FTA-TV Making a Murderer - SPOILERS

[phantom13]

There well may have been stuff left out but so far (that I have seen) there has only been some unconfirmed article stating so, but I think most agree that if producers did leave vital info out, tsk, tsk but is it really that big a deal? & other than some criticism from Kratz, yeah the guy who tried to pressure a domestic abuse victim into a sexual relationship which, along with other offences, deservingly cost him his job & reputation & is probably the last guy that wants a new Avery trial for any number of reasons, I don't see many others coming forward to have a go at the show.

I really have no idea if Steven is guilty or not, but if the show producers did gloss over a few bits to get the story out there & noticed, good luck to them as it's not as if Steven & Brendan have had a fair shake so far & at least now they may get unbiased hearings.

I agree with you and the doco was clearly done with a motive so i dont have any issue with that either, more just pointing out some stuff that i think alot of people are discounting for how the jury came to their conclusion.

 

[DIG]

I was on a jury once. It's very difficult when a couple of stubborn ppl draw a line in the sand and basically say, "nothing any of you can say will ever change my mind on this".

IMO you'll always get more than one juror making a call based on their beliefs on the case, not its facts, for right or wrong.

 

[rumply]

I was on a jury once. It's very difficult when a couple of stubborn ppl draw a line in the sand and basically say, "nothing any of you can say will ever change my mind on this".

IMO you'll always get more than one juror making a call based on their beliefs on the case, not its facts, for right or wrong.

& there must be immense pressure on juries not to come back deadlocked. The swing around in 'not guilty' to 'guilty' numbers has bothered me but I guess we don't know how many times they went back to the judge over the 3 days of deliberations saying 'we cant agree' only to be told to go back & keep trying.

http://www.apa.org/monitor/2008/03/jn.aspx

 

[jod23]

If you grew up in a town where you had heard stories about the Averys from people you would go in there with that history before a single word of testimony is spoken.

This was huge for me. It's why the trial should have taken place somewhere else. So you have 12 jurors who have no idea who Steven Avery is or the Avery family. It's just horribly unfair.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

I think there is certainly both sides to the Steven Avery case, I wouldn't say it was beyond reasonable doubt at all. Considering 7 of the jurors originally said not guilty, it boggles the mind it turned the other way.

But how that jury convicted Brendan Dassey, is unfathomable. And the prosecutions conduct clearly unconscionable. It sickens me. There was not a single piece of coroborative evidence to back up Brendan's coerced confession, and the kid was clearly about 13 inches short of a footlong.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

How does Steven Avery keep finding all these Birds? He's borderline mentally impaired and in and out of jail all his life.

how am i so alone?

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Why is that Hallbach brother with his s**t eating grin at every post trial case, does he not have a job?? Does he not have other things to do? He's even at the Dassey trial into his pre-trial lawyer's misconduct.

 

[bgt2110]

Why is that Hallbach brother with his s**t eating grin at every post trial case, does he not have a job?? Does he not have other things to do? He's even at the Dassey trial into his pre-trial lawyer's misconduct.

He is there for his sister, shouldn't condemn him. The halbach's truly are the victims in all this having lost a daughter and sister.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

He is there for his sister, shouldn't condemn him. The halbach's truly are the victims in all this having lost a daughter and sister.

Doesnt have to be at a Dassey miss trial years later or especially all through the post conviction stages

I dont trust him

 

[bgt2110]

Doesnt have to be at a Dassey miss trial years later or especially all through the post conviction stages

I dont trust him

I gather he and the Halbach family truly believe that Avery and Brendan committed the murder. Similar to other families who years, sometimes decades later still turn out at the parole hearings of those who murdered one of their relatives to ensure they don't get out. Mike was the halbach family spokesperson, i guess he has taken on the responsibility of ensuring those who the family think killed their daughter don't ever see the light of day.

Right or wrong, i don't blame him.

 

[happy_eagle]

I'd be more interested in what they thought of the documentary

 

[celtic67]

Why is that Hallbach brother with his s**t eating grin at every post trial case, does he not have a job??

He works for the NFL team Green Bay Packers http://www.packers.com/team/staff/Mike-Halbach/bc32b029-52e7-4e07-b172-f9580ded39f3

Doesnt have to be at a Dassey miss trial years later or especially all through the post conviction stages

I dont trust him

You do realise this is a true story and these people aren't professional actors? You don't have to like him but the guy had his sister brutally murdered and then her body thrown in a bonfire. I think he can be forgiven for coming across as a bit pissed off.

 

[Broar]

How does Steven Avery keep finding all these Birds? He's borderline mentally impaired and in and out of jail all his life.

how am i so alone?

I don't think he's mentally impaired at all. I know the whole he only had an IQ of 70 when he was in school but after spending all that time in jail he's clearly spent a good portion of that learning. I don't think anyone who is mentally impaired would be able to spend hours upon hours in the law library reading cases and filing documents for the courts.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

I don't think he's mentally impaired at all. I know the whole he only had an IQ of 70 when he was in school but after spending all that time in jail he's clearly spent a good portion of that learning. I don't think anyone who is mentally impaired would be able to spend hours upon hours in the law library reading cases and filing documents for the courts.

His conversational vocabularly is still that of a lively plank of wood.

But yeah defintely good work by him. Hence the "borderline" part of my comment haha.

 

[Ochre]

I'd be more interested in what they thought of the documentary

Reckon it'd be very unlikely they watched it tbh.

 

[Cheesewheel]

I was on a jury once. It's very difficult when a couple of stubborn ppl draw a line in the sand and basically say, "nothing any of you can say will ever change my mind on this".

IMO you'll always get more than one juror making a call based on their beliefs on the case, not its facts, for right or wrong.

I'll add too this. I've sat on a trial that was supposed to be 3 days and ended up being just over 3 weeks because the prosecution wanted to present all the wiretap audio they had on their suspects. Watching this doco, you get the abridged trial with a couple of hours of the best "tv" bits, and forget that the jurors had to sit through 6 weeks of the prosecution reading in reams and reams of dry statements/reports (iirc the doco said that these sorts of trials generate thousands of pages of paperwork), listening to testimony/experts and audio.

By the end of the trial I was on, a lot of people wanted to be done with it. We had people who worked as business executives (they tried repeatedly to be excused because of the trial going WAY over its initial timespan) who wanted desperately to get back to their jobs and clients, stay at home parents who wanted to go back to their day to day routines and students who needed to complete projects and study for exams. By the time deliberations started most people had already formed their judgement because they wanted it to be over and return to their daily lives.

Having something like 8 months worth of news reports and police statements calling Avery and Avery alone guilty absolutely destroyed his chance at a fair trial. If you lived in Wisconsin and believed he was guilty from the moment Halbach disappeared then you had 8 months of constantly escalating and alarming reports that just reinforced your mindset. Bringing that mindset into the jury would easily allow you to use emotion to strongarm everyone else especially after 6 weeks.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Avery's x girlfriend has her say in this recent one on one

So she said he told her what to say and she was fearful so she put on an act. He was inside awaiting trial and she was out defending him to the hilt. There is certainly no taped conversation where he is directing her to say anything. During the visitations? She was still saying nice things after she stopped visiting.

I can get the domestic violence angle but geez, there are some credibility issues here.

 

[GhostofJimJess]

Why is that Hallbach brother with his s**t eating grin at every post trial case, does he not have a job?? Does he not have other things to do? He's even at the Dassey trial into his pre-trial lawyer's misconduct.

On top of what others have added, I'd imagine there would've been quite a significant "victim impact" component to the constant Halbach presence at the various court proceedings. Undoubtedly under the direction of the prosecution in order to send an ongoing reminder to the court the loss suffered by Theresa's loved ones.

Anyone trying to demonise the Halbach family members - for either their constant presence or hostility towards Avery - has probably missed a fair chunk of the point of the entire doco.

 

[chunkylover53]

Ken Kratz's voice is so ******* annoying.

 

[Ry009]

On top of what others have added, I'd imagine there would've been quite a significant "victim impact" component to the constant Halbach presence at the various court proceedings. Undoubtedly under the direction of the prosecution in order to send an ongoing reminder to the court the loss suffered by Theresa's loved ones.

Anyone trying to demonise the Halbach family members - for either their constant presence or hostility towards Avery - has probably missed a fair chunk of the point of the entire doco.

I certainly don't think he deserves to be demonised but I was perplexed by the contrast of indifference at all the media bits he did and then the break down at Steve's sentencing.

There's being detached but at every media bit he's demeanour was that of a guy answering a rough conduct charge at the MRP, if that carried all the way through to the sentencing hearing I could understand it's not like the sentincing should have been the time it all hit him.

Feel for the family but Mike either knows more or he is a massively odd unit.

Brendan's defence team massively dropped the ball not pushing the 'he was pressured line'. The quick snippet of the fat bloke talking to the prosecution suggested something more sinister there IMO.

I had to re-post this, made me laugh, then feel sad.


Making a murderer, why the prosecution's case was "airtight". self.MakingaMurderer

A guy who is a month or two away from a $36 million dollar check gets impatient waiting for all that money and decides to rape and murder a woman that he telephonically arranges (which she seems un-frightened to see him in her voicemail) to come visit his property in the middle of a weekday in full view of various people coming and going from said property. Once he gets her inside his trailer and commences with said raping, he gets a knock on his door, and answering it, he sees his nephew with the mental capacity of a 9 year old. Rather than saying, "I'm busy", he invites said nephew in to witness, participate in, and eventually confess about all the subsequent rapiness and other crimes that happen. Luckily for him, the nephew does not seem to possess any DNA, since none of it gets anywhere during the entire afternoon and evening.

Later, after much raping, stabbing, cutting, slitting, etc, that happens without any blood loss, the woman is dragged to the garage where she is shot eleven times, again without any blood loss, and also without making any sound. Later that evening, they burn the woman's body a few yards away from where several people live, without the horrifying and distinctive smell caused by a burning body.

At some point during this time, the guy and his nephew drive the woman's car (after first taking some of her bloody hair and drawing pictures with it in the back of the vehicle) to what they think is a perfect hiding spot behind 3 or 4 branches, which is located very close to a large and inconvenient car-crusher. They do this without leaving any fingerprints or the tiniest bit of DNA in the car, except for a lot of smeared blood in very obvious spots.

Three days later the police come asking questions and want to look around inside the trailer. The guy lets them do it, knowing he is safe because all of the raping, stabbing, cutting, slitting, etc, that happened in his carpeted trailer happened without any blood loss. The very next day, this guy leaves for his family's cabin 100 miles away, but decides not to bring the woman's car key, bones, teeth, cell phone, camera, etc. to dispose of far away because he knows he's loved by the Manitowoc police department and they will never suspect him and search his property.

This so many time over, :sad lol face:

Which is why hearing the judge sentincing was a bit of 'u wot m8'

 

[Ry009]

Poor kid just wanted to watch wrestlemania

To be fair he hasn't missed much...

 

[vonn]

I urge those who are really interested in the case to go on Reddit's MaM. I read the trial transcripts on there (funny but long read) and they have lots of interesting theories.

 

[Barry Roundhouse]

I urge those who are really interested in the case to go on Reddit's MaM. I read the trial transcripts on there (funny but long read) and they have lots of interesting theories.

after going thru all of that, what's your opinion on it?

Dr. phil did a two episode special on MaM. he read the entire court transcripts and he basically summarised that he has no idea if Steve is guilty or not (I guessed by his language that he was leaning towards guilty, but was basically undersided) but he did not get a fair trial and he definatly deserves a re-trail.

he was fairly strong in his opinion that Brendan got absolutely screwed and was completely innocent.

His concluding statement was basically exactly where I stand ATM.. that the burden of proof of "beyond reasonable doubt" is such a high standard for a reason and that there was clearly enough doubt there that they both should of got off no matter of guilt, and now they clearly deserve a re-trail.

he also had some really good interviews with one of Stevens lawyers and the sherif at the time of Steve getting out of prison (was still constantly lying thru his teeth and dr phil pulled him up on it).
also don't listern to Nancy Graces interview on it unless you want to get angry.

 

[vonn]

after going thru all of that, what's your opinion on it?

Dr. phil did a two episode special on MaM. he read the entire court transcripts and he basically summarised that he has no idea if Steve is guilty or not (I guessed by his language that he was leaning towards guilty, but was basically undersided) but he did not get a fair trial and he definatly deserves a re-trail.

he was fairly strong in his opinion that Brendan got absolutely screwed and was completely innocent.

His concluding statement was basically exactly where I stand ATM.. that the burden of proof of "beyond reasonable doubt" is such a high standard for a reason and that there was clearly enough doubt there that they both should of got off no matter of guilt, and now they clearly deserve a re-trail.

he also had some really good interviews with one of Stevens lawyers and the sherif at the time of Steve getting out of prison (was still constantly lying thru his teeth and dr phil pulled him up on it).
also don't listern to Nancy Graces interview on it unless you want to get angry.

Some of the things that have come out re: what Jodi has filed against Avery in the past... along with other sexual harassment claims which the Judge ruled to be omitted from the court are not the greatest look for Avery so I can see where the doubt comes from. However that being said, the thing that convinces me of his innocence is the fact that Zellner has taken on the case... possibly the best American lawyer for exoneration. It's hardly as though she's looking for 15 minutes either. If you were to go on her twitter, she regularly tweets little bits about why Avery is innocent. That tips it over the edge for me, she would not waste her time with him if he was not innocent IMO.

 

[Gasometer]

after going thru all of that, what's your opinion on it?

Dr. phil did a two episode special on MaM. he read the entire court transcripts and he basically summarised that he has no idea if Steve is guilty or not (I guessed by his language that he was leaning towards guilty, but was basically undersided) but he did not get a fair trial and he definatly deserves a re-trail.

he was fairly strong in his opinion that Brendan got absolutely screwed and was completely innocent.

His concluding statement was basically exactly where I stand ATM.. that the burden of proof of "beyond reasonable doubt" is such a high standard for a reason and that there was clearly enough doubt there that they both should of got off no matter of guilt, and now they clearly deserve a re-trail.

he also had some really good interviews with one of Stevens lawyers and the sherif at the time of Steve getting out of prison (was still constantly lying thru his teeth and dr phil pulled him up on it).
also don't listern to Nancy Graces interview on it unless you want to get angry.

Do you know when the Dr Phil Eps were on?