Jump to content
Greasy Lake Community

Making a Murderer on Netflix - SPOILERS!


Recommended Posts

Watch this.

DO NOT start it until after Christmas - it will ruin your appetite, your attitude, your faith in humanity. Meditations on the intersections of class, power, and justice in small town America will suck the peace and joy right out of your holiday.

It took an episode or two to fully ratchet up but by the time you hit E3...I'm a fan of documentaries and non-fiction television generally and I was as affected by that episode and the next as I have ever been by anything on television, scripted or unscripted. It's a kick in the chest.

I'm on E9 at the moment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 108
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I'll be looking forward to your reaction, JF. The series definitely has a POV, it isn't trying to hide its biases so some questions go unanswered which is frustrating. Still, there's some shenanigans in here that even without the full context looked pretty sketchy to say the least from my unsophisticated legal perspective.

I'm not asking you to do legal analysis on a 10 hour documentary covering two months-long murder investigations and trials..lol. Sit back and enjoy/ hate/ fear the ride but I'm interested to hear your thoughts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Finished the last episode about 30 minutes ago. This is not a "feel good" documentary, by any stretch. I thought it was very well done, but it made me feel terrible...angry...frustrated...deflated...

Link to post
Share on other sites

It really is just gut-wrenching.

I'm on the fence about Avery's guilt but I certainly have reasonable doubt. The 7-3 first vote is reflective of that. I don't see how they came to conviction.



On Brendan Daccey, I have zero doubt. That kid is innocent and deserves a new trial.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It really is just gut-wrenching.

I'm on the fence about Avery's guilt but I certainly have reasonable doubt. The 7-3 first vote is reflective of that. I don't see how they came to conviction.

On Brendan Daccey, I have zero doubt. That kid is innocent and deserves a new trial.

PRR, I agree with you COMPLETELY.

I don't WANT Steven Avery to be guilty, but I'm not really sure. I don't THINK he's guilty, but he could be pulling the wool over my eyes, so to speak... However, Brenden was just an ignorant, gullible, susceptible boy who--I am certain--had nothing to do with the crime. He was led down the confession path even by the people who were supposed to represent him. I cannot believe that what happened to him did not bring about another trial. The first trial is so obviously tainted. Good grief, this simply makes my blood boil! Hey, PRR, thanks A LOT for the recommendation! Lol... It really was good, but it wasn't good for ME! Ha!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I told you at the beginning... LOL

There is so much wrong with what happens with Brendan but two things stick out just for their visceral impact. When the investigators as him what ELSE was cut with the knife and he replies, :"Her hair?" And when neither he nor his mom knew what inconsistent meant.

I've gone down a deep rabbit hole with this case since watching the show. :wacko: I have the full transcripts of Dassey's multi-interrogations -- if anyone is interested, I'll provide links to vids and written.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know what you mean about the rabbit hole... Since watching this, it seems like I'm viewing anything and everything that comes up through the lens of Manitowac County. Makes me feel dirty and angry...

Link to post
Share on other sites

The rabbit hole for me was to go online pulling up the documents and transcripts and news stories outside the series. I wanted to understand how it all comes out the way it does. Especially for Brendan it makes even less sense now.

Basically all the evidence against him is his own very conflicting and clearly manipulated series of confessions. There's absolutely no physical evidence that connects him to Teresa or to any of the alleged crime scenes. No physical evidence connects her to him, either. Nothing at all. No one ever sees them together, there's no communications between them. The prosecution's theory of how the crime was committed is completely different from the one that was used to convict Steven Avery. How does a jury find him guilty? I just don't understand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"It's a kick in the chest."

"...but it made me feel terrible...angry...frustrated...deflated..."

"It really is just gut-wrenching"

"Makes me feel dirty and angry..."

Sounds great.... B)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know how to do the spoiler alert on an iPad, so stop here if you want to be surprised  

 

They seemed to have had juries of their peers, and judges. And a system that allows the same trial judge to hear the appeal  

I have no doubt about Avery. There's no way he was smart enough to get rid of all of the blood, and stupid enough to use the burn pit behind his house and put the car in his lot.  I do know which family members I would've investigated. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just manually type in the syntax....{spoiler} insert spoiler here {/spoiler}. 

 

Replace { } with [ ] and you are good to go. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, I totally think he was dumb enough to use the burn pit and the salvage yard.  IQ of 70.  Threw a live, gasoline soaked cat on a fire.  Ran a woman - wife of a sheriff's deputy no less - off the road and threatened her with a gun for which he was sentenced to six years.  Threatened to kill his wife, in writing, from prison.  A brain trust he is not.

 

He totally could have done both of those things.  The Dexter clean up of the crime scene?  No.  Absolutely not.  Even better than Dexter actually...in the garage he made every microscopic trace of blood, brains, tissue, etc. of a mutilated woman disappear but was smart enough to leave a bunch of spent shell casings, his own blood and other DNA, and the layer of grime on everything untouched.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Power13 said:

Just manually type in the syntax....{spoiler} insert spoiler here {/spoiler}. 

 

Replace { } with [ ] and you are good to go. 

Unfortunately, not with the board upgrade on a mobile device. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There was.  His trial transcripts are online, I can get a link for you if you like.  Also all of his confessions are available which make for absolutely infuriating reading/ viewing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

People seem bothered that a conviction was reached in both of these cases but especially in Dassey's.  So was I...until I remembered Avery's rape conviction happened despite over a dozen witnesses and verifiable receipts placing him elsewhere at the time of the attack.  Peggy Beersten's testimony and a hair were enough for a Manitowoc County jury to sentence him to 32 years.  The entire county has more than its statistical share of citizens with double digit IQs evidently.

Link to post
Share on other sites

'Making a Murderer' Footage 'Manipulated,' Says Manitowoc Sheriff

"In several areas throughout the film, you can see where they cut the tape," says Sheriff Robert Hermann

 

After watching Making a Murderer, Manitowoc County Sheriff Robert Hermann is reportedly "not pleased" with the Netflix docu-series, telling The Wrap that crucial footage involving Steven Avery – the Wisconsin native currently serving a life sentence on a 2005 murder charge – is "manipulated." 

 

"Because of all the media stuff we've been getting, I actually did watch with it my inspector and I still stand by that statement," Hermann said. "In several areas throughout the film, you can see where they cut the tape and manipulated things. One place real evident is one of the interviews with Steven Avery in episode 5 – if you watch one video, it jumps from 3:20 to 3:21, then to 3:17, then to 3:22 and then to 3:18."

 

The sheriff's criticisms echo previous statements made to Herald Times Reporter, prior to having watched the series. "A documentary puts things in chronological order and tells the story as it is … I've heard things are skewed," he said on December 22nd, four days after Making a Murderer hit Netflix. "They've taken things out of context and taken them out of the order in which they occurred, which can lead people to a different opinion or conclusion."

The series focuses on Avery, who was imprisoned on sexual assault for 18 years before new DNA evidence led to his exoneration and release. Two years later, Avery was charged with the rape and murder of Teresa Halbach and received a life sentence in 2007. Making a Murderer presents the theory that he was framed by Wisconsin law enforcement – and major petitions have surfaced aiming to free Avery, 53, via presidential pardon. 

"We're not pleased with the way the film has portrayed us," Hermann told The Wrap. "We've noticed that the family of Avery and the attorneys are embedded with the film producers, and the attorneys from the get-go have portrayed us in a negative light, but there's not much we can do to change it."



Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/tv/news/making-a-murderer-footage-manipulated-says-manitowoc-sheriff-20160104#ixzz3wKUG80Op 
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...