Making a Murderer

[jpotter33]

Oh my goodness... has anyone else been through this docuseries on Netflix yet? It's extremely disturbing to see the unethical and absolutely disturbing actions taken by many involved in the case. I'm only through four episodes, but this whole thing is just soooooo suspicious and sketchy it's overwhelming. The whole ordeal with Brendan Gassey is even farther out there than the Avery deal. Just a very, very weird and unsettling ordeal all around. I highly recommend giving it a watch.

[Yenohb]

Episode 1 is posted on Youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34M2zdLc-2U

[jpotter33]

Omg, I just saw the part about the blood from the evidence container. Mind... Blown... This is absolutely crazy.

[max215]

Omg, I just saw the part about the blood from the evidence container. Mind... Blown... This is absolutely crazy.

Definitely the craziest moment in the series. AMAZING show.

[greg683x]

after you finish the series just make sure you google all the evidence that was left out of the documentary. 

[jpotter33]

after you finish the series just make sure you google all the evidence that was left out of the documentary.

I've already done that, and I've pretty much read how it's all went down. I still think there's some sort of conspiracy going down in this instance. There's way too many inconsistencies not to be. Hell, Avery still might've killed her, but there's no doubt in my mind foul play was involved in the investigation. Also, there's no way there wasn't at least any "reasonable doubt" within the jury.

Didn't a jury member just confess within the last month that they were forced and coerced to give a guilty plea?

[PhoSita]

Dude was super guilty (or do you think the cops murdered a woman, burned her body, and dumped the bones on Avery's property?).

And the police probably falsified evidence / testimony to make sure they got him.


I think the nephew was coerced into a false confession.

[Neurotic Guy]

Fantastic documentary.   Can't say I drew any firm conclusions. I won't spoil the ending for those who haven't seen it -- but just a uniquely entertaining and disturbing  story told in a very compelling way.

[incoherent]

Dude was super guilty (or do you think the cops murdered a woman, burned her body, and dumped the bones on Avery's property?).

And the police probably falsified evidence / testimony to make sure they got him.


I think the nephew was coerced into a false confession.

Any thoughts on his motive? I just don't understand why he would do it.  That's the part that I don't get.  He was about to be a very rich person and he threw his life away?

Combine his utter lack of motive and that all the important evidence was found by the very people who he had a lawsuit against, I can't help but have some doubt.  What about the case did it for you where you are convinced of his guilt?

[PhoSita]

Dude was super guilty (or do you think the cops murdered a woman, burned her body, and dumped the bones on Avery's property?).

And the police probably falsified evidence / testimony to make sure they got him.


I think the nephew was coerced into a false confession.

Any thoughts on his motive? I just don't understand why he would do it.  That's the part that I don't get.  He was about to be a very rich person and he threw his life away?

Combine his utter lack of motive and that all the important evidence was found by the very people who he had a lawsuit against, I can't help but have some doubt.  What about the case did it for you where you are convinced of his guilt?

The woman's bones and personal effects were found in the burnpit on his property.  He was the last person seen with her.  We know, from evidence they didn't mention in the documentary, that he went to the length of using a fake name to get her to come out to his place a second time after he creeped her out the first time.  Also, not just his blood, but his sweat, was found on the key and on the car.  Hard to believe the cops planted that.

I have no idea what his motive would be.  I just don't see a plausible explanation for basic facts other than that he did it.  I don't think it went down the way Brendan said, because I think that was a coerced confession.

I am willing to believe the cops found this woman's car and moved it onto his property and staged somebody "finding" it in order to get probable cause to search the rest of his property.  I'm willing to believe that a misguided individual even went so far as to plant blood, or take the key from the car they moved and plant it in his bedroom to be found later.

What I can't believe is that the cops murdered a woman, or found her body elsewhere and moved the bones and burned them. That's crazy to me.

And I mean, a guy in the documentary pointed this out--- if the cops wanted to "eliminate" this guy, they could have eliminated him.  I believe the cops are in many respects the largest and most powerful gang in the country.  If they want somebody like Avery gone, they can contrive to make it happen.  Why frame him?


It didn't sound like he was about to 'get rich' either.  Maybe a couple million, at best, after the case settled and all the lawyers got paid out.

We can believe that the justice system is messed up and that there are lots of opportunities and incentive for corrupt behavior without believing that every convict who doesn't get a 100% fair trial has been wrongly convicted, let alone framed.

As an aside, I also believe Adnan Syed is guilty.

[MJohnnyboy]

Dude was super guilty (or do you think the cops murdered a woman, burned her body, and dumped the bones on Avery's property?).

And the police probably falsified evidence / testimony to make sure they got him.


I think the nephew was coerced into a false confession.

Any thoughts on his motive? I just don't understand why he would do it.  That's the part that I don't get.  He was about to be a very rich person and he threw his life away?

Combine his utter lack of motive and that all the important evidence was found by the very people who he had a lawsuit against, I can't help but have some doubt.  What about the case did it for you where you are convinced of his guilt?

Speculation is he had the hots for the girl. Something the series didn't touch up on was the history with the victim. Avery called the company she worked for many times asking specifically for her. It got to the point where she told the company she did not want to go back to his place because the last time she had gone to his house, he opened the door wearing nothing but a towel. The next time she went by, she went missing and then was found dead. That is pretty sketchy if you ask me.

However, amongst all the things that the documentary showed, I firmly believe that Steven Avery did not get a fair trial and that his nephew should undoubtedly be released. There's really no [dang]ing evidence against him, outside of speculation and circumstantial stuff, that points to his conviction and his jury were all in his county. He should have had a county that had no bias.

I don't think the cops had anything to do with the murder itself, but when they saw the connection to Avery, they took it as their opportunity to make their problems go away. I think the boyfriend and/or the nephew at the very least knew what happened. Their stories were too sketchy for them to not be suspects.

[Smartacus]

Dude was super guilty (or do you think the cops murdered a woman, burned her body, and dumped the bones on Avery's property?).

And the police probably falsified evidence / testimony to make sure they got him.


I think the nephew was coerced into a false confession.

This is why you can't blame the jury. Strong as the defense's case was there really was no conclusion their argument could have drawn other than openly blaming the poilice for murder and corruption.

As a documentary viewer I have my doubts... If I was sitting on the jury don't think I could've voted not guilty based on the strong yet speculative evidence presented.

[Neurotic Guy]

Dude was super guilty (or do you think the cops murdered a woman, burned her body, and dumped the bones on Avery's property?).

And the police probably falsified evidence / testimony to make sure they got him.


I think the nephew was coerced into a false confession.

This is why you can't blame the jury. Strong as the defense's case was there really was no conclusion their argument could have drawn other than openly blaming the poilice for murder and corruption.

As a documentary viewer I have my doubts... If I was sitting on the jury don't think I could've voted not guilty based on the strong yet speculative evidence presented.

With the threshold of reasonable doubt you could find him not guilty just by speculating that cops may have planted evidence.  It surprised me that not a single juror suspected cops of foul play.  If you think the cops may have planted blood, or the key, or the bones, doesn't that create reasonable doubt?
Certainly doubt exists for rhe nephew based on what the documentary showed.  How could he not at least have gotten a new trial based on the incompetence of his court-appointed attorney? If his confession were true, where was the blood evidence to support it?

[incoherent]

Per the boss and co workers testimony it is pure fiction that she was scared to go back to Avery's salvage yard.  If she was in fact scared to go she would not ha e gone, she had been there roughly 15 times in her career.

Per her co worker, Theresa and the receptionist both laughed off the towel incident,and she never requested to not go there or expressed concern for going there.


The towel incident was greatly overblown by the prosecution and in fact the judge didn't even allow it as evidence in the courtroom.

[gift]

Per the boss and co workers testimony it is pure fiction that she was scared to go back to Avery's salvage yard.  If she was in fact scared to go she would not ha e gone, she had been there roughly 15 times in her career.

Per her co worker, Theresa and the receptionist both laughed off the towel incident,and she never requested to not go there or expressed concern for going there.


The towel incident was greatly overblown by the prosecution and in fact the judge didn't even allow it as evidence in the courtroom.

Yeah, it's important to remember these stories seem to have only spread beyond a few people after the murder. The fact that she did in fact go back indicates it didn't seem as serious as in hindsight. Seems Avery was always a sketchy dude, if not a killer.

I'd have to guess he probably murdered her, but if I was on the jury I'm thinking there's enough reasonable doubt given all of the circumstances.

There is no doubt in my mind that police planted evidence though. The theory was that Avery somehow cleaned all of the DNA from the garage (even the blood that would have slipped between the concrete floor), but left visible blood in the victim's car? Also, I wish they could have gone into the voicemail thing more. So much was clearly wrong with the way evidence was found and treated.

I'd like to see charges against those involved with investigating him and his nephew.