Making a Murderer (Netflix) - New info

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
popsicledeath

popsicledeath

Potato del Grande
7,547
11,831
Consider Nester fully schlonged.

Seriously the most fascinating aspect of this case for me is watching the same human nature that leads to this sort of travesty of justice play out in responses to a documentary trying to highlight those very failings of our system and human nature.

We have people ignoring or not wanting to discuss the evidence we do have, in favor of sensationalized what-ifs. People focused less on the systems and evidence in favor of the more salacious talking points. People saying they don't really care that jury was technically wrong because Avery deserves to be in jail for something so the right outcome was had. People who will just blindly repeat shit they heard and let it form their opinions. People who are selectively bias in their processing of very basic facts, evidence and logic. People who know they're right because they think they're right and their own opinion can't be swayed. Etc.

Add in the power and means to act on flawed human nature, assumptions and fascinations and you basically get miscarriages of justice that we then react to in flawed ways. Rinse, repeat.

I guess there's a reason people struggling to overcome their own flawed nature is a repeated theme in both history and fiction. In short, humanity is fucked because we know we're shitbags and seem incapable or unwilling to ever actually do anything about it.
 
Chanur

Chanur

Shit Posting Professional
<Gold Donor>
29,046
47,040
Nester_sl said:
An interesting article that outlines what was left out of the show. Lots of conjecture so you YMMV

Steven Avery Is Guilty As Hell

Here are just a few items that the producers of "Making a Murderer" decided to leave out that make the case less riveting and Avery more sympathetic:

- Not only was the bullet found in the garage linked to Halbach's DNA, but it was forensically tied to Avery's gun as well. Seems like a pertinent thing for viewers to know. To believe Avery was innocent, you now have to believe that forensics specialists were in on the frame-up and lied about both the DNA and gun, or messed up both tests.

- The criminal complaint claimed that authorities had found restraints - handcuffs and leg irons - at Avery's residence. In 2006, Avery admitted to buying them so he could use them on his then-girlfriend. This alone doesn't mean Avery is the killer of course, but it does lend credence to the description offered by Dassey and the police. We heard nothing about this during the show.

- The infamous car key that was found in Avery's residence had DNA of his sweat on it. So not only are we asked to believe the Manitowoc police department planted the keys in his trailer (and that the neighboring police force was either incompetent or complicit in the deception), but also that somehow the cops had extracted Avery's perspiration and put it on the key. Another explanation might be that Avery handled the keys when dealing with Halbach, although he denies having ever seen them.

Which bring up additional question: If Avery's defenders are convinced that DNA from one pubic hair completely exonerates him in the rape case, why does DNA evidence in this case not prove his guilt?

- Avery not only called Auto Trader and specifically requested Halbach to take pictures the day she was killed, but he also gave a false name when he did so. Why? And why would he, and the documentarians, fail to mention it? Avery then called Halbach's cell phone three times the day she died, twice using *67 to obscure his identity. None of this proves his guilt, but all of these actions undermine the defense's contention that Halbach was just someone that happened to come by that day for a job. It sounds like he wanted her to come by. None of this is mentioned in the documentary.

- Not only was Avery's blood - which we're supposed to believe was planted by the police after being extracted from an evidence room - found in six places on Halbach's vehicle, but DNA from his sweat was also found on a hood latch. How did it get there? Did the police have a vial of perspiration ready to go the day of the murder?

- You'd also have to be gullible to believe that Avery was merely a flawed, but good-hearted victim of unfortunate circumstance once you learn more about his history. According to an Appleton Post Crescent article from 2006, Avery planned the fantasy torture and killing of a young woman while in prison. According to Ken Kratz at least, Avery also drew up plans for torture chambers while in prison. True? We don't know. The documentary never mentions (or disproves) any of these accusations.
Click to expand...
This idiot should have his keyboard taken away. To be clear I'm talking about the author of this crap article not Nester.
 
Khane

Khane

Got something right about marriage
20,626
14,374
Nester you should read the rest of the thread, and that very last bullet point should also be enough for you to realize the author of that article is a moron.
 
Nester

Nester

Vyemm Raider
4,980
3,185
popsicledeath_sl said:
Where'd you copy/pasta that from?
Click to expand...
The link I specificly included in the same post...

It was right behind the comment i made about most of the article coming to conclusions with limited evidence.


I posted it in a response to the comments Steve's Ex said today about a lot of stuff being left out of the documentary.
 
Brand

Brand

Molten Core Raider
1,159
313
rrr_img_122737.jpg
 
Slaythe

Slaythe

<Bronze Donator>
3,389
141
popsicledeath_sl said:
I guess my response would be: who cares? The injustices and precedence set in this trial should be what people are disturb enough by to not only be discussing the issue, but jumping to action. Instead, we have people playing out many of the factors that led to the unfair trial in the first place by ignoring the greater ramifications of these sorts of miscarriages of justice in favor of being titillated by a gruesome who-done-it and gossiping over the juicy details whether they're even true or not.
Click to expand...
This is the correct reaction to the documentary and something I fully agree with. However, the reality is we have masses of people doing things like signing petitions to have him released. I think he deserves a fair trial. If he did kill her I don't think he deserves release because of how much the legal system fucked him.

Even with that though, there's reasonable doubt for every piece of evidence. Those "he's actually guilty" articles are just clickbait and framed as one sided as the documentary was. I don't think there is enough to convict him.

My stance is simple though. I think the easiest explanation is that he probably did it. That doesn't mean he did, just that there's a plausible explanation that he could have. But again without more solid evidence one way or another I don't think it's something that can be proven.
 
chaos

chaos

Buzzfeed Editor
17,324
4,839
Yeah on one hand I don't think he did it. But to alternative is someone, probably the police, set him up. And it is just hard to imagine that happening. Like, did they kill her? Then they would have had to know where she was going, track her, Kill her, stage this elaborate thing, etc. Did someone else kill her and the cops just framed him? So they just find a body and think "quick, let's fuck over Steve Avery"?

The one piece of evidence that bothers me is the car. I mean really bother me. That car wasn't hidden at all, it was right near the entrance to the place. And the chick seemed to know right where it was. And there's blood in the car, but the prosecution isn't claiming she was ever put in the car, this all supposedly happened in the trailer and garage then she went to the burn pit. None of it makes sense.
 
Chukzombi

Chukzombi

Millie's Staff Member
73,147
214,433
Slaythe_sl said:
This is the correct reaction to the documentary and something I fully agree with. However, the reality is we have masses of people doing things like signing petitions to have him released. I think he deserves a fair trial. If he did kill her I don't think he deserves release because of how much the legal system fucked him.

Even with that though, there's reasonable doubt for every piece of evidence. Those "he's actually guilty" articles are just clickbait and framed as one sided as the documentary was. I don't think there is enough to convict him.

My stance is simple though. I think the easiest explanation is that he probably did it. That doesn't mean he did, just that there's a plausible explanation that he could have. But again without more solid evidence one way or another I don't think it's something that can be proven.
Click to expand...
in most cases its the spouse or ex bf/gf who killed their signifigant other. the first person that should have had the magnifying glass over them was TH's ex. that didnt happen, before her car was even found that dipshit colburn was calling the station about her car already knowing its make and asking if avery was in custody yet. IMO thats the biggest clue and possibly the only clue that matters that this entire thing was a farce from the start.
 
popsicledeath

popsicledeath

Potato del Grande
7,547
11,831
Slaythe_sl said:
This is the correct reaction to the documentary and something I fully agree with. However, the reality is we have masses of people doing things like signing petitions to have him released. I think he deserves a fair trial. If he did kill her I don't think he deserves release because of how much the legal system fucked him.

Even with that though, there's reasonable doubt for every piece of evidence. Those "he's actually guilty" articles are just clickbait and framed as one sided as the documentary was. I don't think there is enough to convict him.

My stance is simple though. I think the easiest explanation is that he probably did it. That doesn't mean he did, just that there's a plausible explanation that he could have. But again without more solid evidence one way or another I don't think it's something that can be proven.
Click to expand...
The problem is how we prove people are guilty is through a trial. So all the speculation about 'if he did kill her' is irrelevant, because that "if" is determined by the very trial people are agreeing was corrupted and an injustice. If he did kill her you don't think he deserves to be released because the legal system fucked him? But that is the way we determine whether he is guilty of the crime. There's a tangible disconnect between admitting the trial was unjust and saying anything like "if he did kill her" because those two can't exist. You know, unless one thinks they're above the law and it's their job to convict someone outside the legal expectations and obligations of our system. Which is why the discussions on whether he did it are irrelevant and disturbing, because those are the exact types of discussions and mentalities that led to people taking the law in their own hands and doing whatever they wanted instead of following the system we do have in place, which while imperfect is usually pretty good if people aren't succumbing to their worst nature.

It's like saying I know the Golden State Warriors won the NBA Championship last year, but the Cavaliers were the better team. But, see, the way the best team is determined is by playing for the championship. What would be the point of repeatedly declaring another team was the best team. Eventually people would think that person is just ignorant or a homer and probably not take them at all seriously, right?

But somehow when it's something as serious as a life being taken and more permanently altered it's more forgiving or more acceptable for people to just ignore fact and logic and the intentions of the systems we've put in place and instead succumb to the click-bait culture those same people will often dismiss as they ironically can't stop clicking.

Since you're pretty rational, I'd honestly like to know what is the purpose of speculating on whether he did it or saying "if he did kill her" when you agree the system that is supposed to fairly determine the "if" was unjust in this case?
 
Ambiturner

Ambiturner

Ssraeszha Raider
16,080
19,632
Nester_sl said:
The link I specificly included in the same post...

It was right behind the comment i made about most of the article coming to conclusions with limited evidence.


I posted it in a response to the comments Steve's Ex said today about a lot of stuff being left out of the documentary.
Click to expand...
Ok, but do you actually think the most important evidence is the confession from the nephew? Or do you mean evidence of their innocence? That's the only thing that makes sense
 
Slaythe

Slaythe

<Bronze Donator>
3,389
141
It's just something to talk about. Or in a more realistic scenario maybe if he wasn't convicted and I lived in Manitowoc county I wouldn't want to allow my teenage daughter anywhere near him.

From your perspective, the public opinion of OJ shouldn't change at all because a court of law found him innocent. Of course it matters if he killed her. Because that makes him a murderer. The travesty here is the corrupt legal system he saw. And it's a real travesty, but that doesn't take away the morality of the situation.

Plus it's just a thing to analyze and explore and talk about.

Edit: And I want him to receive a fair trial. But no, I still don't think he should be released.
 
Nester

Nester

Vyemm Raider
4,980
3,185
Ambiturner_sl said:
Ok, but do you actually think the most important evidence is the confession from the nephew? Or do you mean evidence of their innocence? That's the only thing that makes sense
Click to expand...
Looking back i see how i was not clear at all, but that comment about important evidence was only with respect to Brendan's conviction. The evidence i was talking about was not the police confession, but the jail phone call to his mother.

I can see telling the cops what they want to hear in confusion of a 4 hour interigation. But admiting to your mother, when you think you are in a private conversation a crime you did not commit, and not just any crime a rape and a murder to is what i have a hard time with. A normal human reaction is to plead with your mother that you did not do it. What other evidence was there vs Brendan?

I think there is better evidence against Steve, but the police shenanigans make a strong case for reasonable doubt.
 
Chukzombi

Chukzombi

Millie's Staff Member
73,147
214,433
Slaythe_sl said:
It's just something to talk about. Or in a more realistic scenario maybe if he wasn't convicted and I lived in Manitowoc county I wouldn't want to allow my teenage daughter anywhere near him.

From your perspective, the public opinion of OJ shouldn't change at all because a court of law found him innocent. Of course it matters if he killed her. Because that makes him a murderer. The travesty here is the corrupt legal system he saw. And it's a real travesty, but that doesn't take away the morality of the situation.

Plus it's just a thing to analyze and explore and talk about.

Edit: And I want him to receive a fair trial. But no, I still don't think he should be released.
Click to expand...
as long as you realize that you are using your own bias to judge someone you really have no clue about, then yeah, its all good.
 
Jive Turkey

Jive Turkey

Karen
6,740
9,159
popsicledeath_sl said:
enough by to not only be discussing the issue, but jumping to action.
Click to expand...
So what have you been doing? Besides this "important" conversation on the titty website, of course

popsicledeath_sl said:
titillated .. juicy details
Click to expand...
This is the second time you've used these adjectives. A bit creepy, to be honest. The lady doth protest too much, me thinks.
popsicledeath_sl said:
The problem is how we prove people are guilty is through a trial. So all the speculation about 'if he did kill her' is irrelevant, because that "if" is determined by the very trial people are agreeing was corrupted and an injustice. If he did kill her you don't think he deserves to be released because the legal system fucked him? But that is the way we determine whether he is guilty of the crime. There's a tangible disconnect between admitting the trial was unjust and saying anything like "if he did kill her" because those two can't exist. You know, unless one thinks they're above the law and it's their job to convict someone outside the legal expectations and obligations of our system. Which is why the discussions on whether he did it are irrelevant and disturbing, because those are the exact types of discussions and mentalities that led to people taking the law in their own hands and doing whatever they wanted instead of following the system we do have in place, which while imperfect is usually pretty good if people aren't succumbing to their worst nature.
Click to expand...
And this garbled mess of an ideas salad is so divorced from reality, I'm not even sure what to say. If you want people to think you're smart, keep it to three sentences or less.
 
Ambiturner

Ambiturner

Ssraeszha Raider
16,080
19,632
Nester_sl said:
Looking back i see how i was not clear at all, but that comment about important evidence was only with respect to Brendan's conviction. The evidence i was talking about was not the police confession, but the jail phone call to his mother.

I can see telling the cops what they want to hear in confusion of a 4 hour interigation. But admiting to your mother, when you think you are in a private conversation a crime you did not commit, and not just any crime a rape and a murder to is what i have a hard time with. A normal human reaction is to plead with your mother that you did not do it. What other evidence was there vs Brendan?

I think there is better evidence against Steve, but the police shenanigans make a strong case for reasonable doubt.
Click to expand...
Couple things about that:

1. Poor kid actually believed that they were going to help him if he just admitted everything they were telling him he did.

2. They told him either he could tell his mother himself, or they would tell her and that would make everything much worse.

While I think Steve Avery's case is shitty, Brendan's situation really pisses me off. They completely took advantage of a borderline retarded kid and now he's going to die in prison, based on absolutely nothing.
 
Jive Turkey

Jive Turkey

Karen
6,740
9,159
Slaythe_sl said:
From your perspective, the public opinion of OJ shouldn't change at all because a court of law found him innocent. Of course it matters if he killed her. Because that makes him a murderer. The travesty here is the corrupt legal system he saw. And it's a real travesty, but that doesn't take away the morality of the situation.
Click to expand...
I already asked them about OJ and got semantical gymnastics.
 
Chukzombi

Chukzombi

Millie's Staff Member
73,147
214,433
Jive Turkey_sl said:
It was pretty strongly implied that there was a sexual assault. Kinda hard to run a rape kit on a handful of bones, though
Click to expand...
the prosecution implied anything they could get away with, doesnt mean any of it had any kind of merit to it. they are still falling back on avery's 18 year incarceration as some kind of evidence that he is a sexual predator. the same incarceration he was falsely convicted of by the same people who convicted him this time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.