Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Making A Murderer [Netflix - Documentary Series]

1363739414277

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,207 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    Liamo08 wrote: »
    If you believe Brendan's confession was what actually happened how do you explain the following:

    - no blood, DNA or any other evidence from the victim found in the house/garage where she was allegedly raped, strangled, throat slit and shot 10/11 times. I find it incredible to think that these guys could clean up that scene completely and leave not a shred of evidence behind just using some bleach.

    - Despite searching the house for several days no one was able to spot the key that was just sitting on the ground in one of the rooms. Even if you believe it was behind the cabinet that no one thought to look there for several days seems ridiculous. Also how was there no DNA from the victim on the key? Also no one was able to find the bullet with his DNA until months later despite days of searching the house/garage?

    - if he burned her body outside his house why did he need to put her into the boot of her car (where her blood was found) to drive her from his garage to the burn pit?

    - how come no fingerprints were found in the car despite his blood being found there?

    - did no one see/smell the burning body outside the house or here the multiple rifle shots that were fired in his garage?

    Just to clarify I've no idea if Steven Avery is guilty or not but if you believe Brendan's account I find it hard to not have huge questions about the evidence backing it up.
    I totally agree.
    On the first point you make, anyone who has ever watched forensic detectives will know that it is IMPOSSIBLE to remove that level of evidence from a crime scene after such a scenario and any attempt to remove DNA evidence using bleach etc will always be picked up by the Crime Scene techs - nothing at all was mentioned by them about this.
    EDIT - Just to add to this - IF Brendans story is true and somehow they did manage cover up this amount of forensic evidence you have to ask:
    1. How was SA and Brendan so sloppy as to :
    a. Leave SA's DNA evidence and that of the victim in a car ON THEIR OWN LAND
    b. Leave a key with DNA on it lying around SA's bedroom?
    2. Somehow manage to wipe the entire car clean of finger prints but not SA's blood?

    You have to make some serious logical leaps and disconnect from reality to bind together these two stories.

    I just have no idea how a jury could 100% say he did it based on the this missing evidence and all the other timelines that the police made up on their way to a conviction.

    Indeed, I have no idea why the whole thing wasn't a mistrial in the first instance based on the pre trial comments by various parties involved in the prosecution.


    Look, I don't know if he is 100% innocent, all I am saying is based on the evidence presented I would not be happy to commit him for the crime and at the very least the prosecution and police have major questions to answer about how they handled the whole investigation and prosecution.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,232 ✭✭✭marklazarcovic


    the whole dassey and avery clans could have been in the house and garage cleaning up the place and they would still have left behind a huge amount of trace evidence,its beyond unbelievable that that the lady was killed in the manner they say without a lot of evidence left behind.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 129 ✭✭JellieBabie


    bubblypop wrote: »
    He didn't become a suspect for no reason. Just because the programme makers made you believe he was a good guy didn't mean he was.
    There was reason to suspect him for the rape & the reason must have been right because the injured party identified him as the culprit. That's police doing their job. It's not them framing someone.

    Yep, the rape should have been looked at again, before it was. But that was one guy, one guy that ignored a phone call. Not a whole police force setting someone up.

    Lol. 22 witnesses alibied him as being somewhere else and the police deliberately drew up the sketch based on his photo and NOT based on the victim's testimony as to what the perpetrator actually looked like. There were several discrepancies between her description and Steven Avery.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 564 ✭✭✭Checkmate19


    Watched some program on id last night an hour long that went through some of the stuff. They had the prosecution on. He didn't list real anything new that wasn't in the documentary. He made a big play about Avery gave his sister name as a contact. But it was her car they wanted photo's of to sell. Also he said Avery specifically asked for the girl to come out. However she's the only one who does photo's for that mag in the county and also the person they rang up can't remember him asking for the murdered woman in particular. He just asked for the girl who takes the photos.

    Nothing really new. Hard to see where this go's unless new evidence comes forward or someone come's forward. However can't see this being the end of this. I think if anything is going to happen its going to be with Brendan's Dassey side. The more i look at this the more his confession is forced. What kid confesses to a murder and then ask's to go back to school. You can see when his mother comes in and ask's him did he do it. He says they messed with his head.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 18,942 CMod ✭✭✭✭The Black Oil


    I'll try to stay off my soapbox about my issues with binge shows, so here is Vox's Todd VanDerWerff weighing in on Making a Murderer and some of the reaction towards it.
    In nearly every interview they've given since the launch of their Netflix true crime sensation Making a Murderer, directors Moira Demos and Laura Ricciardi have struck the same note.

    They didn't go into the project seeking to exonerate Steven Avery, they say. They have no opinion as to whether or not he killed Teresa Halbach, they say. Their aim is to highlight problems with the US legal system that should give pause even to those who come away from the 10-part documentary believing Avery really did commit the crime for which he is currently imprisoned, they say. The question is not one of guilt or innocence — it's one of prosecutor misconduct and horrible mistreatment of the accused, they say.

    ~

    The effect that binge-watching can have on viewers' response to a TV show is something I first noticed back during the second season of Showtime's Homeland. When it aired, the season was roundly derided for its ludicrous plot twists and bizarre emotional logic, with viewers laughing over, say, a pacemaker being hacked via the internet. What had happened to the sinuous espionage series of season one?

    Yet I found that viewers who watched Homeland's second season on DVD or on demand had an almost uniformly different experience. In that format, the weird, gonzo plot twists that caused so many weekly viewers to throw up their hands in frustration were reduced from a series of jarring potholes to a bunch of minor bumps in the road.

    ~

    Binge-watching, simply put, wears down our critical faculties. It tends to reduce a series to its most obvious elements, setting aside the considerations of theme or meaning in favor of the most surface-level plot and character stuff. It, in other words, flattens a show.

    This is not to say you can't perform a critical assessment after a binge-watch — if it did, it would mean I was lying every time I reviewed a TV show after bingeing it. But it does mean that the binge can cause the onset of a sort of vegetative state, where the next episode is always there to welcome you after the previous one ends, and it's all the easier to just keep going.

    ~

    As I argued in 2015, Netflix itself is inventing a new sort of art form, where the length of the story being told is novel, yes, but so is the way in which it's assumed you'll consume it — all at once, in a big pile. This reduces each episode to just another unit, mostly there to mark a natural stopping point rather than anything else. And, indeed, as Netflix's Ted Sarandos told me when I interviewed him for that piece, the streaming service increasingly thinks of its seasons as big, long episodes, a marked change from how TV has traditionally been produced.

    ~

    All of this brings us back to Making a Murderer, which wanted to be about one thing but ended up, in the minds of its many fans (as well as many members of the media), mostly being about whether Avery deserves to be in prison.

    The numerous other themes that Demos and Ricciardi have talked about — the criticism of media coverage of Avery's case and trial, the examination of prosecution tactics to influence juries, the deep dive into small-town prejudices, the consideration of class in the American judicial system — are all present in the documentary. But they're much easier to miss (or ignore) when you watch all 10 episodes in a weekend (or less).

    If Making a Murderer had been released on a weekly basis, with the discussion proceeding more slowly than it did under the Netflix model, it would have been easier to tease out all these things in the conversations that sprung up around the show. When consumed all at once over the holiday break, it necessarily became all about Avery and whether he committed the crime.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,207 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    I'll try to stay off my soapbox about my issues with binge shows, so here is Vox's Todd VanDerWerff weighing in on Making a Murderer and some of the reaction towards it.

    Nonsense, especially in relation to this specific series - although to be fair the article uses the term "some of the reaction" as opposed to ALL of it.

    This is not a work of fiction, not a drama series, it is a "real life" documentary. Some would say with a one sided view, but a documentary none the less.

    There are many things that it highlights, some are mentioned in that report, and many things that would not happen in many other countries however at the end of the day there is a real life human being in jail as a result.
    IE SOME of the reaction to it is:
    What a miscarriage of Justice, get him out ASAP!

    As I and indeed many more said above, I don't know if the man is innocent or guilty, and the same goes for his Nephew, but one would hope, that the same types of thing would never happen here. (IE a jury to convict based on pretrial media interventions, issues with confessions, some questionable lack of evidence, issues with timelines in witness statements etc etc)

    Different people will react differently to this type of real life story.
    I don't personally believe the delivery method of the series has anything to do with that and the author above's opinion is as based on fact as mine.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 18,942 CMod ✭✭✭✭The Black Oil


    My view is that something like television is a digestion process and that indulgence is not always the way to go.

    The real life aspect is certainly one of the show's main hooks and why it's generated a lot of discussion. It is difficult to think of anything in direct comparison, centred on a murder, that has ~10 episodes. The Serial podcast comes to mind for its real life aspect too. It was delivered weekly and caught a lot of attention. With Netflix's continued expansion, and also more non-English speaking content coming, it'll be interesting to see what else it pursues in terms of real life material.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,269 ✭✭✭Gamebred


    Im not sure hes 100% innocent but im 100% sure he he didnt kill her the way the police are claiming,as mentioned the lack of DNA evidence is a huge hole in the prosecutions arguement,so many holes its not even funny.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,589 ✭✭✭shakencat


    just finished it there, it is absolutely ridiculous.
    fuming.


    i hate all corrupt police, f'in disgraceful.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,776 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    shakencat wrote: »
    just finished it there, it is absolutely ridiculous.
    fuming.


    i hate all corrupt police, f'in disgraceful.

    Did you sign the petition to set him free?


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 564 ✭✭✭Checkmate19


    I take it most on here have seen it so i'm not putting spoilers in. Weather he's guilty or no a few things really don't make sense.

    1. Brendan's confession is she was stabbed in the stomach by Avery and then he slit her throat. Then Avery shot her in the head in the house/trailer. Then they burned her in the burn pit. Given this how where the bullets found in the garage.

    2. The blood in the truck belonged to Avery. Krantz was asked to explain how this had come to pass. He said Avery/Dassey put the woman's body in the truck till they decided what to do with it. So there's smears of Avery's blood in the truck but none of the woman's blood. Does not make sense to me.

    If he/they done it it couldn't happen in trailer and garage. I think if they done it the police wanted to make sure of a conviction and planted evidence as they way the prosecution tries both cases doesn't make sense to me. The lack of blood in the room where they say her throat is hard to believe.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 625 ✭✭✭130Kph


    Kocourek & Vogel plus one or two other officials are very much in the frame of this scandal.

    Its absurdly simple for any of the “suspected corrupt” individuals to hire a contract killer for peanuts ($3,000?) – have this possibly troubled (& possibly death oriented) young lady killed and have the evidence planted on Avery’s property.

    The idea Avery killed her is absurd and the evidence holes mentioned earlier are crystal clear.

    Btw, I’ve only watched 2/10 episodes so the theory of binge watching distorting people’s views is nonsense.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,230 ✭✭✭Merkin


    Just finished binge watching this. What a powerful documentary, the level of corruption at every level is staggering.

    For those who want to keep up to date with developments this is quite a good site

    http://stevenavery.org


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,120 ✭✭✭Lirange


    Taking a sidetrack from the actual case itself the filmmakers did a great job of making Manitowoc seem like a dark dreary and even weird place with the music and editing. But I think the circumstances of the act along with the confusion and depravity of people involved here meant that the filmmakers didn't have to work too hard. Wisconsin...seems like a place where odd (and creepy) things happen. Jeffrey Dahmer, Ed Gein, Wisconsin Death Trip...even those two little girls in the slender man stabbings. Definitely a place I would have crossed off my list if it had ever been on it in the first place...I'm not sure I would even want my plane flying over it. ;)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 573 ✭✭✭m1ck007




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,763 ✭✭✭Thepoet85


    m1ck007 wrote:
    . For all the avery doubters out there.


    A doubter would just say he left his phone behind him.

    Hopefully something will come of it tho, I personally don't think he did it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,158 ✭✭✭✭hufpc8w3adnk65


    I really don't think he did it


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    Why is his lawyer tweeting half of his potential case to the world?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,990 ✭✭✭Potential Underachiever


    How long before Zellner gets charged with murder!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,763 ✭✭✭Thepoet85


    anna080 wrote:
    Why is his lawyer tweeting half of his potential case to the world?

    Did the prosecution no harm in shouting their case to the roof tops so maybe they're doing the same thing, convince people of his innocence before a hearing is heard.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,270 ✭✭✭Wompa1


    anna080 wrote: »
    Why is his lawyer tweeting half of his potential case to the world?

    Build on the public opinion. The phone thing doesn't seem that solid. But maybe it's an attempt to make sure there's visibility so they get outrage if justice doesn't get done this time.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    Wompa1 wrote: »
    Build on the public opinion. The phone thing doesn't seem that solid. But maybe it's an attempt to make sure there's visibility so they get outrage if justice doesn't get done this time.

    But she's just giving the prosecution a chance to rally and build their case. Each to their own, but it's not how I would want my lawyer to conduct themsleves.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,270 ✭✭✭Wompa1


    anna080 wrote: »
    But she's just giving the prosecution a chance to rally and build their case. Each to their own, but it's not how I would want my lawyer to conduct themsleves.

    I'm no legal expert but I believe all evidence needs to be submitted prior to the case usually..you can't just introduce evidence without allowing the prosecution of defense to review it first.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    Wompa1 wrote: »
    I'm no legal expert but I believe all evidence needs to be submitted prior to the case usually..you can't just introduce evidence without allowing the prosecution of defense to review it first.

    Ya I get that, but she's giving them an unfair advantage in the sense that they will have unlimited time and every opportunity to find whatever they can to dismiss her claims.
    I think she should keep her cards close to her chest


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,091 ✭✭✭Antar Bolaeisk


    Maybe she's more interested in getting wrapped up in the celebrity of it all rather than ensuring her client has a good shot at the trial.
    I wouldn't have thought that lawyers and twitter mixed at all considering the place of privilege.

    I initially wasn't very interested in watching this show, it didn't appeal to me but, based on the praise from my work colleagues I went back and ended up getting hooked. Just now finished it and I'm left with a sense of shock that they were both convicted as being guilty, not because I firmly believe they are both innocent but because evidence they were convicted on was, on the whole, very shaky.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,210 ✭✭✭maximoose


    Just got tickets for this

    Have no idea what to expect, but looking forward to it anyway!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 61,272 ✭✭✭✭Agent Coulson




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 746 ✭✭✭Mightydrumming



    Seen that earlier, delighted!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,498 ✭✭✭brianregan09




    Question is ...Will it be out before Stephen Avery ;)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 427 ✭✭cathalj


    He did it .....end of story !


Advertisement