blonde poker forum

So, yeah, the whole thing is completely bonkers.

Steven and Brendan both got convicted of the same crime, even though the 'evidence' used to convict Brendan directly contradicted that used against Steven. Brendan's 'confession' film is heartbreaking to watch - this low-IQ kid getting coerced into telling the cops exactly what they want to hear.

With Steven, there appears to be two conflicting stories - either he did it, or he didn't and the cops planted evidence to fit him up. Now, it seems pretty certain that the cops did plant evidence - the blood vial had been tampered with, it looks like the body had been burnt down by the quarry pit and then moved to the burn pit out at the back of the house. On this basis, the only verdict which could be returned would be not guilty, as there was way more than reasonable doubt.

However, there is a third possibility - that Steven did kill Teresa and the police planted evidence (in the hope of making the case against him a lot tighter).

http://www.pajiba.com/netflix_movies_and_tv/is-steven-avery-guilty-evidence-making-a-murderer-didnt-present.php

There's a lot of stuff there that didn't appear in the documentary.

• Steven always requested Teresa specifically came to do the Auto Trader photos - Teresa had complained about Steven in the past coming to meet her wearing only a towel.
• Steven't sweat DNA was found under the latch on the trunk of Teresa's car - seems improbable the police would be able to fabricate this.

Couple of other things about Steven's character - Brendan told his mum on the phone that Steven had abused him in the past. also, the conviction for animal cruelty that was mentioned in passing in the documentary was for dousing a live cat in petrol and throwing it on a fire. Now, animal cruelty when young is one of the biggest predictors of violent crime when older.

So it may not be as cut and dried as 'he was framed again'.

Other, more minor things from the programme.

How delicious was it when the girly-voiced prosecutor got done for sexting women on case?

Brunette reporter with glasses - mmhmmm.

What shocked me most was how on several appeals brendan didn't at least get a re - trial.  With oj's lawyers can't see brendan ever getting done

the police interview with Brendan looking to probe for the head injury was one of the most harrowing things i have seen on TV for a long time

and then he asks if they will be finished by 29 minutes past, because he has to hand in a project
....
heartbreaking

Biggest factor in OJ case by far was the media coverage and not any brilliance of his lawyers. If either of them had the media on their side at the time they would have walked IMO

Yep. Yr probably right. Pretty amazing that he not only had to contend with the police and the prosecuting authorities but also his own defence team. Can't believe there are no grounds for appeal. Feels so unjust. I don't know if he was involved but I know there  was no fairness in his treatment

How can the original judge be allowed to decide if there should be a re trial?

undecided if Brendan's original attorney was an idiot, or corrupt and in on it. Either way, what a shit.

There's something wrong with the victims brother and ex IMO. Their involvement in evidence gathering is all too convenient, and the fact they both admitted to hacking her voicemail and someone deleted messages. The fact none of them were even asked for alibis is really odd.

Needs to be retried in an entirely different area of the country. Different prosecutot, definitely different judge.

I'm having a rewatch from the beginning.

Also, yes, reporter with the glasses was quite striking.

I'm certain he's innocent, but ofc it is possible he isn't, either way though there is absolutely no way you can sentence a man to life in prison based on the evidence that was giving, it's an absolute disgrace.

+1 to the comments about Brendan, just so sad.

How in the world would it fucking be possible that someone could slit someone's throat and be intelligent enough to to not leave a trace anywhere but then be stupid enough to leave the victims bones out out in the garden JESUS FUKN CHRIST CMON NOW!

Had me raging watching it, just such a fucked up world, and this is obv not the only case of a poor, lower than average intelligence  person getting fucked over by the justice system.

You have to feel that if the don't get out soon with all this attention then they never will.

Anonymous group says they have proof he is innocent, hopefully that's true and they'll release it v soon.

Can open this thread finally.

Gripped by this from start to finish. (Although admittedly I love crimey kinds of stuff).
The most compelling episode for me was the one with Brendan's first lawyer - felt so angry every time he popped up with his slimey smile.

I really do want them to be innocent, but clearly that is the way we are lead by the programme makers.

It did feel that they weren't getting a fair whack, just because of their educational abilities, and standing in the community.
The police, and some of the legal people came across as horrible and prejudiced.

He annoyed the crap out of me, smiling and giggling as he discussed a brutal murder and the prospect of his client going to prison for the rest of his life.

How could the judge refuse to let Brendan replace him?

I found the defence lawyers investigator even worse than the lawyer if that were possible. Even in his testimony seemed pleased to be basically testifying for the prosecution. Like tighty said - it was just jaw droppingly obvious that Brendan had no clue what was going on when he asked if he could leave the police station in half an hour

Now there's a list of stuff that wasn't in the documentary that is pro-Avery.

http://www.avclub.com/article/read-pro-steven-avery-list-what-was-left-out-makin-230634

Which actor would play Steven Avery in any Hollywood adaptation of Making A Murderer? http://btfr.co/AMurderer 

From the reddit post, lol

Yeah, the co-erced police confession was bad enough but when he was trying to tell the investigator the truth and the investigator told him to change the story and draw pictures it is pretty unbeleivable how this can be on video and not have more weight with the jury.  FWIW, in the UK Brendan would not have been prosecuted like any normal person as he would be classed as having learning disabilities.  Feel bad for him even just for the amount of time he has done in jail already.

Loads of stuff just doesnt add up if he actually did do it, like the blood in the car, if he went to the bother to clean the car to the point there was none of his DNA or fingerprints inside the car elsewhere then surely he would see and clean the blood?  If he was wearing gloves or something then there wouldve been no blood as the only cut or scratch he had was on his finger.  If he supposedly killer her in the garage and then cleaned up all the blood after, then how is there no trace of the blood but the garage is still filthy?  It obv hadnt been cleaned or it would be clean!

It just seems incredibly stupid for someone about to win millions in a lawsuit and is engaged to kill someone like that at that stage in their life, especially after wrongfully doing 18 years in jail already and knowing exactly what jail is like.  And if he did do it it seems beyond stupid to just park the car on the property and keep her stuff lying around.

The majority of the evidence just doesnt make sense, nothing absolutely pins the murder on him and with the wrongful involvement of the police etc I find it crazy that a jury could find him guilty beyond reasonable doubt.  Apparently after using all their veto's in the jury picking process the defence were left with included the wife of 1 of the county sheriffs and someone that worked in the justice department.  According to the excused juror, the initial vote they took had 3 thinking he was guilty, 7 innocent and some undecideds.  It sounds like probably those jurors were convinced he was guilty from the start and were never gonna change their mind and the other jurors eventually compromised/changed their decision just to get the trial over with as they had been debating it for days without hope of the initial 3 changing their mind.

The scariest thing is just how much the law can get away with if they chose to screw you over and the lengths people will go to to avoid blame for something, the people involved in the original case have potentially sent an innocent man to jail for the 2nd time, ensuring he will spend more than half of his total life behind bars and sending a 16 year old to jail for the majority of his life too just to avoid being pointed out as not doing their job correctly in 1985.  Avery had a lawsuit that couldve potentially bankrupted the whole county as the insurance didnt cover it, the conspiracy to set him up couldve really come from higher up than the police force........

Just finished watching this - managed to avoid reading/hearing anything about the story or the outcome beforehand and haven't (yet) looked into the case further.

I found myself at points during watching finding myself suspicious of the victim's brother - does anyone think there was a deliberate attempt by the film makers to draw the viewer in that direction?

Like jakally, I can open now open this thread.

Wow incredible documentary/footage/viewing

The video of Brendan writing his confession with Mr.defence investigator was jar dropping...at this point I thought is this real....or a film! Of course this leads on to how on earth Brendan doesn't get a re trail.

Now obviously going to look at missing evidence...thanks Andrew!,,,,and prob still wont know which way to think.


 

yes! thats what I thought the ending was going to be.

I don't think it was deliberate. I don't remember any insinuation, even a slight one. I could well have overlooked something.

It did cross my mind, albeit very briefly. Must be incredibly hard to sit through a long trial like that and being constantly hounded by the press for comments.

I dunno - I think the implications were very subtle and not directly made in the commentary, but they were there.

I'm guessing this guy, as the family's spokesperson, spoke to the press many, many times over the course of the trial.  All the clips we saw though seemed to follow where we'd been shown some pretty questionable evidence, and he was referring to that saying something along the lines of 'that evidence is solid, they are banged to rights'.  That surely raises questions in the viewer's mind as to whether he is hearing/seeing the same thing as us in that particular regard and really wants justice for his sister or if he just wants these men sent down.

One particular one I remember was in reference to the Dassey confession tape (the 'what did you do to her head?, one) where he said something along the lines of 'once the jury see that there will be no doubt that he's guilty).  A reporter then asked him if he'd seen the video, to which he replied 'no' and she pulled a silly screwed up face behind him.

There was also a clip in one of the last few shows, I think it was at one of Dassey's appeal hearings, where a wide angle shot showed the family leaving the court room afterwards and he seemed to be laughing to himself - I already had in my mind at this point that we were being made to think suspiciously of him so was probably scrutinising him more than I otherwise would have done.

Unless the intention was to sew a seed of doubt in the viewer's mind over this guy I can't see what those particular clips contributed to the programme. 

All that aside, the media circus was just farcical and i don't see how either of them could have hoped to have a fair trial in those circumstances. Perhaps I'm being naive but I can't help but think (and hope, actually) that if they were tried over here based on the same evidence they would be free men - then again I would also hope that the investigations and evidence gathering would have been a lot more professional too.

Wot no Leo?  A shoe in I'd have thought.

Was he really stupid enough to park the RAV4 on the outskirts of their yard,barely covered and easily spotted when he had forty acres to hide it in, not forgetting the fact he had a car crusher on site? There's lots that doesn't add up for me in this and I couldn't have convicted when presented with this evidence. The syringe hole in the purple topped vial should've been enough to cast doubt. Remind never to take trial by jury, essentially 3 people convinced the rest.

Wow, what a program that was.  Poor old Ma Avery looks like the saddest person in the world.

In the Avery case, he was found not guilty of mutilation of a copse yet Brendan was found guilty of this.  Also, Brendan's case, they seemed happy that a lot went on in the bedroom, yet in the Avery case, it was said that it wasn't done there.  I just don't see how that's not a severe conflict.  Even if genuinely guilty, I'd have said there was no way Brendan would mutilate the corpse by himself.

I was surprised that in Steven's case, they had a jury from within Manitowoc county - would that be normal?  Given that almost everyone thought he was guilty before it even went to court, it didn't seem the most logical place to get a jury from.

What was the motive for Steven to kill Theresa?  On the verge of a $36m payout, surely you'd keep your nose clean until that's paid.

I'm struggling to see how Brendan at least didn't get an appeal through.

I'll probably spend hours Googling information on this now.

Interesting articles, apologies for the Mirror links. 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/making-murderer-steven-averys-mum-7247108

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/making-murderer-explosive-new-details-7245290

Season 2 is on the cards. 

The ex boyfriend  hacking the victims phone account and listening/ tampering her voicemail stood out to me. Why wasn't he questioned more on this ? Also his involvement co- ordinating in the search party and entering the potential crime scene. After his testimony in court I just can't help thinking he was involved in her disappearance.
 He was also most likely the mystery person hassling her with upsetting calls that her work colleague testified about.

Making of a Murderer is fascinating - but is it true? http://bit.ly/1UscbAq 

Sorry if I'm being dense Rich, but what did that tell us?

not a great deal excpet to add the psyxchology of confirmation biases to the discussion where we watch a documentary and wat to believe its true/can't be true

On Sky ID channel now and in an hour on +1  Steven Avery, Guilty or Innocent?

Cheers Red.....hopefully saves trying to explain it all to Mrs ripple  :)

after MakingAMurderer – your next TV addiction is The People v OJ Simpson http://loaded.online/1R2irjr 

I watched it in real time as it happened. Riveting.

Really harrowing viewing, and absolutely unbelievable that either of them were convicted on everything that was shown there.

The nephew didn't know what day it was, so it seems pretty unlikely that he was master accomplice to a crime like that.

Need to go to bed, but my head is about to asplode at what I've just seen.

America, where if they see fit, your counsel will put work in for the prosecution, too?!?!?!

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/making-murderers-steven-avery-given-7429287

Brendan Dassey's conviction overturned by federal judge.

About time, imo.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/12/making-a-murderer-nephew-brendan-dasseys-conviction-overturned/

Making a Murderer: Court upholds Brendan Dassey conviction - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42291231

Series 2 now on Netflix

watched the second season. Not as amazing as the first but I still found it compelling. A few people haven't enjoyed it as Avery's new lawyer is quite a grating woman but I personally found it great to watch such a sharp mind at work.

Stephen Avery has the same Birthday as me..not a lot of people know that