Making A Murderer [Netflix - Documentary Series]

Lorne Malvo · 17-01-2016 05:58PM

TallGlass wrote: »

This theory also crossed my mind. Was there any massive blood or signs of blood loss found on the site, finding such blood loss would kind of swing my mind. But again it's quite a serious risk to take, when he had some many options to make this problem go away if he did commit the crimes.

There's no real proof that is in my mind deciding to me to say yes he is or no he isn't guilty. Unless I am missing something.

The only evidence is the kid, but he is swings and roundabouts and watching them videos of his interrogations are nothing short of telling him what to say.

I said it from the start, and will continue to say. That the ex boyfriend there is something that doesn't sit right with me about him, the first time I seen him and the footage I instantly said to myself he done something. I still think this.

There would be no blood if the victim was strangled...bullet to the head with a bag over their head...again no blood.

Lorne Malvo · 17-01-2016 06:03PM

Dr. Bre wrote: »

Halbach boss said she was getting calls from someone hassling her. Felt this wasn't talked bout enough. Who the hell was this!

Her voicemail sent to the Avery prior to the meeting didn't sound if she was at all apprehensive about the upcoming photo-shoot.

Drumpot · 17-01-2016 06:17PM

Lorne Malvo wrote: »

There would be no blood if the victim was strangled...bullet to the head with a bag over their head...again no blood.

It's hard to believe that Avery had the good sense to make it a clean murder by putting a plastic bag over her head to shoot her but chose to hide vital evidence (car and bones) in his garden.

I could believe he was an idiot and left the evidence all over the place. Not the inconsistencys with evidence here and there.

zweton · 17-01-2016 09:42PM

TallGlass wrote: »

This theory also crossed my mind. Was there any massive blood or signs of blood loss found on the site, finding such blood loss would kind of swing my mind. But again it's quite a serious risk to take, when he had some many options to make this problem go away if he did commit the crimes.

There's no real proof that is in my mind deciding to me to say yes he is or no he isn't guilty. Unless I am missing something.

The only evidence is the kid, but he is swings and roundabouts and watching them videos of his interrogations are nothing short of telling him what to say.

I said it from the start, and will continue to say. That the ex boyfriend there is something that doesn't sit right with me about him, the first time I seen him and the footage I instantly said to myself he done something. I still think this.

just finished watching earlier, i was of the same opinion straight off with the ex boyfriend.

Ageyev · 17-01-2016 10:10PM

Folks, it's real life. The documentary goes to great lengths to argue for the presumption of innocence and the requirement of a court to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt as a foundational requirement for justice. "What about the ex-boyfriend, Teresa's brother, Avery's family etc." totally miss the point of the doc which was to highlight the dodgy practises of the legal system - one of which being arbitray assumptions without evidence.

"something doesn't sit quite right with me about X,Y,Z" is part of the same problem. Such an opinion is fine for a Law&Order episode, a best seller thriller novel or an Oscar film when it's all fiction.

Lorne Malvo · 17-01-2016 10:47PM

Drumpot wrote: »

It's hard to believe that Avery had the good sense to make it a clean murder by putting a plastic bag over her head to shoot her but chose to hide vital evidence (car and bones) in his garden.

I could believe he was an idiot and left the evidence all over the place. Not the inconsistencys with evidence here and there.

If his motive was to frame the cops, he would've had to be careful where evidence was left; he wouldn't have wanted blood splattered all over the inside of his trailer.

Deise Vu · 18-01-2016 12:25PM

Some of the theories are getting increasingly ridiculous here.
My take is we know one of the following killed Theresa Halbach:

1. Stephen Avery and / or Brendan Dassey.
2. Other members of the Avery clan.
3. The cops.
4. Someone else in the World.

Working backwards was it someone else in the World? Theresa Halbach's last appointment was with Stephen Avery. Neither she nor her car were seen anywhere else afterwards and there was no further activity on her phone. If she went on her merry way out of Avery Road to be killed by a person or persons unknown, how bloody unlucky was Stephen Avery that this should happen when he was her last appointment and on a night he was lighting a bonfire and nobody else saw her afterwards, and she didn't make or receive any phone calls before bumping into her murderer? Next, how lucky did the murderer get, that the Police then moved her car to the Avery site and planted the bones outside his house and the blood in the car. Remember only the Police could have had access to Stephen's blood, and if the murderer moved the car and the bones, he was incredibly lucky that the wasn't spotted by one of the Averys as well as being somehow inspired to frame Stephen Avery knowing the cops would help out.

It has been suggested that the Ex was a bit dodgy based mainly, I am guessing, on the interview where he and Theresa's brother had accessed her phone records to help in her search and were very vague about explaining why the 'Holy Spirit' guided searcher was the only person given a camera and she found the car within 20 minutes on a 44 acre site. There is a logical explanation for their 'fidgety' behaviour under questioning by the TV reporters which is that the Police told them that they had located the car without a search warrant and, rather than lose this evidence because of the absence of a warrant, they told the brother and the Ex about it and said it would help the investigation if the amateur searchers 'found' the car instead. That would also explain Colbourn ringing in the Reg beforehand.I also find it too much of a leap that Theresa's brother and her Ex would somehow find common ground in a motive for her murder.

Next up, did the police do it and frame Stephen. The Civil Case from the wrongful conviction was seriously embarrassing for the cops but, in my view, I could not see how they would be found to be personally liable when the victim was so adamant Stephen had committed the crime and a jury had believed her. Even if it was a possibility it is a huge leap to murder an innocent girl and go about the frame. Any crack in their plan and they were going from being embarrassed to spending the rest of their lives behind bars. I don't buy that at all, especially when, if they were capable of murdering a completely innocent girl and implementing an elaborate frame, surely the simplest thing would be to murder Stephen himself? Some people are outraged that a cop said as much in the trial, but I think it is a valid point.

I'm afraid that leaves just one of the Averys. Which of them is impossible to definitively say as I believe the police tried to embellish the evidence with the blood, the magic bullet in the completely sanitised garage and, possibly, by moving the burnt remains so the finger would point at Stephen. With their embellishments the cops actually introduced 'reasonable doubt' in my opinion and it is clear the convictions are unsafe.I suppose the difficulty they were facing as things stood was that it was obviously one of the Averys did it but which one? If the bones weren't moved (only the cops know this either way), you would have to reasonably conclude (but not beyond reasonable doubt) that it was Stephen who did it. If the cops moved the bones from the other burn site then it could have been one of the other Averys. Unfortunately we will probably never know for sure unless there is a confession (a credible one this time!).

PIORUN · 18-01-2016 12:45PM

TallGlass wrote: »

This theory also crossed my mind. Was there any massive blood or signs of blood loss found on the site, finding such blood loss would kind of swing my mind. But again it's quite a serious risk to take, when he had some many options to make this problem go away if he did commit the crimes.

There's no real proof that is in my mind deciding to me to say yes he is or no he isn't guilty. Unless I am missing something.

The only evidence is the kid, but he is swings and roundabouts and watching them videos of his interrogations are nothing short of telling him what to say.

I said it from the start, and will continue to say. That the ex boyfriend there is something that doesn't sit right with me about him, the first time I seen him and the footage I instantly said to myself he done something. I still think this.

I thought the same about the ex boyfriend when I watched it, but they must have so much on Steven that another suspect wasn't even in their minds. Especially that evidence that was left out of the documentary

sadie06 · 18-01-2016 01:43PM

I have never been so glad to be finished with anything in my life. It was the most depressing factual watch since I watched Dear Zachary (don't do it) but at least that was only feature length.

That's not to say that this wasn't fascinating. It's just not something I would ever give up 10 hours of my life (plus dwelling time) to ever again.

With the collective history of violence towards women by men living on the Avery compound several of whom knew that Teresa was to visit that day, it is highly unlikely that she was killed by anyone outside of that family.

My best guess is that the step-father and/or Dassey brother followed her as she left and that the crime was committed off the property. It it had been committed on the property, surely they would have crushed the car?

They abandoned the car. The police later discovered it, hence the phone-in of the licence plate. They then framed Steven (having plenty of time to do it) perhaps reassuring themselves that he was the most likely suspect anyway, but surely fuelled by the pending lawsuit.

The whole thing is sickening on so many levels, and exposes many of America's greatest flaws. So many deeply unlikeable characters in positions of power.

MadDog76 · 19-01-2016 02:06AM

I've been thinking about this case since finishing watching the documentary.

There's a few things that bother me about the whole thing .........

Teresa Halbach's Jeep ........... I think Deputy Colburn found her Jeep two days before it was officially "found" and called it in to the dispatcher for confirmation ......... he probably came across the abandoned vehicle (with the key still inside) close enough to the Avery property to convince him that Steven Avery is responsible for Teresa's murder but not close enough to be damning evidence against Avery ......... so he moved it onto the Avery property, planted the key in Avery's bedroom when the opportunity (that he'd been waiting for) arose and also removed Avery's blood from the evidence room to plant in the Jeep.
I doubt he did any of this alone, he was almost certainly aided by Lieutenant James Lenk and others in the Department.
Why? Because, in their minds, Avery is guilty and they'll be damned if he gets away with it.

The bones .......... they were moved. The body would have taken anywhere between 12-16 hours to be broken down to the state it was found in ........... this would have to have been done elsewhere then moved, probably in the burn barrel, onto the Avery property.
Who burned her? The killer obviously ........ but who moved the bones onto the Avery property and why? I believe, like the Jeep, that the burn barrel, with the bones inside, were found by Law Enforcement (Colburn? Lenk?) close to the Avery property and/or Jeep but just not close enough so once again the "evidence" was given a helping hand.

The bullet in the garage ......... there are/were lots of bullets, shells, casing's etc. in and around the Avery property. They liked guns and they liked shooting so it's quite easy to pick up a bullet(s) from the property and plant it, with added DNA, in the garage.
This bullet somehow passed completely through Teresa's body to land on the garage floor with her (and only her) DNA on it without leaving any blood, tissue, DNA etc. on the surrounding floor/walls ........ and it remained on the floor of the garage for six months during multiple searches before being found? Doesn't make logical sense because that didn't happen ......... it was planted to help convict this "guilty" man.

Brendan Dassey's "confession" ........... I think most people can dismiss this "confession" without needing any detailed explanation.

When did Teresa actually die? The Prosecution say October 31st because that's the day she was on the Avery property .......... yet nobody reported her missing until November 3rd ......... not her room-mate, not her friends, not her ex-boyfriend, not her family/brother ......... nobody.
Somebody was accessing, and deleting, her voice-mails right up to the morning of November 2nd ......... who and why?? Was it Teresa herself meaning that she was still alive hence why she wasn't reported missing ......... or was it her killer who would have had to be somebody close enough to her to know her password.

How did Teresa die? The Prosecution believe that Brendan cut her throat in Steven Avery's bedroom ........... no knife or blood have ever been found in Steven's trailer so that's not possible.
The Prosecution also believe (because Teresa must have been murdered twice by two separate people in two separate locations?) that Teresa was shot by Steven Avery in his garage ......... no evidence (apart from the magic bullet) of this ........ the murder took place in an unknown location.

If I had been a Juror during this trial I'd have been waiting for the Prosecution to tell me exactly how, when, where and why Teresa was murdered and prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
I'd have wanted them to prove to me that the accused committed the murder.
They failed to do any of this so I would have acquitted Mr. Avery.

michael.dublin · 20-01-2016 03:34PM

One thing i can't understand is this: Kratz's pointed out in the closing augments “man and one man alone is responsible for the death of Teresa Halbach, and that man is Steven Avery” IF there is only one man, and one man alone responsible, HOW can they convict Brendan Dassey for the same murder, then according to the first trial Kratz's made that point.

The Raptor · 20-01-2016 06:22PM

This came out yesterday. Viewers of making a murder noticed the picture of Teresa Halbach in front of her suv, holding her camera. She was also holding a bunch of keys. Like normal people would have a bunch of keys.

Where are these keys? And only one turned up, to that of her car, in Steven Avery's trailer, without her DNA in her key. If she planned on going home, where was her house key? Where were her bunch of keys?

Ageyev · 20-01-2016 09:16PM

michael.dublin wrote: »

One thing i can't understand is this: Kratz's pointed out in the closing augments “man and one man alone is responsible for the death of Teresa Halbach, and that man is Steven Avery” IF there is only one man, and one man alone responsible, HOW can they convict Brendan Dassey for the same murder, then according to the first trial Kratz's made that point.

MadDog76 wrote: »

How did Teresa die? The Prosecution believe that Brendan cut her throat in Steven Avery's bedroom ........... no knife or blood have ever been found in Steven's trailer so that's not possible.
The Prosecution also believe (because Teresa must have been murdered twice by two separate people in two separate locations?) that Teresa was shot by Steven Avery in his garage ......... no evidence (apart from the magic bullet) of this ........ the murder took place in an unknown location..

It's not entirely clear from the documentary whether the prosecution's theory in both cases are consistent. Keats says (based on Brendan's testimony) that she was stabbed in the stomach and had her throat cut in the bedroom but was still alive. And that she was then killed in the garage by gunshots. Afaik the only medical evidence pointing towards cause of death based on the bones is the bullet wound to the head.

If their theory is inconsistent, unfortunately there's no law against it (Dean Strang has addressed this in recent interviews). Keats in closing arguments said "one man and one man only" and then prosecutes Brendan. Seems inconsistent but there's no constitutional protection afaik..

Ageyev · 20-01-2016 09:19PM

The Raptor wrote: »

This ago out yesterdays of makkeya murder noticed the picture of Teresa Halbach in front of her suv, holding her camera. She was also holding a bunch of keys. Like normal people would have a bunch of keys.

Where are these keys? And only one turned up, to that of her car, in Steven Avery's trailer, without her DNA in her key. If she planned on going home, where was her house key? Where were her bunch of keys?

I posted about this a few weeks ago: the key was a spare key/valet key. Plenty of Reddit threads (or search my posts) on it.

Degag · 21-01-2016 12:44AM

sheep? wrote: »

As a slight aside and purely on the aesthetics of the documentary, the intro is magnificent. Especially the music.

Highly recommended viewing.

Slippin Jimmy wrote: »

Absolutely a must watch. The intro is brilliant like a lot of shows on Netflix.

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

I totally agree with the intro. It is brilliant.

Finished the series last night. Excellent tv. Reading through the thread at the moment but just wanted to agree with these posters. Intro and especially the opening theme was fantastic. Really set the mood. Goosebumps down the spine stuff.

retro:electro · 21-01-2016 01:08AM

Agree the opening tune is superb. Am almost envious of those who are only starting the series, brilliant stuff.

Hazys · 21-01-2016 02:40AM

Just some random thoughts on the documentary, that may have not been brought up already:

Theres nothing to say that Steven Avery did kill Halbach and the Manitowoc also tried to stitch him up, to me those two acts are mutually exclusive to me
Even if Brendan was guilty, how can he get life in prison? Its clear with his mental capacity he would have been easily lead/forced/coerced by his older uncle to commit those acts, it certainly wasn't premeditated by him (although does not admitting guilt mean you automatically get the maximum sentence?)
What's scary is that Avery needed $400,000 just to have a good defense. Imagine another poor person going through this trial with a court appointed lawyer, the case would have been wrapped up in a week. Just shows how broken the justice system is, if you are poor you have no chance regardless of guilt a la Avery's first case.

The Raptor · 21-01-2016 02:55AM

Ageyev wrote: »

I posted about this a few weeks ago: the key was a spare key/valet key. Plenty of Reddit threads (or search my posts) on it.

So the real killer has her keys or knows what happened to them.

How come some of her items were recovered from the burn barrel but where were her real bunch of keys. And her house key? How can the cops get the spare to have planted it?

So many questions.

MadDog76 · 21-01-2016 03:09AM

The Raptor wrote: »

So the real killer has her keys or knows what happened to them.

How come some of her items were recovered from the burn barrel but where were her real bunch of keys. And her house key? How can the cops get the spare to have planted it?

So many questions.

From her house ..........

8-10 · 21-01-2016 09:34AM

MadDog76 wrote: »

When did Teresa actually die? The Prosecution say October 31st because that's the day she was on the Avery property .......... yet nobody reported her missing until November 3rd ......... not her room-mate, not her friends, not her ex-boyfriend, not her family/brother ......... nobody.
Somebody was accessing, and deleting, her voice-mails right up to the morning of November 2nd ......... who and why?? Was it Teresa herself meaning that she was still alive hence why she wasn't reported missing ......... or was it her killer who would have had to be somebody close enough to her to know her password.

Difficult to remember how my own cellphone worked in 2005 and America was probably different again, but if you had her phone physically I wouldn't be surprised if you could access voicemail directly without a password.

I remember having phones back then without a SIM lock, some just had a screen lock that you pressed * and # together to unlock. Then dialling 171 or equivalent I'm sure there was no requirement to have a voicemail password from your own handset, just straight to "welcome to your voicemail, you have X new messages"...play....delete

If you pick up your mail from a landline or other cellphone, then you needed a password. So I don't think it's impossible for the killer to have had her phone in his possession from the 31st (when I believe she died as I don't know of any evidence pointing to her being held somewhere for more than a day) to the 2nd, monitor her voicemails and delete messages, before dumping the phone

toadfly · 21-01-2016 09:49AM

The Raptor wrote: »

So the real killer has her keys or knows what happened to them.

How come some of her items were recovered from the burn barrel but where were her real bunch of keys. And her house key? How can the cops get the spare to have planted it?

So many questions.

From her dodgy brother, housemate or ex-boyfriend.

MadDog76 · 21-01-2016 11:10AM

8-10 wrote: »

So I don't think it's impossible for the killer to have had her phone in his possession from the 31st (when I believe she died as I don't know of any evidence pointing to her being held somewhere for more than a day) to the 2nd, monitor her voicemails and delete messages, before dumping the phone

If she did die on October 31st, which is entirely possible, then why did absolutely NOBODY report her missing until November 3rd???

Flint Fredstone · 21-01-2016 11:13AM

8-10 wrote: »

Difficult to remember how my own cellphone worked in 2005 and America was probably different again, but if you had her phone physically I wouldn't be surprised if you could access voicemail directly without a password.

I remember having phones back then without a SIM lock, some just had a screen lock that you pressed * and # together to unlock. Then dialling 171 or equivalent I'm sure there was no requirement to have a voicemail password from your own handset, just straight to "welcome to your voicemail, you have X new messages"...play....delete

If you pick up your mail from a landline or other cellphone, then you needed a password. So I don't think it's impossible for the killer to have had her phone in his possession from the 31st (when I believe she died as I don't know of any evidence pointing to her being held somewhere for more than a day) to the 2nd, monitor her voicemails and delete messages, before dumping the phone

The ex and brother state that there was a password and they guessed it.

MadDog76 · 21-01-2016 12:19PM

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

The ex and brother state that there was a password and they guessed it.

Yes but they weren't accessing her voice-mails from her actual phone ........ according to them anyway.

Even if we believe their story, it's hard to believe that they "guessed" a password ..........

Their story never sat right with me ......... I don't believe they had any actual involvement with Teresa's murder/disappearance but the facts that they somehow were able to access Teresa's voice-mails and that some of those voice-mails were deleted coupled with the fact they waited until November 3rd to report Teresa missing doesn't add up to me.

marklazarcovic · 21-01-2016 12:35PM

remember when the ex couldnt remember what time of the day it was when he visited her house on the supposed day of her death/disappearance, he said he had no idea if it was dark,or morning,or bright.. but could remember other days and times quite easily, he was trying hard not to implicate himself in something by being so vague.

Ageyev · 21-01-2016 02:07PM

Hazys wrote: »

Just some random thoughts on the documentary, that may have not been brought up already:
Theres nothing to say that Steven Avery did kill Halbach and the Manitowoc also tried to stitch him up, to me those two acts are mutually exclusive to me

Even if Brendan was guilty, how can he get life in prison? Its clear with his mental capacity he would have been easily lead/forced/coerced by his older uncle to commit those acts, it certainly wasn't premeditated by him (although does not admitting guilt mean you automatically get the maximum sentence?)

What's scary is that Avery needed $400,000 just to have a good defense. Imagine another poor person going through this trial with a court appointed lawyer, the case would have been wrapped up in a week. Just shows how broken the justice system is, if you are poor you have no chance regardless of guilt a la Avery's first case.

On point 3).

Avery got a $400k but didn't get every penny as some of it I think went towards legal fees to cover the civil suit. Afaik he gotabout $200-300k of that money and that didn't even cover the full cost - Dean Strang has said in interviews recently that the money ran out and they were working at a loss.

There is free legal aid in Ireland but it is on the discretion of a judge and depends upon whether the crime you are charged with couod result in a significant jail sentence. A district court judge recently slammed the free legal aid scheme - http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/district-court/judge-brands-legal-aid-system-a-joke-as-bail-of-7-000-paid-in-cash-1.2504136

Politicians don't typically go out of their way to better fund and equip the scheme. There's been serious "reform" of the UK's scheme the past few years. Very scary stuff but public opinion is often "meh, he did it, bring back hanging, let them rot" etc. The presumption of innocence means nowt in the media.

toadfly · 21-01-2016 02:26PM

Ageyev wrote: »

On point 3).

Avery got a $400k but didn't get every penny as some of it I think went towards legal fees to cover the civil suit. Afaik he gotabout $200-300k of that money and that didn't even cover the full cost - Dean Strang has said in interviews recently that the money ran out and they were working at a loss.

I think $160k went to the civil case leaving him with $240k for the second one. When you think they were preparing for months and the case went on for 9 weeks or something like that? Its not really crazy money.

trashcan · 21-01-2016 10:00PM

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:

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.

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?

Thanks for your consideration.
Ken

Don't know about the rest of the points he made - but on these two - Some inmate says Steven Avery "told him this" ? Doesn't make much sense for someone proclaiming his innocence to be shooting his mouth off in such a fashion does it ? Steven lawyer has already rubbished point 8 - There is no such thing as blood or non-blood DNA. It's all just DNA.

Anyway, on the wider issues. I suspect my view is similar to most here. You couldn't be sure Steven Avery is innocent, but there certainly seemed to be enough doubts that he probably shouldn't have been convicted. Brendan Dassey on the other hand seems to have been royally screwed, mainly by people who were supposed to be looking out for him. That was the most sickening aspect of the whole thing for me. Len Kachinsky and his "investigator" were a disgrace.

Riveting series.

MadDog76 · 21-01-2016 10:18PM

trashcan wrote: »

Don't know about the rest of the points he made - but on these two - Some inmate says Steven Avery "told him this" ? Doesn't make much sense for someone proclaiming his innocence to be shooting his mouth off in such a fashion does it ? Steven lawyer has already rubbished point 8 - There is no such thing as blood or non-blood DNA. It's all just DNA.

Anyway, on the wider issues. I suspect my view is similar to most here. You couldn't be sure Steven Avery is innocent, but there certainly seemed to be enough doubts that he probably shouldn't have been convicted. Brendan Dassey on the other hand seems to have been royally screwed, mainly by people who were supposed to be looking out for him. That was the most sickening aspect of the whole thing for me. Len Kachinsky and his "investigator" were a disgrace.

Riveting series.

Plus one on that ......... also, where is this mysterious "diagram"? Or are we just to take some inmates word that he's seen this diagram and that it does actually exist??

retro:electro · 21-01-2016 10:47PM

http://www.theladbible.com/articles/is-this-the-most-credible-theory-about-making-a-murderer-yet-200116

This is the most credible theory I think.

Making A Murderer [Netflix - Documentary Series]

Comments