The making of a murderer

[WestCoastRunner]

I binged on this Netflix documentary. I couldn't stop it was so riveting. After watching it, I did some research on other evidence and info that wasn't included.

Just a heads up. Don't read any further if you haven't watched it.

I believe Brendan should get another trial (he is scared of his own shadow) and I think Steven should have perhaps been acquitted because of the evidence presented, however I think he may be guilty.

[ReeferMadness]

I haven't watched it so I'm not reading the thread. Is it good?

[WestCoastRunner]

I haven't watched it so I'm not reading the thread. Is it good?

It's so addictive. Prepare to throw away 10 hours of your life. Hands down, it's one of the best documentaries I have ever watched. Even the music theme is outstanding.

Edited January 3, 2016 by WestCoastRunner

[Ash74]

It's so addictive. Prepare to throw away 10 hours of your life. Hands down, it's one of the best documentaries I have ever watched. Even the music theme is outstanding.

After watching this i was disgusted with the prosecution in this case. Brenden should not only have a retrial plus the confessions should be thrown out and His first lawyer should be disbarred.

I am a hang high kinda guy but was just sick for that poor young man. Even if guilty I do not believe he knew what he was doing.

Stephen's case just screamed cover up. "The Key" found by the very police that had him convicted wrongly 20 years earlier.

Where was the blood?

Where was the evidence she was killed in the garage?

I was shocked how badly this was done.

I understand we are seeing the one side of the story and of course it was very much shown in a favorable light towards the Avery family but damn that was a mess

[WestCoastRunner]

After watching this i was disgusted with the prosecution in this case. Brenden should not only have a retrial plus the confessions should be thrown out and His first lawyer should be disbarred.

I am a hang high kinda guy but was just sick for that poor young man. Even if guilty I do not believe he knew what he was doing.

Stephen's case just screamed cover up. "The Key" found by the very police that had him convicted wrongly 20 years earlier.

Where was the blood?

Where was the evidence she was killed in the garage?

I was shocked how badly this was done.

I understand we are seeing the one side of the story and of course it was very much shown in a favorable light towards the Avery family but damn that was a mess

It sure was a mess and how about Kachinsky! You can't make this stuff up.

I did find some interesting tidbits about Steven and his phone calls that day. And how he specifically asked for her. However, lack of blood, Dna etc makes this so puzzling.

Edited January 4, 2016 by WestCoastRunner

[dialamah]

I haven't watched the whole thing, but boyfriend looked up the outcome and told me they're convicted. He's so incensed he can't watch it anymore. Anyway, caught a bit of the today show who are interviewing the producers (I think) who says there was one juror who didn't want to convict but was worried that they'd be identified and targeted. There's a petition somewhere calling for a presidential pardon for both of them.

[WestCoastRunner]

I haven't watched the whole thing, but boyfriend looked up the outcome and told me they're convicted. He's so incensed he can't watch it anymore. Anyway, caught a bit of the today show who are interviewing the producers (I think) who says there was one juror who didn't want to convict but was worried that they'd be identified and targeted. There's a petition somewhere calling for a presidential pardon for both of them.

Yes I heard that about the juror. The petition has over 200,000 I believe.

It really does cast law enforcement in a shady light. And it's not happening just in Wisconsin, but across the country (according to those involved in the case). I certainly think Brendan was railroaded. Not sure about Steven. Except where's the blood and DNA? Very puzzling

Edited January 5, 2016 by WestCoastRunner

[Boges]

It's so addictive. Prepare to throw away 10 hours of your life. Hands down, it's one of the best documentaries I have ever watched. Even the music theme is outstanding.

You clearly have more patience than I do.

After Episode 2 the writing was already on the wall for Mr. Avery. I couldn't justify waiting another 10 hours of my life and just Googled what happened to him and watched the last episode to see what conclusions are made.

SPOILER!!!!!!!

You know dude has a 70 IQ so perhaps he's daft enough to leave the woman's key in his bedroom, but to leave her remains on the compound too. And he was about to receive a huge pay day from the county as well. He had no motive.

None of it makes any sense, and speaks to a greater conspiracy. But as the lawyer says in the last episode, he kind of hopes Avery did do it, because if he didn't do it, the ability of law enforcement to frame anyone of any crime is absolutely terrifying.

I'm not sure why they choose to make this things 10 episodes though, kind of annoying.

Edited January 6, 2016 by Boges

[WestCoastRunner]

You clearly have more patience than I do.

After Episode 2 the writing was already on the wall for Mr. Avery. I couldn't justify waiting another 10 hours of my life and just Googled what happened to him and watched the last episode to see what conclusions are made.

SPOILER!!!!!!!

You know dude has a 70 IQ so perhaps he's daft enough to leave the woman's key in his bedroom, but to leave her remains on the compound too. And he was about to receive a huge pay day from the county as well. He had no motive.

None of it makes any sense, and speaks to a greater conspiracy. But as the lawyer says in the last episode, he kind of hopes Avery did do it, because if he didn't do it, the ability of law enforcement to frame anyone of any crime is absolutely terrifying.

I'm not sure why they choose to make this things 10 episodes though, kind of annoying.

It's not annoying when you enjoy the making of a documentary and the interviews of lawyers and the family involved. I found it fascinating but everyone has their own interests.

[dialamah]

Scott Walker refused to pardon them, because he's not going to pardon anyone during his tenure as governor. Guess he didn't what to be bothered with any tough questions regarding justice or morality.

[Hal 9000]

I haven't seen it...and don't intend to.

However, we should be careful what we consider a "documentary". A true documentary shouldn't know where it's going, it should tell it's own story and try and keep its own influence out.

Thanks to Michael Moore, we now accept opinion and political pieces as "documentaries". New documentaries ( Inconvenient Truth, Blackwater etc) have an agenda, and agenda that might not keep the facts - or at least all the facts.

You've heard the defence side of this case through a well planned out political opinion piece - that's all.

[ironstone]

I just watched a Nancy Grace show about this case,and yes I know she has a hard-ass prosecutor mindset.I don't have Netflix so I have not seen this documentary and can't say too much about it.Based on what I saw about this case I think the guy is guilty.It's hard to believe all the stuff about planted evidence alleged by his defenders.

[Guest]

You clearly have more patience than I do.

After Episode 2 the writing was already on the wall for Mr. Avery. I couldn't justify waiting another 10 hours of my life and just Googled what happened to him and watched the last episode to see what conclusions are made.

I agree. Maybe it was over hyped or maybe I have just been too tired to enjoy it, but I've watched two episodes and can't believe the ratings this show has received.

[ReeferMadness]

I haven't watched the whole thing, but boyfriend looked up the outcome and told me they're convicted. He's so incensed he can't watch it anymore. Anyway, caught a bit of the today show who are interviewing the producers (I think) who says there was one juror who didn't want to convict but was worried that they'd be identified and targeted. There's a petition somewhere calling for a presidential pardon for both of them.

Yes I heard that about the juror. The petition has over 200,000 I believe.

It really does cast law enforcement in a shady light. And it's not happening just in Wisconsin, but across the country (according to those involved in the case). I certainly think Brendan was railroaded. Not sure about Steven. Except where's the blood and DNA? Very puzzling

I watched it in 2 days. Who knows about truth or innocence but based on the show, I would say the following:

• Establishing proof beyond a reasonable doubt and discovering the truth are sometimes 2 very different things
• Be careful about talking to police without a lawyer and never let your kids talk to police alone
• It seemed to me like the lack of DNA or blood and the enormous amount of conflicting testimony should have created reasonable doubt for Avery
• I don't get how anyone could return guilty verdict over a coerced confession from a 16 year old boy with an IQ of 70; with no physical evidence whatsoever.

[BC_chick]

I finally got around to watching this show, but once I started it was very addicting. I ended up binge watching all episodes in 3-4 days.

It very well may have been him, and I would certainly not put it past him, but as far as the case went, there is no way the state presented enough evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. Maybe he killed her elsewhere, but if it was on the property, it plain doesn't make sense that he was sophisticated enough to clean up the blood meticulously but left the bones and her car on his property. If it was elsewhere, none of the other stories make sense about the witness testimonies and planted evidence. Either way you look at it, it's inconsistent.

No matter what someone thinks of Steve Avery's guilt, I think the point of the documentary was to show just how badly the state can make a case and put someone away for life.

At the very least, he should have been granted an appeal for a proper trial.

[Moonlight Graham]

It was riveting TV. BUT....i think the documentary was quite slanted. It makes me wonder all the things they they DIDN'T include in the documentary that may have looked bad on Steve's part. A documentary is not a trial, it's the filmmakers highlights and editorials of the trial in whatever way they want to frame it.

This is why so many documentaries these days are garbage. They're always slanted and leave out a lot of information on the contrary. They should be called Film Editorials or something..

I feel bad for the kid Brandon though. Like WTF

[BC_chick]

There wasn't a whole lot it left out. The prosecutor declined to be involved out of his own volition and he wrote an op-Ed saying the things that were left out. However, I don't find them a huge game changer.

According to the op-Ed, the documentary left out that Avery called and specifically requested Teresa Halbach and he gave a fake name because the last time she came to the house he answered in a towel and creeped her out. While incriminating, it's still not evidence of murder. Circumstantial at best. He also told someone in jail that he wanted to torture women when he gets out. That's also hearsay.

Don't get me wrong, I'm 50/50 on whether or not he's guilty, but as far as the case goes, I'm 100% of the belief that the state's case, and the police investigation, were a farce and if he was still found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt (I think there were a lot of reasonable doubts), he should have at the least been granted an appeal based on the sloppy police work alone.

The man is scary and there was some evidence that he may have killed someone, but the police and the state did not prove that case.

Edited September 27, 2016 by BC_chick

[Bryan]

The man is scary and there was some evidence that he may have killed someone, but the police and the state did not prove that case.

That's the case in a nutshell really -- Avery doesn't appear to be a likeable person. It's easy to picture that he might have done it. But the prosecution didn't even come close to demonstrating that he actually did do it. With the evidence they presented, it's patently insane that he was actually convicted.

[Moonlight Graham]

There wasn't a whole lot it left out.

How do you know this? Did you have a seat at the trial?

The doc-makers were clearly making a case for Steve's innocence. That's a huge red flag for me.

Edited September 27, 2016 by Moonlight Graham

[BC_chick]

As I said, the prosecutor wrote an article highlighting all the incriminating parts that were left out. Also, I had no sense of closure after the movies so I spent a good day at or so reading anything I could find online. While it's true that initially I thought he's innocent I went on to believe it's a possibility.

However, I stand by what said in spite of that I learned in hindsight: I don't find anything that was left out a huge game changer when it comes to *hard evidence proving a murder*.