags.
In the months leading up to Halbach’s disappearance, Avery had called Auto Trader several times and always specifically requested Halbach to come out and take the photos.

Halbach had complained to her boss that she didn’t want to go out to Avery’s trailer anymore, because once when she came out, Avery was waiting for her wearing only a towel (this was excluded for being too inflammatory). Avery clearly had an obsession with Halbach.

I was firmly in the innocent camp until I read the above.

Interesting details if true. Pity there's no source for the info in that link beyond the author saying they trawled reddit and local news.

Personally I still think it's very likely he's guilty and Dasseys version is the closest thing we have to the real version of events.

But I've also little doubt the police department are corrupt and hell bent on seeing him convicted at all costs because of how he had shown them up on the previous mishandled investigation and had them on the hook for a payout.

The show also shows how disinterested the system is in reality and truth and how easy it is to convict someone for a crime once the police decide someone is their man.

Shows how vulture like and worthless the media is too. More interested in entertaining than reporting. Ironically the show itself does the same given its so one sided to try push at all costs the viewer to believe Averys innocence.

Good show all the same.

sheep?

Goose81 wrote: »

I seem to be the only person that thinks they are both 100% guilty . like her truck disappeared on his land and she was burned on his land, who the hell else did it.
I didn't think it was very good tbh, dragged on way too long. I had lost interest by episode 6/

On both counts, you're jumping to conclusions.

There is no evidence as to where the truck went missing, only where it was found.

The body may have been burned on his land, but there is evidence to suggest it was moved to his pit from a nearby quarry.

I'm not saying he didn't do it, but there is enough evidence to cast reasonable doubt. I don't know how anyone can look at this documentary and say they were 100% guilty.

spud82

I got an email from the knobhead that is Kratz this morning, using a fake email address. Told him I was a journalist and he sent me back this

Examples for you to consider:

1. Avery's past incident with a cat was not "goofing around". He soaked his cat in gasoline or oil, and put it on a fire to watch it suffer.

2. Avery targeted Teresa. On Oct 31 (8:12 am) he called AutoTrader magazine and asked them to send "that same girl who was here last time." On Oct 10, Teresa had been to the Avery property when Steve answered the door just wearing a towel. She said she would not go back because she was scared of him (obviously). Avery used a fake name and fake # (his sister's) giving those to the AutoTrader receptionist, to trick Teresa into coming.

3. Teresa's phone, camera and PDA were found 20 ft from Avery's door, burned in his barrel. Why did the documentary not tell the viewers the contents of her purse were in his burn barrel, just north of the front door of his trailer?

4. While in prison, Avery told another inmate of his intent to build a "torture chamber" so he could rape, torture and kill young women when he was released. He even drew a diagram. Another inmate was told by Avery that the way to get rid of a body is to "burn it"...heat destroys DNA.

5. The victim's bones in the firepit were "intertwined" with the steel belts, left over from the car tires Avery threw on the fire to burn, as described by Dassey. That WAS where her bones were burned! Suggesting that some human bones found elsewhere (never identified as Teresa's) were from this murder was NEVER established.

6. Also found in the fire pit was Teresa's tooth (ID'd through dental records), a rivet from the "Daisy Fuentes" jeans she was wearing that day, and the tools used by Avery to chop up her bones during the fire.

7. Phone records show 3 calls from Avery to Teresa's cell phone on Oct 31. One at 2:24, and one at 2:35--both calls Avery uses the *67 feature so Teresa doesn't know it him...both placed before she arrives. Then one last call at 4:35 pm, without the *67 feature. Avery first believes he can simply say she never showed up (his original defense), so tries to establish the alibi call after she's already been there, hence the 4:35 call. She will never answer of course, so he doesn't need the *67 feature for that last call.

8. Avery's DNA (not blood) was on the victim's hood latch (under her hood in her hidden SUV). The SUV was at the crime lab since 11/5...how did his DNA get under the hood if Avery never touched her car? Do the cops have a vial of Avery's sweat to "plant" under the hood?

9. Ballistics said the bullet found in the garage was fired by Avery's rifle, which was in a police evidence locker since 11/6...if the cops planted the bullet, how did they get one fired from HIS gun? This rifle, hanging over Aver's bed, is the source of the bullet found in the garage, with Teresa's DNA on it. The bullet had to be fired BEFORE 11/5---did the cops borrow his gun, fire a bullet, recover the bullet before planting the SUV, then hang on to the bullet for 4 months in case they need to plant it 4 months later???

There is more of course. But I'm not a DA anymore. I have no duty to show what nonsense the "planting" defense is, or why the documentary makers didn't provide these uncontested facts to the audience. You see, these facts are inconsistent with the claim that these men were framed---you don't want to muddy up a perfectly good conspiracy movie with what actually happened, and certainly not provide the audience with the EVIDENCE the jury considered to reject that claim.

Finally, I engaged in deplorable behavior, sending suggestive text messages to a crime victim in Oct 2009. I reported myself to the OLR. My law license was thereafter suspended for 4 months. I have withstood a boat-load of other consequences as a result of that behavior, including loss of my prosecution career. However, I've enjoyed sobriety from prescription drug use for over 5 years now, and refuse to be defined by that dark time of my life. All of this occurred years after the Avery case was concluded...I'm unclear why the defense-created documentary chose to include this unpleasantness in this movie, especially if the filmmakers had no agenda to cast me as a villian. I am not a victim in that whole texting scandal---then again, it's exceedingly unfair to use that to characterize me as morally unfit.

To identify Lt. Lenk, Sgt. Colburn and myself as being "responsible" for the framing and knowing false murder conviction of Steven Avery is irresponsible, and inconsistent with a consideration of all the evidence presented. Netflix should either provide an opportunity for rebuttal, or alert the viewers that this series was produced by and FOR the defense of Steven Avery, and contains only the opinion and theory of the defense team.

Thanks for your consideration.
Ken

PressRun

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

Anyone see that O'Kelly guy crying over the blue ribbon in the ladt episode when be was being questioned and in deep ****? It was so cringeworthy it turned my stomach.

I've never seen a worse attempt at fake crying. He was really doing his best to push those tears out.

spud82

PressRun wrote: »

I've never seen a worse attempt at fake crying. He was really doing his best to push those tears out.

He really was a piece of fooking merde wasn't he. Anyone else find Teresa's brother and ex boyfriend odd? Was it her ex that was able to hack into her phone and delete messages and no one said anything.

I can't stop thinking about it all day. I feel so sorry for Steve Averys mother and father, the amount of ****e they have had to put up and the strength that they show is unbelievable

Mightydrumming

Just finished watching it last night, in my opinion.. it's one of the best docu-series I've have ever watched. So many questions though...

That Kratz fellow, HIS VOICE!!!

I was a bit dumbfounded to say the least when Fassbender was asked ''Is Steven Avery the only person being investigated?'' He answered no... THEN WHO WAS?

Also the situation with the voicemail's and her brother not being able to recall whether or not he deleted some of them... dodgy

So glad Netflix decided to create the series really hope something comes out of it!

Mightydrumming

spud82 wrote: »

He really was a piece of fooking merde wasn't he. Anyone else find Teresa's brother and ex boyfriend odd? Was it her ex that was able to hack into her phone and delete messages and no one said anything.

''Errr... they just ehm guessed'' utter sh!te... plus the fact that the ex had access to the Avery property during the search, doesn't add up!

Found her brother to be very weird regarding the voicemails...

[Deleted User]

Goose81 wrote: »

I seem to be the only person that thinks they are both 100% guilty . like her truck disappeared on his land and she was burned on his land, who the hell else did it.
I didn't think it was very good tbh, dragged on way too long. I had lost interest by episode 6/

Nope me too… the more I think about it the more I think that both were involved and guilty.

Which does not mean that I think they were accorded due process or that they should have been convicted on the basis of evidence we were made aware of in the documentary. and for sure the investigation was corrupt. Would love to see the police and judiciaries investigated. Can't see it happening though.

It was excellent tv but very manipulative. And I really think that the way Teresa Halbach was kind of relegated to almost a plot device is very disrespectful of her memory and must be awful for her family.

So many wrongs in this story, though.

PressRun

spud82 wrote: »

He really was a piece of fooking merde wasn't he. Anyone else find Teresa's brother and ex boyfriend odd? Was it her ex that was able to hack into her phone and delete messages and no one said anything.

I can't stop thinking about it all day. I feel so sorry for Steve Averys mother and father, the amount of ****e they have had to put up and the strength that they show is unbelievable

I did find it odd how her brother was always there in front of the media, saying he didn't believe Steven or Brendan and how they were both liars, etc. before there had even been a conviction. I know most families in these situations usually appoint a spokesperson who does media-related stuff on behalf of the rest of the family, but I just found his steadfast belief in their guilt strange. I would have thought families usually just say something along the lines of "I hope we see justice at the end of all this"/"It's a horrible ordeal for our family", etc. But he seemed to be really involved in pushing the prosecution's agenda in the media.

I thought the ex-boyfriend's eagerness to be at the forefront of searches for Teresa unusual too. Wasn't there something about how he was allowed onto the property even though it was supposed to have been sealed? He also was never asked for an alibi for when Teresa went missing either, which just sounds like bad practice on the part of the police.

It's all just speculation really though. I thought both of those characters were a bit off, but that's a stick people used to beat Steven Avery with too. Like I said before, I find it very hard to be convinced either way. I'd kind of be thinking along the same lines as that one juror who spoke to the filmmakers - there's still a great deal of reasonable doubt.

I read an interview with the filmmakers where they said that Steven's mum used to bring new clothes with her to his court appearances so that he'd have something to wear should he get released.

Sunflower 27

Mightydrumming wrote: »

Just finished watching it last night, in my opinion.. it's one of the best docu-series I've have ever watched. So many questions though...

That Kratz fellow, HIS VOICE!!!

I was a bit dumbfounded to say the least when Fassbender was asked ''Is Steven Avery the only person being investigated?'' He answered no... THEN WHO WAS?

Also the situation with the voicemail's and her brother not being able to recall whether or not he deleted some of them... dodgy

So glad Netflix decided to create the series really hope something comes out of it!

Oh God yeah, that snivelling little whiney voice hahaha.

The brother was odd, talking about letting the family grieve when there was no body and she was still presumed to be alive but missing. Very odd statement indeed.

Tbe ex bf hacking into her voicemail and deleting messages. Why???

And that colburn idiot calling in Teresa's plates before the car was found and knowing the model year. He was lying through his teeth. What if it was a car accident that he stumbled across and decided to frame the guy that was about to bring down his very department? What if Teresa's family (tbe brother) were offered money to go along with a setup. The sheriff etc were dodgy after all.

Teresa's family were in on it if you adk me. How did they find her car in 25mins in a 40 acre site? They were told go look in that spot by the people that out it there. The aunt or whoever she was lied under oath in my opinion. She said no one told her where to look, yet her reasoning for looking in that specific area was so vague.and why was she given a camera? No other searcher was given that by the ex and the flatmate.

Also, the brother was seen laughing and smiling throughout. The only time he showed any emotion was when he was telling the jury to convict Avery. It was the only time he seemed upset in all his footage, even when he talked about grieving for her.

[Deleted User]

God that was sad. Excellent and something il be thinking about for days after

In my opinion her brother totally did it...got a complete joe o' Reilly vibe off him

Sunflower 27

Rfrip wrote: »

God that was sad. Excellent and something il be thinking about for days after

In my opinion her brother totally did it...got a complete joe o' Reilly vibe off him

A lot of people seem yo think it was the brother. Maybe he listened to her voice mail to know where she would be. He would not entertain the idea it wasn't Avery even though most people don't believe Avery did it after looking at all the lack of evidence.

Maybe he is just a bit of an oddball. He seemed to love the limelight, I'll give him that.

Sunflower 27

spud82 wrote: »

I got an email from the knobhead that is Kratz this morning, using a fake email address. Told him I was a journalist and he sent me back this

Examples for you to consider:

1. Avery's past incident with a cat was not "goofing around". He soaked his cat in gasoline or oil, and put it on a fire to watch it suffer.

2. Avery targeted Teresa. On Oct 31 (8:12 am) he called AutoTrader magazine and asked them to send "that same girl who was here last time." On Oct 10, Teresa had been to the Avery property when Steve answered the door just wearing a towel. She said she would not go back because she was scared of him (obviously). Avery used a fake name and fake # (his sister's) giving those to the AutoTrader receptionist, to trick Teresa into coming.

3. Teresa's phone, camera and PDA were found 20 ft from Avery's door, burned in his barrel. Why did the documentary not tell the viewers the contents of her purse were in his burn barrel, just north of the front door of his trailer?

4. While in prison, Avery told another inmate of his intent to build a "torture chamber" so he could rape, torture and kill young women when he was released. He even drew a diagram. Another inmate was told by Avery that the way to get rid of a body is to "burn it"...heat destroys DNA.

5. The victim's bones in the firepit were "intertwined" with the steel belts, left over from the car tires Avery threw on the fire to burn, as described by Dassey. That WAS where her bones were burned! Suggesting that some human bones found elsewhere (never identified as Teresa's) were from this murder was NEVER established.

6. Also found in the fire pit was Teresa's tooth (ID'd through dental records), a rivet from the "Daisy Fuentes" jeans she was wearing that day, and the tools used by Avery to chop up her bones during the fire.

7. Phone records show 3 calls from Avery to Teresa's cell phone on Oct 31. One at 2:24, and one at 2:35--both calls Avery uses the *67 feature so Teresa doesn't know it him...both placed before she arrives. Then one last call at 4:35 pm, without the *67 feature. Avery first believes he can simply say she never showed up (his original defense), so tries to establish the alibi call after she's already been there, hence the 4:35 call. She will never answer of course, so he doesn't need the *67 feature for that last call.

8. Avery's DNA (not blood) was on the victim's hood latch (under her hood in her hidden SUV). The SUV was at the crime lab since 11/5...how did his DNA get under the hood if Avery never touched her car? Do the cops have a vial of Avery's sweat to "plant" under the hood?

9. Ballistics said the bullet found in the garage was fired by Avery's rifle, which was in a police evidence locker since 11/6...if the cops planted the bullet, how did they get one fired from HIS gun? This rifle, hanging over Aver's bed, is the source of the bullet found in the garage, with Teresa's DNA on it. The bullet had to be fired BEFORE 11/5---did the cops borrow his gun, fire a bullet, recover the bullet before planting the SUV, then hang on to the bullet for 4 months in case they need to plant it 4 months later???

There is more of course. But I'm not a DA anymore. I have no duty to show what nonsense the "planting" defense is, or why the documentary makers didn't provide these uncontested facts to the audience. You see, these facts are inconsistent with the claim that these men were framed---you don't want to muddy up a perfectly good conspiracy movie with what actually happened, and certainly not provide the audience with the EVIDENCE the jury considered to reject that claim.

Finally, I engaged in deplorable behavior, sending suggestive text messages to a crime victim in Oct 2009. I reported myself to the OLR. My law license was thereafter suspended for 4 months. I have withstood a boat-load of other consequences as a result of that behavior, including loss of my prosecution career. However, I've enjoyed sobriety from prescription drug use for over 5 years now, and refuse to be defined by that dark time of my life. All of this occurred years after the Avery case was concluded...I'm unclear why the defense-created documentary chose to include this unpleasantness in this movie, especially if the filmmakers had no agenda to cast me as a villian. I am not a victim in that whole texting scandal---then again, it's exceedingly unfair to use that to characterize me as morally unfit.

To identify Lt. Lenk, Sgt. Colburn and myself as being "responsible" for the framing and knowing false murder conviction of Steven Avery is irresponsible, and inconsistent with a consideration of all the evidence presented. Netflix should either provide an opportunity for rebuttal, or alert the viewers that this series was produced by and FOR the defense of Steven Avery, and contains only the opinion and theory of the defense team.

Thanks for your consideration.
Ken

The last paragraph, he refrains from saying they didn't frame him. How odd. Just says it is irresponsible. Now that is telling!!!

I'd say that is a standard repmy he is sending every 'journalist'

Of course he rang her that day, she was due to come over and in other reports she was late so calling her is not odd at all.

PressRun

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

A lot of people seem yo think it was the brother. Maybe he listened to her voice mail to know where she would be. He would not entertain the idea it wasn't Avery even though most people don't believe Avery did it after looking at all the lack of evidence.

Maybe he is just a bit of an oddball. He seemed to love the limelight, I'll give him that.

That's what I found weird about him. I think he sort of enjoyed getting up in front of the cameras.

And if I were the family member of someone who had been murdered and I discovered that the police hadn't even bothered to properly investigate other suspects, such as former partners, I'd be asking questions. How is an ex-boyfriend not even asked for an alibi??

Mightydrumming

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

Oh God yeah, that snivelling little whiney voice hahaha.

Every time I heard it I cringed!

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

Tbe ex bf hacking into her voicemail and deleting messages. Why???

Very strange... there was no mention of any interrogations carried out towards the ex, not even an alibi

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

And that colburn idiot calling in Teresa's plates before the car was found and knowing the model year

Forgot about that, in my opinion that was a key element in the trial but of course nothing came out of it.

You have to put your hands up to Steven's defence team, tremendous job considering the outcome. I still can't work out how the $400,000 lasted the duration!!

[Deleted User]

PressRun wrote: »

I read an interview with the filmmakers where they said that Steven's mum used to bring new clothes with her to his court appearances so that he'd have something to wear should he get released.

That just kinda breaks my heart... what that poor woman has been through

Sunflower 27

PressRun wrote: »

That's what I found weird about him. I think he sort of enjoyed getting up in front of the cameras.

And if I were the family member of someone who had been murdered and I discovered that the police hadn't even bothered to properly investigate other suspects, such as former partners, I'd be asking questions. How is an ex-boyfriend not even asked for an alibi??

I can t help but think he was in with the sheriff's department. He wanted Avery to go down for it so bad. Why would you not want other people questioned in the face of no real evidence?

Colburn calling in the plates is where it started being dodgy. He was clearly looking at the vehicle then, or the licence plates, several days before the aunt stumbled upon the car.

Where were the plates found? Anyone know?

Sunflower 27

Cali_girl wrote: »

That just kinda breaks my heart... what that poor woman has been through

She was so genuine. I really felt for her. She has been to hell and back. Twice. Just like her son.

PressRun

Mightydrumming wrote: »

You have to put your hands up to Steven's defence team, tremendous job considering the outcome. I still can't work out how the $400,000 lasted the duration!!

They were great. I don't think they were actually a team that had worked together before either. I think they were two separate lawyers who were just drafted in to work on this case. Hard to believe. They did a great job of tag-teaming the case, as if they'd been working together for years.

Whatever about whether Steven actually did it or not, his team did a fantastic job of creating reasonable doubt. I don't really know how anyone could be 100% sure of Steven's guilt or innocence either way. Even a juror who sat through the entire trial and heard every piece of evidence couldn't make up his mind. But in the case of not being sure, it has to be 'not guilty'. I think this is something a lot of jurors don't seem to understand. If you have doubts, you can't convict. If you're going to send someone down for life without the possibility of parole, you better be absolutely certain that this is the guy. I think a lot of jurors just go with "well, he probably did it", rather than "we know for certain that he did it because the evidence is conclusive", and return a 'guilty' verdict. Or they have reasonable doubt, but believe that they have to continue deliberating until they're at a point where they've convinced themselves of someone's guilt.

JaMarcusHustle

It's a very hard-hitting documentary and it really got to me at certain points. Especially when they showed the picture of Brendan, now 26, but noting that he would not be eligible for release for another 32 years.

At face value, it's unbearably cruel. However, it's unashamedly one side of the story. Im sure there's more that needs to be considered.

Ultimately, I would echo Avery's lawyer. I just really hope they are both guilty and all this sympathy is unwarranted.