Stigura wrote: » This is why I gave up after the first episode of the subject programme. Don't highlight a single sentence out of, potentially, a thick wad of typed material. Expecting me to accept your slant on the whole. I've probably said, " I'd kill him. " at some point in the last month. Now type up every word I've uttered, in the past month. High light that, without any context. I'm homicidal. Bollocks. These programmes show us what the makers want us to see / hear. They simply ,omit what doesn't fit their agenda. Oh; And I have Avery blood. Still can't be arsed to watch it.
Stigura wrote: » This is why I gave up after the first episode of the subject programme. Don't highlight a single sentence out of, potentially, a thick wad of typed material. Expecting me to accept your slant on the whole. I've probably said, " I'd kill him. " at some point in the last month. Now type up every word I've uttered, in the past month. High light that, without any context. I'm homicidal. Bollocks. These programmes show us what the makers want us to see / hear. They simply ,omit what doesn't fit their agenda.Oh; And I have Avery blood. Still can't be arsed to watch it.
Noo wrote: » Wasnt the point of the documentry to show Averys side, not to prove innocence or guilt but to highlight the shambles of an investigation. AFAIK the police department refused to interview for the documentry so for that reason yes its all one sided. When the case first came out all the people on the streets were screaming guilty guilty guilty as all they had was the polices media statements, which less face it only fed them one thing. The documentry clearly shows reasonable doubt and i just dont know how anyone can argue otherwise.
J Mysterio wrote: » Wha? :pac:
Stigura wrote: » I tend to grow disinterested the moment productions feed us sound bites out what would clearly be Lots of material.
I'm not going to trawl the court records of every case out there.
BizzyC wrote: » The show does demonstrate though that the case the proceedings of the case were a complete shambles and probably not sufficient to find him guilty.
8-10 wrote: » I think this is the point, rather than being a whodunnit A couple of things about the investigation and trial just looked wrong, and there is definitely some believability that class came into the way some of it was handled. For instance there was definitely something shady in the way Kratz interviewed Bobby Dassey on the stand. Making it seem like his conversation with Mike happened on the 3rd and not the 10th, and Kratz being the one to suggest it happened that way and not the witness volunteering it that just looked very shady. I know the defense moved for a mistrial on the back of that but I think at the least the jury should have received instructions in retrospect on how to interpret Bobby's testimony.
Antar Bolaeisk wrote: » How are they going to ensure an unbiased jury this time around, surely everyone in the world has heard about this case at this stage and a large number of people have watched the show.
smash wrote: » His new attorney claims to have enough evidence to exonerate him outright without the need for a retrial. Tomorrow or Monday are earmarked as days to keep an eye on, but we'll see what happens.
Laois_Man wrote: » Kathleen Zellner also says someone using a fake name accessed the Avery property during the search. Also I see Avery's girlfriend at the time of the murder Jodi Stachowski gave an interview showing a completely different view point to what's shown in the documentary. She believes he's guiltyhttp://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/01/13/making-a-murderer-steven-avery-s-ex-fiancee-claims-behind-closed-doors-he-s-a-monster.html
nacho libre wrote: » So the new evidence is a prowler(?) unauthorised person had access to the crime scene and the phone masts proves she left his place, despite it being claimed previously that was the last place she had been? Why were her voice messages deleted and who did this? It seems to me the person who hacked her voicemail deleted them, but why?
smash wrote: » This was only ever claimed by the police after they found her vehicle on Avery's property. Prior to this it was always believed that her last stop was George Zipperer, who's wife even testified that the victim was at their property some time between 12 and 3 and that she never saw Teresa leave. When the car was found at Avery's they immediately dismissed all other suspects. Andres Martinez was also on the Avery property the day the car was found. He had previous convictions and left the Avery property to go home and axe his girlfriend. He also made subsequent statements that Steven and Brendan are innocent... Google it, you couldn't make this stuff up.
