Making a Murderer

[Big Dave2]

Anyone else watching this? I usually don't get sucked into any Netflix stuff but. My wife started it and i can't quit watching this one.

[jbell1981]

Just started it. Only an episode and a half in but definitely intriguing. 

[Kidd]

I watched all 10 episodes.  Pretty entertaining,  Here's how it ends .........  

[Whopper Stopper]

10 hours ago, Big Dave2 said:

Anyone else watching this? I usually don't get sucked into any Netflix stuff but. My wife started it and i can't quit watching this one.

You are in for a roller coaster of emotions.

WS

[Sandmannd]

Yea, I binge watched it. I work the Public Defenders office as IT. It's pretty disgusting what WI did to this guy. I don't know if he's guilty or not but he sure didn't have a fair trail. His nephew's first defense attorney should be disbarred for what he did. Horrible injustice done throughout this show.

[Big Dave2]

I've seen 7 of them so far. I probably would have come close to finishing it last night if it weren't for the darn Vikings.

2 hours ago, Kidd said:

I watched all 10 episodes.  Pretty entertaining,  Here's how it ends .........  

I already cheated and Googled the names involved. 

[Big Dave2]

We already finished this. It only took us 3 or 4 days to watch them all!.

I'm left not knowing what to think. If you do some research on the case it appears that there is evidence that was left out of the trial and out of the TV show that could lead you to believe Avery is guilty but I think with the evidence we were able to see in the show there is no way I could have convicted him or the nephew.

[bobbymalone]

I haven't seen it, but I know the general story from all the press I've read about it.  I find it a bit ridiculous that people watch a thing on netflix, grab their pitchfork, and head to the internet to demand this guy be pardoned...  

[Big Dave2]

5 hours ago, bobbymalone said:

I haven't seen it, but I know the general story from all the press I've read about it.  I find it a bit ridiculous that people watch a thing on netflix, grab their pitchfork, and head to the internet to demand this guy be pardoned...  

I totally agree with you but between the documentary and the other evidence that is floating around on the internet it sure seems like there would be enough doubt that I wouldn't personally be able to vote to convict. One of the jurors has supposedly made the statement that "98%" of the evidence available to the jury was presented in the show.

Speaking of grabbing your pitchfork, have you seen the yelp reviews people are leaving for former DA Kratz? OMG! http://www.yelp.com/biz/kratz-law-firm-west-bend

This is an interesting side note about excused jurer #11:

http://jonsjailjournal.blogspot.com/2016/01/making-murderer-update-9-car-crash.html

Maybe Anonymous already has the whole thing figured out?

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/making-a-murderer-anonymous-claims-to-have-evidence-that-netflix-documentary-s-subject-steven-avery-a6790546.html

[bobbymalone]

in addition to the bad yelp reviews, I hear he also gets death threats.

Just seems like the internet pitchfork brigade should demand for a retrial rather than a pardon.  Internet mob justice overturning court decisions is a greater perversion of justice than some overzealous prosecutor convincing a jury to put the wrong the guy in prison.

Edited January 7, 2016 by bobbymalone

[Big Dave2]

58 minutes ago, bobbymalone said:

in addition to the bad yelp reviews, I hear he also gets death threats.

Just seems like the internet pitchfork brigade should demand for a retrial rather than a pardon.  Internet mob justice overturning court decisions is a greater perversion of justice than some overzealous prosecutor convincing a jury to put the wrong the guy in prison.

I don't know if it's a "greater" perversion of justice but it is at least equal.

[Sandmannd]

I don't know for sure if he did it or not but I lean towards him not doing it. Everything I saw and have read they produced no DNA on her. If he killed her there would have been blood and he's not smart enough to clean it up to the point where they would find nothing. I don't think he should get a pardon but with the way this case was mishandled he sure should get an appeal trial. Brandon for sure needs a new trial. A blind man could see his confession was a lie and he was pushed into it. I have a bigger issue with Brandon's trial. They were horrible with that. His original lawyer should be disbarred for what he did.

[JBMasterAngler]

I think the biggest thing going against Avery is the fact that no other signs point anywhere else as to her murder...at least nothing that was even bothered to be investigated. Based on what I seen in the show, who else could even be remotely considered a suspect? Her roommate, and friend (was he an ex bf?) were the only ones I would consider.

 

I signed the petition. If at the very least, it may help get a new trial. I feel bad for both of them, but certainly more so for Brandon. He was totally bullied and railroaded by everyone! They need to contact the Steve Wilkos show and get a lie detector test! 

[Big Dave2]

The brother and brother in law could both be considered suspects as well as the police.

[mrklean]

Only4 episodes in right now my wife loves shows like this, I told her going in this was documentary that is 100% on Avery side so it will be biased so don't get to swayed by it.  So far I don't even know what to think Brendan's lawyer should never practice law again that dude is horrible he was happy to get the publicity but didn't seemed like he actually cared.  The key being found on the 7th search of a small trailer in the open also by a Manitowoc police dept member was odd, his blood sample that was tampered with in evidence really threw up a flag to me. I don't know still have more episodes to watch

[LindellProStaf]

I haven't watched yet but sure am interested.  These comments made me even more curious about it.  

[lovebigbluegills]

The wife and I watched the entire series in the last 4-5 days, and there was a whole lot of head-scratching (i.e. how the hell did the judge allow that???  How are a couple of the cops not in jail? etc).

A roller coaster of emotions, as was mentioned above, sums it up pretty well.

[Big Dave2]

Read This: The pro-Steven Avery list of what was left out of Making A Murderer

By Marah Eakin@marahe

Jan 12, 2016  2:21 PM

ShareTweet185

Last week, as the nation reeled from a holiday break spent binge-watchingMaking A Murderer, a list of facts excluded from the docuseries for whatever reason started making the rounds. That list, which originated mostly on Reddit but was collated on Pajiba, was pretty darning against Steven Avery, alleging that he’d both purchased leg irons and left his blood under the hood of Teresa Halbach’s car. Now, a new list of evidence has emerged, this time via the Making A Murderer subreddit. This time, though, it’s of details that could help exonerate Avery—or at least swing the court of public opinion in his favor.

“Pro-defense information that was left out of MAM” is fairly self-explanatory list and includes citations for all of its information, something that Pajiba list sort of skimmed over. Some of the information is iffy, like that Sherry Culhane, the DNA expert featured in the trial, had an error rate that “was shown to be the highest of her group although her analysis time was 70 percent of the other analysts,” while other tidbits read pretty strongly for the defense. Some of the strongest evidence is excerpted below, but for the whole rather extensive list and discussion, head on over to Reddit.

• Dean Strang recalled that one of the investigators involved in finding DNA under the hood of Halbach’s car admitted to not changing gloves after handling evidence inside her car. [source]
• Culhane testified that the amount of Avery’s DNA on Halbach’s hood latch (which could have been blood) was very small, similar to what you would get from rubbing Avery’s toothbrush on it, or from the unchanged gloves of the tech who handled blood evidence inside the car and then touched the hood. [source]
• Blaine Dassey testified that his brother, Bobby, was asleep when he got home from school around 3:40 p.m., contradicting Bobby’s testimony that he got up at 2:30 p.m. and saw Teresa headed toward Steven’s trailer. [source]
• Dean Strang stated they had a forensic anthropologist at trial who testified that an open fire wouldn’t have generated enough heat to burn a body in the way that those bones were destroyed, but it didn’t make the documentary. [source]
• In between 3:30 and 4 p.m., a propane delivery truck driver (John Leurquin) saw a green SUV leaving the Avery property but couldn’t identify the 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. [source]
• Teresa Halbach’s clothing: “Police said she was wearing blue jeans, a white button-down shirt and a summer jacket when she was last seen. Schmitz would indicate that Halbach was at his residence at approximately 1:30 p.m. Was there for approximately 10 minutes. Was wearing a white shirt, waist—waist-length jacket, and blue jeans. (Day 4 of Dassey Trial.) Zipperer would indicate that Halbach was at her residence between approximately 2 to 2:30 p.m. Was there for approximately 10 minutes. Was wearing a white top, waist-length jacket, and blue jeans. (Day 4 of Dassey Trial.) Bobby Dassey said when he saw Teresa Halbach photographing the van Avery was selling October 31, 2005, she was wearing a knee-length coat and slacks.” [source 1, 2]
• William Newhouse, a gun expert with the Wisconsin State Crime Lab, said he couldn’t conclusively link a bullet found in a crack in Avery’s garage to a .22-caliber rifle seized from his bedroom. (He could only confirm that it was definitely a bullet from a .22 caliber rifle.) There was no DNA on the gun, no blood blow-back that you’d get from shooting someone at that close range and no blood mist/spatter around the garage that would also be present had someone been shot in the garage. [source]
• On the “Kelly Files” interview, Dean Strang mentioned that there were little drops off deer blood all over Avery’s garage, essentially debunking the theory that they could have cleaned all the blood evidence out of the garage, since had they cleaned it that thoroughly, there wouldn’t have been any deer blood. [source]
• On the leg irons/handcuffs from Avery’s house: They tested those for DNA and found a mixture of DNA from two or more people. They confirmed Avery to be a source of one of the matches. Most importantly, they excluded Teresa’s DNA as a match. [source]
• Investigators never dusted the Toyota key (with Steven’s DNA) for fingerprints. [source]

[lovebigbluegills]

And still this guys appeals to higher courts for a new trial get denied????  There's got to be something that we don't know???

[mrklean]

That is what I cant figure out, it seems like so many red flags come up and he cant get a new trial, I don't know if he did it or not I wont let the show sway me on that but it has at least given a reason to think he deserves a retrial

[CaptainMusky]

On ‎1‎/‎8‎/‎2016 at 7:10 PM, JBMasterAngler said:

I think the biggest thing going against Avery is the fact that no other signs point anywhere else as to her murder...at least nothing that was even bothered to be investigated. Based on what I seen in the show, who else could even be remotely considered a suspect? Her roommate, and friend (was he an ex bf?) were the only ones I would consider.

I have only watched the first two episodes so bear with me, but your comment about no other suspects was interesting to me because the person I thought of immediately was the ex-boyfriend. Did you see how he and her brother acted when they were interviewed and asked if they had been on the property? They were looking at each other and stammering and then answered it by saying it was one member of the search party who asked permission to search the avery yard. I picked up on his mannerisms right away. He didn't exude ANY issues when he was organizing the search, but when asked a vague question about where the vehicle was found he struggled mightily.

[mrklean]

Finished it up last night it was interesting how different the courtroom was between the two cases Steve courtroom was packed every time Brendan's was empty.  I guess I still don't know what to think but I truly do believe Len Kachinsky ruined Brendan's chance of ever getting the proper and fair trial he deserved.  It is fairly clear Brendan's is a below average when it comes to intelligence he should have been with his client at all times when being questioned by the detectives so he actually knew what was going on and what he was being asked.  At the vary least the criminal justice system failed him

[Tom7227]

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/01/25/dead-certainty

Mr. Klean - here's a possible explanation for the deal with Mr. Kachinsky. 

Given the available evidence (which we really don't know about) possibly the best tactic would have been a plea bargain.  Remember that it was revealed that the investigator was supposed to administer a lie detector test.  The program doesn't reveal whether the test was administered or what the result was.  It is very possible that the test showed that the denials were false.  So tactically the effort may have been to get the defendant to write up as truthful an admission as possible.  It took a lot of effort to get the final product, and I thought what I saw was a bit over the top.  Anyway they have something to show the prosecutor, something that may include some sort of remorse.  The investigators were there the next day to 'test' the defendant to see if he was at all credible in terms of the written confession.  The lawyer isn't there so that the statement given the investigators can't be used at trial.

NOTE that I am speculating.  But I seriously doubt that a lawyer of the status of Mr. Kachinsky was as foolish as the program wants folks to believe.

The program is a documentary and if you read the link I posted above you may get a bit of an explanation of the defects.

 

[swamptiger]

Quote

As of January 12th, more than four hundred thousand people had signed a petition to President Obama demanding that “Steven Avery should be exonerated at once by pardon.” That outrage could scarcely have been more misdirected. For one thing, it was addressed to the wrong person: Avery was convicted of state crimes, not federal ones, and the President does not have the power to pardon him. 

 

I don't know what to think about it, but it really is disheartening to discover that Obama can't just fix everything...

 

Sounds like there might be a sequel to the story though, with new attorneys involved.

[JBMasterAngler]

The latest theory is a good one. A retired detective from Montana believes that Avery was framed by a serial killer. Look up Edward Wayne Edwards. Apparently this guy framed numerous people for murder over the course of 40 plus years. I listened to an interview with this retired detective on friday...I wish I could remember his name. But the story seems like a long shot until I he breaks down everything piece by piece.