Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

OT: Making A Murderer on Netflix

ExCyment said:
I imagine there is tons of misinformation in a "documentary" like this. If you have ever seen a 60 minutes or dateline story about something you have first hand knowledge of you know how loose these types of shows are with the "facts" as they build their one sided cases. Haven't seen it, might watch it, but the brief research I did leads me to believe the proper people are probably in jail. People outraged should be calling for a new trial not a pardon.
Click to expand...

Nuff said

You shouldn't really be commenting wo watching it.

I can't say they didn't do it, but I can say with 100% certainty is that a lot of fishy **** went on throughout the entire case. Enough to where I wouldn't have found him guilty.
I was on the grand jury for the city of Des Moines for 3 months, we did 4 different cases. Very interesting stuff is shown to you, but people, including cops do lie on the stand, stories are changed, evidence gets tampered.
 
Just finished and what I don't understand for the life of me is if he actually did the raping and killing, how does he clean everything up spotless but yet leave the keys in his room and why not crush that car. I'm in the crew of he may be guilty but it also seems like some of this evidence was planted.
 
ISUCubswin said:
Oh and I want to go on the record and say I feel awful for the family but have no idea how I feel about Brother Halbach.

Seemed like he cared more about the Avery's getting in trouble than finding out who killed his sister. Dude also was one of the only ones involved with her voicemail but was having a hard time remembering anything about the voicemails.
Click to expand...

I couldn't believe how many times that when the defense asked questions, the person on the stand couldn't recall but when the prosecution side asked they could recite it like it was written on a piece of paper.
 
I just finished yesterday. I think he is guilty but there's some fishy stuff going on by cops, detectives. If anyone deserves a pardon its Brendan. That poor kid got life for being coerced to saying things. That's not right.

I just felt like for a documentary that was obviously one-sided there should have been more evidence proving Steven innocence than there was.
 
501Clone said:
I just finished yesterday. I think he is guilty but there's some fishy stuff going on by cops, detectives. If anyone deserves a pardon its Brendan. That poor kid got life for being coerced to saying things. That's not right.

I just felt like for a documentary that was obviously one-sided there should have been more evidence proving Steven innocence than there was.
Click to expand...

I see what you are saying but I think you may be looking at it from the wrong point of view. Yes they did not exactly prove his innocence by providing info that clearly shows that. They did however very clearly show that the prosecution did not prove he was guilty and was more or less railroaded. That is more of what it was about.
 
Just finished the second episode. Really wish I had a entire day to watch them all. And I really, really wish that I would stop looking at this thread for spoilers/theories. No self control.
 
501Clone said:
I just finished yesterday. I think he is guilty but there's some fishy stuff going on by cops, detectives. If anyone deserves a pardon its Brendan. That poor kid got life for being coerced to saying things. That's not right.

I just felt like for a documentary that was obviously one-sided there should have been more evidence proving Steven innocence than there was.
Click to expand...

You watched the entire series and you still have this mindset? The whole premise of the series is to show how the convicted are no longer presumed innocent until proven guilty, you can devalue evidence through media manipulation, coercing confessions is standard practice and is akin to obtaining a confession under torture, and the burden has shifted from the prosecution proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to the defense having to prove innocence.
 
Last edited:
wxman1 said:
I see what you are saying but I think you may be looking at it from the wrong point of view. Yes they did not exactly prove his innocence by providing info that clearly shows that. They did however very clearly show that the prosecution did not prove he was guilty and was more or less railroaded. That is more of what it was about.
Click to expand...

I feel like a lot of people are missing this point.

The fact that the DA publicly made a definitive statement that Manitowoc Sheriffs would NOT be on the scene or involved in the investigation - and yet nearly all the "smoking gun" evidence is then FOUND by Manitowoc (7 searches later) is the biggest joke ever. How any sane jury looks past that is beyond me.
 
Gunnerclone said:
You watched the entire series and you still have this mindset? The whole premise of the series is to show how the convicted are no longer presumed innocent until proven guilty, you can devalue evidence through media manipulation, coercing confessions is standard practice and is akin to obtaining a confession under torture, and the burden has shifted from the prosecution proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to the defense having to prove innocence.
Click to expand...
I'm not really sure. I've read a few key pieces of evidence that the show left out that made Steven Avery look guilty. I'm not really sure if they are true or not so I have a hard time deciding which side to lean on. Obviously no doubt though that the investigation was corrupt.
 
awd4cy said:
I'm not really sure. I've read a few key pieces of evidence that the show left out that made Steven Avery look guilty. I'm not really sure if they are true or not so I have a hard time deciding which side to lean on. Obviously no doubt though that the investigation was was not run legally.
Click to expand...

Also throw modern jury theory in this whole thing as well. Another crazy thing going on.
 
awd4cy said:
I'm not really sure. I've read a few key pieces of evidence that the show left out that made Steven Avery look guilty. I'm not really sure if they are true or not so I have a hard time deciding which side to lean on. Obviously no doubt though that the investigation was corrupt.
Click to expand...

For you to say "I'm not really sure" means if u were on a jury you would have to say not guilty. It's the prosecutors job to prove without a resonable doubt that Steven Avery was guilty and they did not do that IMO.
 
awd4cy said:
I'm not really sure. I've read a few key pieces of evidence that the show left out that made Steven Avery look guilty. I'm not really sure if they are true or not so I have a hard time deciding which side to lean on. Obviously no doubt though that the investigation was corrupt.
Click to expand...

The only piece may be the DNA under the hood which wasn't found until they likely coerced Brendan to say Steven did something to the car so that they could match up the evidence. The rest proves he's creepy. It does not prove he's the killer of Halbach. There is the problem. People are confusing evidence that a guy is creepy with evidence the guy killed her.
 
Gunnerclone said:
You watched the entire series and you still have this mindset? The whole premise of the series is to show how the convicted are no longer presumed innocent until proven guilty, you can devalue evidence through media manipulation, coercing confessions is standard practice and is akin to obtaining a confession under torture, and the burden has shifted from the prosecution proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to the defense having to prove innocence.
Click to expand...

This x1000. Although i'd change "convicted" to charged. I think that's what you meant.
 
Curses to whoever brought up "Dear Zachary". Despite my better judgment, I couldn't help myself and watched it last night. As a father of 5, I'm just devastated. Can't stop thinking about it.
 
Only been able to watch the first few so far and of course I'm hooked. Plenty I could say but most has been said/covered here already. The one thing that keeps popping into my head is how Brendan was worried about making it to 6th hour. That kid clearly had no idea of what he was actually doing and those ****ers pushed him until he said what they wanted. So ******* disgusting to see them take advantage of somebody like that. Poor kid.
 
HitItHard58 said:
Only been able to watch the first few so far and of course I'm hooked. Plenty I could say but most has been said/covered here already. The one thing that keeps popping into my head is how Brendan was worried about making it to 6th hour. That kid clearly had no idea of what he was actually doing and those ****ers pushed him until he said what they wanted. So ******* disgusting to see them take advantage of somebody like that. Poor kid.
Click to expand...

Based on what had happened to his Uncle it is mind blowing to me that anyone in his family would speak to the police without a lawyer present. Even after going through that ordeal they remain ignorant to the tactics of the police and their own rights.
 
ThatllDoCy said:
Based on what had happened to his Uncle it is mind blowing to me that anyone in his family would speak to the police without a lawyer present. Even after going through that ordeal they remain ignorant to the tactics of the police and their own rights.
Click to expand...

They told Brendon they talked to his mom and she said it was okay to talk to them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom
Back