This is the one: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/12/09/the-interview-7
It's a long read, but really fascinating. I might have gotten the link from someone in this thread actually, so credit to them if I did!
FTA-TV Making a Murderer - SPOILERS
- Thread starter NarniMagic
- Start date
- Tagged users None
This is the one: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/12/09/the-interview-7
It's a long read, but really fascinating. I might have gotten the link from someone in this thread actually, so credit to them if I did!
IIRC it is inadmissible in Victoria
So this was last week. Was interesting that when asked what they believed was the biggest travesty of the whole thing, they both were very much in agreement that it was Brendan. Only time they got quite animated and angry really.
What initially happened to that kid to put him in prison was disgraceful. I'm not sure there are words to describe keeping him there.
That doesn't seem surprising at all. Was there anything else really interesting they had to say?
Not a great deal. They both definitely have an opinion about who did it. And you could tell they were really frustrated to not be able to legally share it. They're also still bound by attorney-client privilege so there were topics they couldn't discuss.
One thing they cleared up (for me at least that wondered that once Avery's cash ran out they ditched him) was the appeal process. Apparently in Wisconsin law they don't allow original counsel to run any subsequent appeals. As much as they said they'd have liked to continue, it was also important to get a fresh set of eyes on the case.
They also discussed "touch DNA" that wasn't really covered in the doco. And how we all have millions of our DNA particles floating around all the time. Then they talked about how the forensic investigator who was searching Halbach's car didn't even change his gloves from moving inside where they found Avery's blood to the bonnet and engine well. And just how easy it would have been to have transferred the original DNA to other area's.
Overall they just seemed as outraged as most of us but couldn't really give any answers that we had about the key found, the lack of blood or the fact her body had been moved.
One thing they cleared up (for me at least that wondered that once Avery's cash ran out they ditched him) was the appeal process. Apparently in Wisconsin law they don't allow original counsel to run any subsequent appeals. As much as they said they'd have liked to continue, it was also important to get a fresh set of eyes on the case.
They also discussed "touch DNA" that wasn't really covered in the doco. And how we all have millions of our DNA particles floating around all the time. Then they talked about how the forensic investigator who was searching Halbach's car didn't even change his gloves from moving inside where they found Avery's blood to the bonnet and engine well. And just how easy it would have been to have transferred the original DNA to other area's.
Overall they just seemed as outraged as most of us but couldn't really give any answers that we had about the key found, the lack of blood or the fact her body had been moved.
Barry Roundhouse
Norm Smith Medallist
- Feb 16, 2011
- 6,504
- 8,357
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Sounds like they wernt very informative.. wasnt is fairly expensive?
Yeah, for $100 I expected a bit more.
Interesting development
Judge wants them to look again at the key, the blood in the car and the vial of Avery's blood
http://lawnewz.com/uncategorized/breaking-judge-orders-scientific-testing-in-steven-avery-case/
Judge wants them to look again at the key, the blood in the car and the vial of Avery's blood
http://lawnewz.com/uncategorized/breaking-judge-orders-scientific-testing-in-steven-avery-case/
Last edited:
Just got through this series, compelling viewing, how these two are locked up in jail is beyond me
- Mar 20, 2007
- 28,264
- 24,782
- AFL Club
- West Coast
The documentary was incredibly biased
Look into the case online, and its quite easy to see why Avery was found guilty.
Barry Roundhouse
Norm Smith Medallist
- Feb 16, 2011
- 6,504
- 8,357
- AFL Club
- Essendon
When you look into it, beyond reasonable doubt still isn't reached for mine. The fact that different stories and explanations for the crime were used for Brendens and Stevens cases is enough for me to doubt the entire process.
Whether he did it or not, he shouldn't have been convicted. The fact Brenden is still behind bars is a joke.
Agreed, it also makes no sense as to why Avery would have committed that murder, he had money coming in, he had a soon to be wife, plus I think the Manitowoc police definitely planted evidence on the scene and the whole debacle about the number plates on that woman's car was rather suss.
She obviously wasn't murdered in Steven's trailer nor garage, even where she was supposedly burned didn't take place there either.
Everything was moved and planted, I already have a slight distrust in the police force in general and this just further justifies my distrust in them.
How that woman who discovered her car within 30 mins on that huge junkyard after being pointed in the right direction by the ex-boyfriend and being given the only camera and direct phone number to the police working on the case is highly suspicious as well.
The deleted phone messages, whom the ex-boyfriend had access to, the fact that he was never properly interrogated and helped steer the direction towards Avery, even being allowed access to their property and signing in with a fake name is ludicrous.
He was unemployed at the time, she was living with another male "room-mate", he had plenty of time on his hands to plot out a plan, jealousy can be a bitch.
Avery clearly had enemy's out to ruin his life in a lot higher stead and power than himself, they succeeded the first time and pretty much reckon they succeeded the second time around as well.
It's clear Brendan had nothing to do with it and was pressured into ******* himself over by those two investigators and his lawyer and the lawyers investigator, the guy had no clue about what was going on and was just saying what they wanted to hear so he could get out of that situation, he was so far out of his depth that it is a disgrace that the police acted that way and his lawyer should have never got work again imo.
They (police & lawyer) should be locked up themselves for that ridiculous conduct imo.
Neither of them should be in jail.
If I was going to theorize on who actually murdered that poor girl I would say the ex-boyfriend knows about everything that happened to her that night.
Avery's name was tarnished, even though he was found innocent, it would have been a massive story and the media would have covered every aspect of it, even ******* Brendan could have worked out that the police didn't like Steven and were out to get him, it's the perfect setup situation if you were that way inclined.
There is the possibility though that Avery was angry about having spent 18 years behind bars and so actually did commit the crime he was supposed to be behind bars for in the 1st place, as a way of "revenge" I guess but honestly I doubt it and even if he did, the case is weak and he shouldn't be locked up anyway.
Last edited:
- Jun 29, 2013
- 19,344
- 19,584
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
I’ve spent 3 months reading up on it and there is no way he can be found guilty by an reasonable doubt.
Far too many things don’t add up and every single piece of DNA “evidence” is suspect.
I also can’t say he didn’t do it but the brother stinks and he knows a lot more than he is saying.
Any other area in the world and Steven gets off he was never going to in that county
For anybody that enjoyed this series, try and find Murder on a Sunday Morning.
Jacksonville, Florida, May 2000. Mary Ann Stephens is shot in the head at point blank range in front of her husband. Two hours later, a 15-year-old black American, Brenton Butler, is arrested walking down a nearby street. Jean-Xavier De Lestrade's Academy Award-winning film follows his trial. Everyone involved with the case, from investigators to journalists, is ready to condemn Butler, except his lawyer Patrick McGuiness. A dazzling and magnetic presence of Hollywood proportions, McGuiness reopens the inquiry, and in a dramatic and spine-tingling sequence of events, he and his team discover a slew of shocking and troubling elements about the case. Murder on a Sunday Morning is gripping and heart-wrenching - the stuff suspense novelists only dream of writing.
A brilliant documentary.
Jacksonville, Florida, May 2000. Mary Ann Stephens is shot in the head at point blank range in front of her husband. Two hours later, a 15-year-old black American, Brenton Butler, is arrested walking down a nearby street. Jean-Xavier De Lestrade's Academy Award-winning film follows his trial. Everyone involved with the case, from investigators to journalists, is ready to condemn Butler, except his lawyer Patrick McGuiness. A dazzling and magnetic presence of Hollywood proportions, McGuiness reopens the inquiry, and in a dramatic and spine-tingling sequence of events, he and his team discover a slew of shocking and troubling elements about the case. Murder on a Sunday Morning is gripping and heart-wrenching - the stuff suspense novelists only dream of writing.
A brilliant documentary.
HBF
Flying Scotsman
- Sep 24, 2002
- 156,160
- 100,963
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Thanks for the tip.
How many Eps?
No clue. Just saw this yesterday and got a little excited.
- Mar 20, 2007
- 28,264
- 24,782
- AFL Club
- West Coast
I wonder if they will be a bit more balanced this time around
- Apr 11, 2002
- 33,702
- 34,848
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Iggles, Georgia.
these guys are still banged up, no?
Just caught a Dr Phil from last year with the Prosecutor and Defence Lawyer
No love lost; the Prosecutor Kim Krantz (?) was very defensive and antagonistic towards the Defence Lawyer
No love lost; the Prosecutor Kim Krantz (?) was very defensive and antagonistic towards the Defence Lawyer
This Friday it's up on Netflix; typically around 4/5pmish
It’s there
Watched 5 mins of Ep 1 SO2
Watched 5 mins of Ep 1 SO2
Similar threads
