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

retro:electro

[Deleted User] wrote: »

But what is the significance of the blue ribbon?

Oh sorry I didn't realise that is what you were referring to. They were hung around the neighbourhood while the search was going on for her

[Deleted User]

JaCrispy wrote: »

8 i think

Lol. I just put it on now. Skipped that episode somehow.

PressRun

lukesmom wrote: »

Yes very very odd. It was almost as if she knew she was going to die. Very strange and eerie at the same time. Why would a young woman make a video like that???

To be honest, I think the way people filmed themselves in the pre-Instagram/Youtube/Facebook era was a little different to how people film themselves now. When I look back on home videos now, they're so much more candid and personal than anything people film today. Any time someone makes a video of themselves today, the fact that it's going to be seen by lots of other people is always in the back of their minds, so there's always a performance aspect or some element of holding back. In the kind of home videos Teresa was making, there isn't any assumption that strangers are going to see it, so people behave differently. For all we know, that video could have been taken during a personal chat she was having with someone and she didn't think other people would be watching it.

youandme13

http://uk.complex.com/pop-culture/2016/01/making-a-murderer-juror-sheriffs-department-volunteer-during-steven-avery-trial?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=tmz

Wrong on so many levels.. Not only did a juror's dad serve as a volunteer at the Sherriffs Dept and supervise in the jail,, another juror has said votes were 'traded' and she believes that Avery is innocent!

The Raptor

JaCrispy wrote: »

Finding it hard to see how people think he is innocent.
Firstly he was the last person to see her alive. All the evidence (circumstantial or not) points to Steven.

Last person to see her alive? I doubt it very much. That's because the cops didn't bother their asses doing a proper investigation or interviewing more people. The prosecution led us believe he was the last one to see her because it was her last photograping session of the day.

But anyone could have been the last one to see her past 3.45pm that day, if the cops did a proper investigation.

Its already been said that when someone gets killed its often the people closest to them that kills them. Yet her ex boyfriend wasn't a suspect, her brother wasn't a suspect (who wanted to grieve when she was missing). Her parents never shed a tear during the trial.

Not all evidence points to Steven Avery. No blood of Teresa Halbach was found in his trailer or garage. No fingerprints of his in her car. 8 days of a search in his trailer and a key is found. once that shelve was shook up, the key should have fell downwards, not sidewards under a pair of shoes. The key was planted.

The Black Oil

Just finished the first episode. Certainly compelling, moving and disturbing. Typical documentary, then.

Heat_Wave

Read tonight that Steven Avery himself is now putting forward the idea that his brothers possibly killed Teresa.

Apparently his brothers have a long track record of sexual violence and they were in the process of falling out with Steven around the time of Teresa's death as they were jealous and bitter that the garage was been ran by Steven and also envious of the compensation money which he was seeking from the state.

retro:electro

The Black Oil wrote: »

Just finished the first episode. Certainly compelling, moving and disturbing. Typical documentary, then.

First ep is nothing really, just sets up background. Starts to take off from the middle of ep 2

The Black Oil

Yeah, the ending of 1.01 was such a typical cliffhanger, really!

[Deleted User]

lukesmom wrote: »

Yes very very odd. It was almost as if she knew she was going to die. Very strange and eerie at the same time. Why would a young woman make a video like that???

For me if the outcome was unjust, that video would point the direction to what really happened, it did seem like she was saying goodbye.. have serious doubts about innocence after reading some of the evidence that was not shown on the Netflix documentary, would not like to have been on that jury though as it's too hard to call it, As for the Manitowoc police and judicial system, bloody scary!

finglashoop

[Deleted User] wrote: »

For me if the outcome was unjust, that video would point the direction to what really happened, it did seem like she was saying goodbye.. have serious doubts about innocence after reading some of the evidence that was not shown on the Netflix documentary, would not like to have been on that jury though as it's too hard to call it, As for the Manitowoc police and judicial system, bloody scary!

If your on the jury its whether reasonable doubt occurs when evidence is presented. Its not particularly about guilt or innocence but whether the prosecution have proved their case where you have no doubt

[Deleted User]

etymon

As someone who works in psychiatry it was a great example of every personality disorder known to man including Ken Kratz, Mike o'Kelly and Len Kuchinsky in particular. America's pre-trial publicity and the nonsense commentary (to the public!) every day by Mike Halbach, the victim's brother, was incredible. As for Brendan Dassey's ability to make a sandwich, let alone remove every trace of a victim's blood and DNA from his person and clothing.... USA isn't high up there on my list of go to places any more.
I mean, Steven Avery might have done it, but it doesn't make his conviction safe. One thing they didn't address in the trial was how the hell did her car key have just his DNA on it?!

Welruc

Theres supposedly a lot left out of the show. During Dasseys call to his mother that was used as evidence he tells her how avery would touch him and the other kids also he gave a very detailed account of avery moving teresa's car and removing the battery which could explain how they found his dna under the hood.

glued

JaCrispy wrote: »

Finding it hard to see how people think he is innocent.
Firstly he was the last person to see her alive. All the evidence (circumstantial or not) points to Steven.

It would take the collusion of so many people (different police jurisdictions, crime scene guys and FBI) to point the finger at him.

I don't think the police really know 100% what happened, e.g. where she was killed but the defences argument was ludicrous. That somebody else murdered Halbach in such a way it would incriminate Avery. Absurd conclusion.

Mistakes were made all over the place but ultimately, the right man was given the right sentence.

I'm not sure how you can draw such a preposterous conclusion tbh. Luckily most people haven't drawn the same absurd conclusions as you. I'm not sure how any sane person could watch that documentary, read up on the case and draw the conclusion that 'the right man was given the right sentence'.

Trigger

deuceswild wrote: »

Theres supposedly a lot left out of the show. During Dasseys call to his mother that was used as evidence he tells her how avery would touch him and the other kids also he gave a very detailed account of avery moving teresa's car and removing the battery which could explain how they found his dna under the hood.

This was explained over on reddit, basically he was coerced into saying that in his statement to the investigators and then they had told him that he had to tell his mother everything that he told them in the statement or she wouldn't believe him. They knew full well that the phone call would be recorded. He was also coerced into saying that Steven was under the hood of the car.

marklazarcovic

astradave wrote: »

This was explained over on reddit, basically he was coerced into saying that in his statement to the investigators and then they had told him that he had to tell his mother everything that he told them in the statement or she wouldn't believe him. They knew full well that the phone call would be recorded. He was also coerced into saying that Steven was under the hood of the car.

when his mother questioned brendan on the touching he told her it was when they would fun wrestle,in the same room as his mum would be at the time,and steven would would pretend grab at his groin area,whilst both fully clothed .

im guessing it was the only real scenario he could come up with after he was away from the cops interviewing him,so he wasnt 'LYING' to his mom so to speak.

thats my take on it,poor kid trying to justify his coerced statement to his mum so not to upset the cops,but not wanting to lie to his mum either

JaCrispy

The Raptor wrote: »

Not all evidence points to Steven Avery. No blood of Teresa Halbach was found in his trailer or garage. No fingerprints of his in her car. 8 days of a search in his trailer and a key is found. once that shelve was shook up, the key should have fell downwards, not sidewards under a pair of shoes. The key was planted.

You're talking about "evidence" that wasn't found. I'm say that any evidence that was found pointed towards Avery.
Also throughout this thread you will see the amount of information that Netflix didn't include in the documentary.
Stuff such as the Dassey testimony about how Avery moved Halbachs car.

Not everything you see on television is real !!!

Certain bits of information that's left out or displayed in a certain manner can coerce people into thinking a certain way.

I think the Dassey interrogation was inhumane and downright disgraceful.

Veloce

JaCrispy wrote: »

You're talking about "evidence" that wasn't found. I'm say that any evidence that was found pointed towards Avery.
Also throughout this thread you will see the amount of information that Netflix didn't include in the documentary.
Stuff such as the Dassey testimony about how Avery moved Halbachs car.

Not everything you see on television is real !!!

Certain bits of information that's left out or displayed in a certain manner can coerce people into thinking a certain way.

I think the Dassey interrogation was inhumane and downright disgraceful.

There is no doubt the documentary is biased in favour of Dassey & Avery.

In saying that, I do not believe either got a fair trial based on what was outlined in the documentary. No way someone can conclude that both of them are guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

Joeface

I don't believe the documentary intentionally did bias it in favor of Dassey and Avery , It is simple the evidence and how it is presented that does that. I don't think all the editing in the world would make it Pro Defense .
Look back through the thread the Prosecutions said there was evidence left out of the documentary that was damning to Avery but just as much if not more Pro evidence appears to be left out including .

"In between 3:30 - 4PM, A propane delivery truck driver (John Leurquin) saw a green SUV leaving the Avery property at but couldn’t identify driver or if it was a male or female. He delivers propane for Valders Co-op. Usually fuels up near Avery property at 3:30 for about half an hour http://www.wsaw.com/news/headlines/6386482.html"

That's fairly massive.

vapor trails

As a counter balance I wonder if the the Halbach family had coincidentally commissioned their own 10 year long behinds the scene's documentary which was edited and produced heavily with their point of view as the agenda. How convincing would their side of the story look ? I be very surprised if it was not as if not more convincing than the Avery side. Some people willing to surrender themselves to an opinion which is really based on what the directors and producers of MAM decided what should / should not be shown. I watched it and its definitely compelling but I find myself reluctant to go all in with my opinion based upon what I saw because i don't trust anyone to present the facts to me in a completely unbiased and fair way.

[Deleted User]

vapor trails wrote: »

As a counter balance I wonder if the the Halbach family had coincidentally commissioned their own 10 year long behinds the scene's documentary which was edited and produced heavily with their point of view as the agenda. How convincing would their side of the story look ? I be very surprised if it was not as if not more convincing than the Avery side. Some people willing to surrender themselves to an opinion which is really based on what the directors and producers of MAM decided what should / should not be shown. I watched it and its definitely compelling but I find myself reluctant to go all in with my opinion based upon what I saw because i don't trust anyone to present the facts to me in a completely unbiased and fair way.

People really, really need to take this into account. In the same way that the prosecution were labeled into spinning their own narrative; this a piece of entertainment first, not an investigation.

Snoopy1

JaCrispy wrote: »

Finding it hard to see how people think he is innocent.
Firstly he was the last person to see her alive. All the evidence (circumstantial or not) points to Steven.

It would take the collusion of so many people (different police jurisdictions, crime scene guys and FBI) to point the finger at him.

I don't think the police really know 100% what happened, e.g. where she was killed but the defences argument was ludicrous. That somebody else murdered Halbach in such a way it would incriminate Avery. Absurd conclusion.

Mistakes were made all over the place but ultimately, the right man was given the right sentence.

I totally agree with you. An opinion thats unpopular unfortunately

Flint Fredstone

[Deleted User] wrote: »

People really, really need to take this into account. In the same way that the prosecution were labeled into spinning their own narrative; this a piece of entertainment first, not an investigation.

You also need to take into account that it's in the true detective type genre, the fact that it's all real is what people find entertaining about it. The recorded questioning and court appearances are what actually happened and they are what people are so astonished and outraged by more than anything else.

[Deleted User]

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

You also need to take into account that it's in the true detective type genre, the fact that it's all real is what people find entertaining about it. The recorded questioning and court appearances are what actually happened and they are what people are so astonished and outraged by more than anything else.

Which must be taken with a dollop of salt. For example, we see maybe 30 minutes of Brendan's initial 4 hour confession. I think the outrage is misguided.

Trigger

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Which must be taken with a dollop of salt. For example, we see maybe 30 minutes of Brendan's initial 4 hour confession. I think the outrage is misguided.

The full interview is on YouTube. You will still be outraged by the end of it.

Heat_Wave

astradave wrote: »

The full interview is on YouTube. You will still be outraged by the end of it.

I watched the entire 2.5/3 hours on YouTube last night and I actually found myself thinking 'guilty'. Furious at the manner in which it was done, but how on earth could he make all that up? He was so specific too.. 'I went into Steven's kitchen and I drank some soda.. Then he asked if I wanted to go into the bedroom', he wasn't prompted to say a lot of what he actually did say.

Drumpot

deuceswild wrote: »

Theres supposedly a lot left out of the show. During Dasseys call to his mother that was used as evidence he tells her how avery would touch him and the other kids also he gave a very detailed account of avery moving teresa's car and removing the battery which could explain how they found his dna under the hood.

Actually see : http://www.thewrap.com/making-a-murderer-prosecutor-ken-kratz-steven-avery-9-reasons-guilty/

And then scroll down to the first comment on the page from a Florida lawyer. He basically confirms this "extra evidence" only serves to attack Avery's character. It may prove he is capable of the act, but it actually doesn't serve in anyway to prove that he did it!

I still cant get over them announcing all that stuff before the trial. They started to make people believe that this was a horrible crime , performed by a horrible person who they had in custody. So any potential juror would be automatically looking for the "right" evidence to back up this claim. Its wrong on so many levels. That's not even going into the efforts the state made to "prove" its case and the continual conflict of interest of all involved in prosecuting him.

And for those saying he is guilty/innocent, for me there wasn't enough proof to prove either and the verdict wasn't the story.. . The state did everything within its powers to get a guilty plea. The manner in which the case was conducted is the story.

enfant terrible

Heat_Wave wrote: »

I watched the entire 2.5/3 hours on YouTube last night and I actually found myself thinking 'guilty'. Furious at the manner in which it was done, but how on earth could he make all that up? He was so specific too.. 'I went into Steven's kitchen and I drank some soda.. Then he asked if I wanted to go into the bedroom', he wasn't prompted to say a lot of what he actually did say.

Me too. I was expecting the detectives to be coaxing the full confession out of him like how it was portrayed in the show. Doubt he ever read a book in his life nevermind kiss the girls.

wardides

vapor trails wrote: »

As a counter balance I wonder if the the Halbach family had coincidentally commissioned their own 10 year long behinds the scene's documentary which was edited and produced heavily with their point of view as the agenda. How convincing would their side of the story look ? I be very surprised if it was not as if not more convincing than the Avery side. Some people willing to surrender themselves to an opinion which is really based on what the directors and producers of MAM decided what should / should not be shown. I watched it and its definitely compelling but I find myself reluctant to go all in with my opinion based upon what I saw because i don't trust anyone to present the facts to me in a completely unbiased and fair way.

I'm not entirely sure that's the whole point of the show. I viewed it as an insightful insight into the negligence and poor standard of law enforcement in the Manitowoc area. It highlights huge doubts over vital evidence which went on to convict a man of murder. Your point about the Halbachs producing their own documentary, which highlights their own side. What exactly do you think this would show? What exactly would it "convince"?

I think people need to step away from the "did he or didn't he" theories. The documentary is about how a criminal case can be brought and held up, how two people can be sentenced for the rest of their lives in prison, without any legitimate evidence that proves, without reasonable doubt, they deserve to be there. That's the point. Not that Steven Avery is innocent, but that the handling of the case was one of the worst documented, and to ensure this doesn't happen again.