Making a Murderer - includes spoilers
- Thread starter Eberzzz
- Start date
Did Dassey's stepfather have a history of pointing guns at women?
Did Dassey's stepfather ever have a restraining order taken out against him by a woman he was in an abusive relationship with?
Did Dassey's stepfather ever send letters to his wife from prison threatening to kill her?
Did Dassey's stepfather ever pour gasoline on a cat and burn it alive?
Did Dassey's stepfather specifically request that the victim come to photograph the car?
Did Dassey's stepfather greet the victim wearing nothing but a towel?
Even if there was police misconduct, you'd have to get past all of that stuff before you move on to another suspect.
Did Dassey's stepfather ever have a restraining order taken out against him by a woman he was in an abusive relationship with?
Did Dassey's stepfather ever send letters to his wife from prison threatening to kill her?
Did Dassey's stepfather ever pour gasoline on a cat and burn it alive?
Did Dassey's stepfather specifically request that the victim come to photograph the car?
Did Dassey's stepfather greet the victim wearing nothing but a towel?
Even if there was police misconduct, you'd have to get past all of that stuff before you move on to another suspect.
NickleDimer
Post 'Til Your Fingers Bleed
When you live in a trailer in a junk yard, the answer to all of these is always yes.
NickleDimer
Post 'Til Your Fingers Bleed
Yes. Stay away. It ruined my night. I won't spoil why it's such a thunderbolt of depression.
So just got through 8 episodes with the wife. Thought it was really well done even if it may be a bit one sided. A few things stand out:
1) If you watch what they did do that kid Brendan how can you not believe anything is in play in Steven's case as it relates to his defense? That was absolutely sickening. I am not sure how you live with yourself after taking away that kids life like that.
2) What is up with Wiscy law with the judges ruling on third party liability? The defense can't name another potential suspect when trying to prove reasonable doubt for its client.. seems odd no? Then the prosecution can suggest in closing that the jury must believe the cops killed Teresa if they believe the defense's argument??? Why is the defense held to a higher standard as it relates to introduction of alternative suspects and motive? What motive did the prosecution bring forward for Steven Avery?
3) Assuming Avery killed her and that he did so somewhere on his property, via any of the methods suggested (shooting multiple times, stabbing/throat slitting).... he was smart enough to somehow get rid of all of her blood/DNA from wherever that killing took place, yet not smart enough to use his crusher or smelt?
1) If you watch what they did do that kid Brendan how can you not believe anything is in play in Steven's case as it relates to his defense? That was absolutely sickening. I am not sure how you live with yourself after taking away that kids life like that.
2) What is up with Wiscy law with the judges ruling on third party liability? The defense can't name another potential suspect when trying to prove reasonable doubt for its client.. seems odd no? Then the prosecution can suggest in closing that the jury must believe the cops killed Teresa if they believe the defense's argument??? Why is the defense held to a higher standard as it relates to introduction of alternative suspects and motive? What motive did the prosecution bring forward for Steven Avery?
3) Assuming Avery killed her and that he did so somewhere on his property, via any of the methods suggested (shooting multiple times, stabbing/throat slitting).... he was smart enough to somehow get rid of all of her blood/DNA from wherever that killing took place, yet not smart enough to use his crusher or smelt?
Last edited:
NickleDimer
Post 'Til Your Fingers Bleed
My favorite thought: Avery killed her and expertly scrubbed everything clean but had such a hardon for auto recycling that he just couldn't bring himself to trash a Rav 4 with so many perfectly good parts.
I want that kind of dedication from my junkyard guy. Willing to go back to jail for life for the principles of used auto parts.
I want that kind of dedication from my junkyard guy. Willing to go back to jail for life for the principles of used auto parts.
Yeah that's what I couldn't get over. The guy lives in a shithole with crap everywhere. He has an IQ of 70. We really think he can clean up a crime scene? And do it well enough that it's not obvious that something had been cleaned up?
Everyone keeps posting after watching episode 8. Just stop there. It stinks after that.
I was amused by Avery having a girlfriend and by all the pictures of him in front of different murals. There's like 10 in a row
Everyone keeps posting after watching episode 8. Just stop there. It stinks after that.
I was amused by Avery having a girlfriend and by all the pictures of him in front of different murals. There's like 10 in a row
NickleDimer
Post 'Til Your Fingers Bleed
I would like a chronological history of Steve Avery's hair styles, facial hair and weight loss. He looks like a different person every month. He came out of 18 years of prison looking like a creature from a Dr Seuss book.
Just finished the last episode last night. Its bonkers that Brendan is still in jail. I'm not sure of Avery's innocence, as I dont't know who else makes sense, but I think at some point, if he did it and Brendan never gets out, hes got to confess - have some sympathy for Brendan being in prison falsely (which he knows too much about) because he won't come clean.
The fact that they were found at 3 locations makes no sense from the Avery POV.
My biggest gripe is that there was no evidence showing what the prosecution was arguing happened. None. It's all based on Brendan's confession. There is no physical evidence that TH was even raped.
I also think that whether or not Avery did it - the Sheriffs department planted at least the bullet and key, and possibly the blood and bones as well. Also the sheriffs department had the only motive in the entire case.
Did I hear that right that Kayla is interviewed 5 days after Brendans confession is read on TV and her recap of that story is somehow evidence?
The fact that they were found at 3 locations makes no sense from the Avery POV.
My biggest gripe is that there was no evidence showing what the prosecution was arguing happened. None. It's all based on Brendan's confession. There is no physical evidence that TH was even raped.
I also think that whether or not Avery did it - the Sheriffs department planted at least the bullet and key, and possibly the blood and bones as well. Also the sheriffs department had the only motive in the entire case.
Did I hear that right that Kayla is interviewed 5 days after Brendans confession is read on TV and her recap of that story is somehow evidence?
All it would really take is Lenk and the shady deputy who radioed in the license plate. I'm not convinced Avery is innocent but I believe there was deliberate police misconduct. That would probably have been enough to create reasonable doubt for me.
The one thing that I have a hard time understanding is why Avery would do it and not dispose of the evidence better. Either it was planted or it was staged to appear like it was planted. Maybe he killed her somewhere else then staged a frame-up. It sounds crazy but is that possible? Maybe his celebrity was fading and he wanted to be the victim again? Maybe he did it but the suspicious activity by the police raised enough questions that he has us all duped.
The one thing that I have a hard time understanding is why Avery would do it and not dispose of the evidence better. Either it was planted or it was staged to appear like it was planted. Maybe he killed her somewhere else then staged a frame-up. It sounds crazy but is that possible? Maybe his celebrity was fading and he wanted to be the victim again? Maybe he did it but the suspicious activity by the police raised enough questions that he has us all duped.
Last edited:
Anonymous getting involved:
http://fox6now.com/2015/12/29/after...-up-to-help-free-steven-avery-brendan-dassey/
http://fox6now.com/2015/12/29/after...-up-to-help-free-steven-avery-brendan-dassey/
NickleDimer
Post 'Til Your Fingers Bleed
Options:
1. Avery
2. The Dassey guys do it and try to pin it on Avery by throwing the ashes in his yard. The police goose the evidence to bolster their case. Maybe the Dasseys plant the key.
3. A crazy police conspiracy with them covering for another killer for some reason.
1. Avery
2. The Dassey guys do it and try to pin it on Avery by throwing the ashes in his yard. The police goose the evidence to bolster their case. Maybe the Dasseys plant the key.
3. A crazy police conspiracy with them covering for another killer for some reason.
Another thing the series didn't mention, which is entirely immaterial but still interesting. Lori, Steven Avery's ex-girlfriend is now married to Brendan Dassey's father.
How does Avery shoot her in the head in his garage, they go through all the shit in it and find none of her DNA, except on a flattened bullet?
Either he cleaned every piece of shit and square inch in the garage and yet missed the freaking bullet or some shady F took the gun back to the garage and framed him. It makes no sense.
Either he cleaned every piece of shit and square inch in the garage and yet missed the freaking bullet or some shady F took the gun back to the garage and framed him. It makes no sense.
her blood was found nowhere else but in her car and on the (seemingly) planted bullet. after seeing what you saw of AVery, do we REALLY think he was that good where he could clean up a crime scene that well?
also, as the lawyers pointed out, if Avery killed her at his house (which is what was argued), why would he put her body in her car?
also, as the lawyers pointed out, if Avery killed her at his house (which is what was argued), why would he put her body in her car?
I'm right in the middle of this. I think Avery had some involvement, don't think he killed her though.
Would be interested in DanMcGuire's comments of the attorneys in the trial from what he saw. Judge didn't seem to give the defense a lot to work with, denied a bunch of requests.
Would be interested in DanMcGuire's comments of the attorneys in the trial from what he saw. Judge didn't seem to give the defense a lot to work with, denied a bunch of requests.
I also love Avery's dad wearing velcro sneakers and telling his wife not to eat the candy because of her diabutes.
I'm no expert on criminal defense, but from what I saw Avery's lawyers were both top notch. From the little I've read on the case it doesn't sound like the judge was as bad as presented in the show. He excluded evidence of Avery showing up to the door in a towel as too inflamatory, prior bad acts were excluded and Wisconsin appears to have a difficult standard for introducing evidence of alternative suspects (which the defense couldn't meet). Not so sure about the EDTA stuff; I don't know much about it. If Avery isn't guilty then Kratz must be good- getting a conviction based on circumstantial evidence alone with skilled defense counsel cannot be that easy, I wouldn't think. Having planted evidence might help, I suppose.
NickleDimer
Post 'Til Your Fingers Bleed
Kratz was good... in a weird closeted and mustachioed upper Midwest kinda way.
I have a different perspective on this after hearing that Avery would call in using different numbers/names and had harassed the chick before. Intellectually dishonest filmmaking.
I have a different perspective on this after hearing that Avery would call in using different numbers/names and had harassed the chick before. Intellectually dishonest filmmaking.
She told her boss that she didn't want to go to Avery's because he creeped her out and he once answered the door wearing only a towel. Avery made the appointment that day using his sister's name, but requested Halbach as the photographer. He called Halbach's cell twice earlier in the day using *67 to block the caller ID, then once not using *67 an hour or so after her visit (would appear to be an attempt to establish an alibi that she never showed up).
Still doesn't explain how a key to her car that only had avery's dna (and not the girl's) ended up on his floor after five days of searching, or the officer calling in the car license plate 2 days prior, or the bullet in the garage but no other traces of blood or anything.
Defense got to argue the key and bullet were planted and that Colburn found the car earlier and was calling in the plate. Kratz nearly conceded that the key might have been planted in his closing. The jury apparently didn't think these issues created reasonable doubt. My guess is that the FBI guy saying the blood wasn't planted undercut the frame up theory in a big way, but I'm speculating.
My wife and I watched the whole series over about 3 days during the holiday break. Here are my thoughts:
1. We both felt there was a bias in the filmmaking. All they seemed to show was the defense attorneys crossing the prosecution's witnesses, but not the other way around. When they did show the prosecution questioning a witness, it always seemed to be some nonsense on redirect or something. Couple that with some dramatic music, and they were clearly telling us which way to think. If I had the time, it would have been interesting to just read the trial transcripts straight through and see what I thought of it. As people earlier in the thread have shown, there are certainly additional facts that can swing you both ways.
2. Both defense attorneys were top notch. I don't think anyone can argue they didn't do a good job. As someone who has tried (civil) cases to juries before, you have to just hope all of the evidence goes in the way you want it to and then hope for the best. Juries are weird. It's a shame that not everyone can afford to hire attorneys like that, because most people, even non-lawyers, can tell the difference between these guys and some public defender dork.
3. These people, man. Bitter middle americans, seemingly in-bred. I think the best shot for most of these people is to get into the armed forces. Otherwise, probably no hope.
4. On the merits, based on what I saw and have read on the internet, I think that him and one or more of these Dassie people were probably involved. I think she was probably shot out in the woods somewhere which is why there's no DNA in the garage or in the "trailer." I also think the police goosed evidence and tried to make it a much clearer case when they had a destroyed body and not much other evidence. If I was a juror, based on what I saw of the trial, I would acquit. The doubt is more than reasonable.
5. I also thought that the evidentiary ruling on the alternate theories was weird, but that's apparently a thing in Wisconsin. So it doesn't bother me that much.
6. Ball is the only criminal guy on the board, so he knows better than me, but I had no problem with what the prosecutors did. They're supposed to go as hard as they can after the guy that's in front of them.
7. Brendan Dassie got manipulated as hell, but you can't confess to rape and murder and then change your story a million times, not take a plea deal, and hope it all works for the best. He is dumb, but I can't think of a worse way for an innocent person to act. His incarceration is like a plane crash in that it's never just one thing that goes wrong, but several different failures that all happen at the wrong time.
8. That first defense attorney was a real screwball, and said some wrong things, but in the end I think his strategy was sound. He very clearly wanted to plead the kid out and was making every conceivable signal to let the government know that he would take a reasonable plea. Kind of like some of the plaintiffs I see trying to settle cases where they know they are going to get totally smoked. The old "give me 50 grand to go away" cases. Nothing wrong with that when you have no case.
9. I also thought the diabetes line was hilarious. The parents were the best part.
1. We both felt there was a bias in the filmmaking. All they seemed to show was the defense attorneys crossing the prosecution's witnesses, but not the other way around. When they did show the prosecution questioning a witness, it always seemed to be some nonsense on redirect or something. Couple that with some dramatic music, and they were clearly telling us which way to think. If I had the time, it would have been interesting to just read the trial transcripts straight through and see what I thought of it. As people earlier in the thread have shown, there are certainly additional facts that can swing you both ways.
2. Both defense attorneys were top notch. I don't think anyone can argue they didn't do a good job. As someone who has tried (civil) cases to juries before, you have to just hope all of the evidence goes in the way you want it to and then hope for the best. Juries are weird. It's a shame that not everyone can afford to hire attorneys like that, because most people, even non-lawyers, can tell the difference between these guys and some public defender dork.
3. These people, man. Bitter middle americans, seemingly in-bred. I think the best shot for most of these people is to get into the armed forces. Otherwise, probably no hope.
4. On the merits, based on what I saw and have read on the internet, I think that him and one or more of these Dassie people were probably involved. I think she was probably shot out in the woods somewhere which is why there's no DNA in the garage or in the "trailer." I also think the police goosed evidence and tried to make it a much clearer case when they had a destroyed body and not much other evidence. If I was a juror, based on what I saw of the trial, I would acquit. The doubt is more than reasonable.
5. I also thought that the evidentiary ruling on the alternate theories was weird, but that's apparently a thing in Wisconsin. So it doesn't bother me that much.
6. Ball is the only criminal guy on the board, so he knows better than me, but I had no problem with what the prosecutors did. They're supposed to go as hard as they can after the guy that's in front of them.
7. Brendan Dassie got manipulated as hell, but you can't confess to rape and murder and then change your story a million times, not take a plea deal, and hope it all works for the best. He is dumb, but I can't think of a worse way for an innocent person to act. His incarceration is like a plane crash in that it's never just one thing that goes wrong, but several different failures that all happen at the wrong time.
8. That first defense attorney was a real screwball, and said some wrong things, but in the end I think his strategy was sound. He very clearly wanted to plead the kid out and was making every conceivable signal to let the government know that he would take a reasonable plea. Kind of like some of the plaintiffs I see trying to settle cases where they know they are going to get totally smoked. The old "give me 50 grand to go away" cases. Nothing wrong with that when you have no case.
9. I also thought the diabetes line was hilarious. The parents were the best part.
NickleDimer
Post 'Til Your Fingers Bleed
You've got to feel bad for Avery's dad. He built a damn garage with fish tanks so that he and his son could bond after he spends his 20s and 30s in jail. Then he goes and kills a chick.
It's got to be tough for small town cops to handle murder investigations. They happen so rarely that they're bound to **** them up and have to fudge the details to make up for it. It's not like bigger cities where there's a dedicated team that can be chasing down alternate theories, managing crime scenes, etc. And when you're dealing with rural areas, it's hard to find eye witnesses and evidence.
I could listen to prison phone calls all day. How weird are they? Especially when discussing the case or uncertain future plans or a girlfriend you haven't met yet.
My final thought on this today: if the Avery/Dassey clan killed her, how did they so expertly dispose of the body, yet clumsily dispose of the car when their entire livlihood is junking cars?
It's got to be tough for small town cops to handle murder investigations. They happen so rarely that they're bound to **** them up and have to fudge the details to make up for it. It's not like bigger cities where there's a dedicated team that can be chasing down alternate theories, managing crime scenes, etc. And when you're dealing with rural areas, it's hard to find eye witnesses and evidence.
I could listen to prison phone calls all day. How weird are they? Especially when discussing the case or uncertain future plans or a girlfriend you haven't met yet.
My final thought on this today: if the Avery/Dassey clan killed her, how did they so expertly dispose of the body, yet clumsily dispose of the car when their entire livlihood is junking cars?
did it annoy anyone else that when Dassey and his mom talked on the phone, EVERY SINGLE TIME when they said hello they'd say "yea?" "yea"
NickleDimer
Post 'Til Your Fingers Bleed
Shaky forensic science is usually interpreted to favor the prosecution:
http://bostonreview.net/books-ideas...-pseudoscience-criminal-justice?Src=longreads
http://bostonreview.net/books-ideas...-pseudoscience-criminal-justice?Src=longreads
Most attorney jobs say you are supposed to advocate zealously for your position. The major exception is a prosecuting attorney. Role of a prosecutor is to seek justice, not conviction. Using tainted evidence, hiring phony experts, hiding evidence (like inconsistent witness statements) are big no no's for prosecutors. Also, the way they conducted the trial in the media prior to the trial is borderline but still ethical.
I actually don't think these prosecutors were the worst, but they were unethical on a few issues. The inconsistent statement that Katz knew dassey was going to testify to should have been disclosed, for example. The fbi test was complete bs, but probably not unethical (judge probably should not have allowed it). And i don't blame the prosecutors for some of the bad objections being sustained in favor of the state. The comes down to a state biased judge.
Ken Kratz does fit the prototypical stereotype of weasely prosecutor.
Regarding the comment that the defense had the chance to argue about the tainted evidence.... Who did they have a chance to argue it to? A jury pool where 150 of the 151 jurors already thought he was guilty?
I actually don't think these prosecutors were the worst, but they were unethical on a few issues. The inconsistent statement that Katz knew dassey was going to testify to should have been disclosed, for example. The fbi test was complete bs, but probably not unethical (judge probably should not have allowed it). And i don't blame the prosecutors for some of the bad objections being sustained in favor of the state. The comes down to a state biased judge.
Ken Kratz does fit the prototypical stereotype of weasely prosecutor.
Regarding the comment that the defense had the chance to argue about the tainted evidence.... Who did they have a chance to argue it to? A jury pool where 150 of the 151 jurors already thought he was guilty?
how can you rectify that there were two trials for the same murder of Teresa Halbach, one in which Kratz argues she was shot and killed in the garage (Avery) and one in which she was stabbed and throat slit (Dassey)?
NickleDimer
Post 'Til Your Fingers Bleed
It was even worse with the closed captioning on. Every friggin word was "Yeah". In hindsight, I may not have needed the closed captioning on.