Television Making a Murderer (Netflix Documentary) - Spoilers from Page 2

[crappycraperson]

Anyone else watching it?

Here is the trailer -


Very binge worthy. Especially suited for folks who liked Serial and Jinx.

 

[Dan]

Watched the first episode, will demolish the rest over Christmas.

 

[Cina]

yeah it's fantastic, I'm three episodes in.

It's better than The Jinx I think. An even crazier story and with far more footage and coverage to go along with it.

 

[crappycraperson]

yeah it's fantastic, I'm three episodes in.

It's better than The Jinx I think. An even crazier story and with far more footage and coverage to go along with it.

Definitely better than Jinx for me. More closer to a documentary and has access to almost all key players via footage or interviews or documents.

American justice system can be scary though it is kind of amazing how they document almost everything in some form which actually leads to uncovering of such stories.

 

[Sam]

Just starting watching having seen this thread last night. Pretty hooked already.

 

[VorZakone]

I think I'm gonna give this one a go, I enjoyed the Jinx and this is hailed as even better than The Jinx?

 

[JackXX]

I can't believe it's real it's so fecked up. Pretty scary really but an amazing documentary.

 

[Cina]

Finished it. Incredible and disturbing story. Best documentary I've seen.

Spoiler

Going purely on the documentary it really boggles the mind not only that he was found guilty, but especially that Brendan was found guilty. I can only assume these jurors were massively brainwashed by all the media attention at the time. However, I've read stuff on the net and apparently the documentary has left out pretty incriminating evidence, like supposedly Stephen did ring Teresa multiple times that day. Even still, what's the motive? And where the hell is the blood? She was stabbed and mutilated and all they could find was a slab on a bullet? Madness!

I agree with his defense attorney though, I really hope at this stage that he actually is guilty, otherwise it's too messed up to comprehend.

 

[Shane88]

Finished it. Incredible and disturbing story. Best documentary I've seen.

Spoiler

Going purely on the documentary it really boggles the mind not only that he was found guilty, but especially that Brendan was found guilty. I can only assume these jurors were massively brainwashed by all the media attention at the time. However, I've read stuff on the net and apparently the documentary has left out pretty incriminating evidence, like supposedly Stephen did ring Teresa multiple times that day. Even still, what's the motive? And where the hell is the blood? She was stabbed and mutilated and all they could find was a slab on a bullet? Madness!

I agree with his defense attorney though, I really hope at this stage that he actually is guilty, otherwise it's too messed up to comprehend.

Spoiler

There was blood on the car though, wasn't there? That's the stuff they did the EDTA testing on, which seemed dodgy considering how quick they did it.

I'm still not sure on Avery, just can't decide if he's guilty or not. Dassey though, I think he's innocent. He's a dumb kid that was fecked over massively by his prick of a lawyer.

Amazing documentary. Also, I knew that prosecution lawyer, Kratz, was a dirtbag.

 

[Cina]

Spoiler

There was blood on the car though, wasn't there? That's the stuff they did the EDTA testing on, which seemed dodgy considering how quick they did it.

I'm still not sure on Avery, just can't decide if he's guilty or not. Dassey though, I think he's innocent. He's a dumb kid that was fecked over massively by his prick of a lawyer.

Amazing documentary. Also, I knew that prosecution lawyer, Kratz, was a dirtbag.

Spoiler

There was blood there, yeah. I think it was probably from his cut finger. I doubt the FBI would feck around like that. Although it doesn't explain the blood vial being tampered with. I more so meant the vast amounts of blood that should have been where they killed her, i.e. the garage. We're talking about someone very stupid here, and we're supposed to believe the guy was able to get rid of all traces of the girl, yet was stupid enough to leave her car almost at the front of their scrapyard barely covered by a twig? Not buying it.

Yeah Kratz always seemed like scum, from the moment he did his "any children under the age of 15 should leave the room now" crap at the first press conference. The worst thing about him is that he was more concerned with winning the case and sending them to jail than actually proving who did it.

 

[Scrumpet]

It's remarkable how much material they have for it. Seems like every step of the way they have all the recordings and interviews you could ever ask for. I wouldn't have known where to begin when it came to sorting through it all and arranging it for a documentary.

The Jinx had that real time investigation aspect which made for gripping viewing, but the way the filmmakers inserted themselves into the story left a slight bad taste in the mouth. Making a Murderer is much more like HBO's docs on the West Memphis 3, watching it you can tell that you're not getting a bias-free account but it is an incredible story.

Some of those lawyers make your blood boil.

 

[BD]

Three episodes in and I'm really enjoying it.

One thing I keep wondering is, how did they get all this footage? Who recorded it all?

Edit: OK, just realised it was filmed over 10 years, makes sense now.

 

[dumbo]

Part way through and it's been brilliant so far. The Jinx had an extraordinary hook that I felt was squeezed to within an inch of it's life for dramatic effect - successfully so it must be said, but this is so far getting by on story and case analysis alone. It's on another level.

 

[crappycraperson]

Finished it. Incredible and disturbing story. Best documentary I've seen.

Spoiler

Going purely on the documentary it really boggles the mind not only that he was found guilty, but especially that Brendan was found guilty. I can only assume these jurors were massively brainwashed by all the media attention at the time. However, I've read stuff on the net and apparently the documentary has left out pretty incriminating evidence, like supposedly Stephen did ring Teresa multiple times that day. Even still, what's the motive? And where the hell is the blood? She was stabbed and mutilated and all they could find was a slab on a bullet? Madness!

I agree with his defense attorney though, I really hope at this stage that he actually is guilty, otherwise it's too messed up to comprehend.

Spoiler

Yes, they did leave out some stuff. Avery also did ask for Teresa to be specifically sent for those photographs. His offences before the rape charge were also side-stepped. Not testifying in the case himself would have hurt him too. But overall, I thunk his defense did a stellar job of weakening prosecution's case.

Brandon's trial was just downright travesty.

 

[redmeister]

The thing I find fascinating about the reactions to this show, is that people seem to be genuinely shocked at how prosecutions work. When it's seen in a documentary like this,everyone is outraged, yet when we see it going on in real time, as we did with Amanda Knox, most people can't recognize what is happening. It shows that we have a natural inclination to assume the prosecution are the good guys trying to find out what happened, rather than in reality, which is they are trying to get convictions.

 

[VorZakone]

The thing I find fascinating about the reactions to this show, is that people seem to be genuinely shocked at how prosecutions work. When it's seen in a documentary like this,everyone is outraged, yet when we see it going on in real time, as we did with Amanda Knox, most people can't recognize what is happening. It shows that we have a natural inclination to assume the prosecution are the good guys trying to find out what happened, rather than in reality, which is they are trying to get convictions.

Unfortunately there's still a lot of naivety around. "Law enforcement doing shady stuff in a Western country? No way!"

 

[crappycraperson]

A comment on interweb sums up some of my own thoughts

Spoiler

While recognizing that Making a Murderer is going to have at least a slight bias—by virtue of access if nothing else—I just can't understand how a complete lack of a reasonably coherent narrative of events from the prosecution can result in a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. In fact, I'm still not sure what the prosecution thought happened.

1. Even if we take the accusations that Avery repeatedly called and requested Halbach and used his sister's initial for the appointment, it more or less makes sense that a customer (particularly one with an auto salvage yard, and therefore professional reasons to have extended, frequent contact with Auto Trader) might request a specific employee (even if for some degree of pervy reasons, which isn't at all clear) and make the appointment under the name of his sister, who was after all the one selling the van.

Then...according to the prosecution...

2. Avery talked Halbach into his trailer and/or garage, even though the only DNA evidence of her being anywhere inside the buildings was a bullet with trace DNA and no visible blood. He shot her multiple times...SOMEWHERE...even though no reasonable person could expect for anyone to be able to clean up the mess from multiple head shots without there being obvious evidence of a massive clean up. Instead, no Halbach blood or DNA, but an abundance of dirt, grime and Avery DNA. Likewise, no match is made to a weapon used for the attack.

3. Meanwhile, despite the need for an exhaustive clean-up of the crime scene which scrubbed any blood evidence from the buildings (but somehow missed a bullet on the floor), or any other visible evidence of significant blood loss elsewhere on the property, Avery left several visible smudges—his own and Halbach's—in the RAV4. Nevertheless, he left no fingerprints in or on the car. And, despite the on-site machinery and know-how to disassemble and crush the car, he simply parks it within eyesight of the crusher and covers it perfunctorily with scrap parts and tree branches.

4. Then, he wipes clean Halbach's car key and fob of any of her DNA but handles it enough to leave his own DNA on it, stashes it in a small cupboard in his own bedroom.

5. To dispose of the body, he builds a large bonfire in a fire pit outside his bedroom window, invites his nephew and others over. It may be possible to get a bonfire to the necessary temperatures to burn a body down to bone shards, but it would take hours. (Cremation usually takes 2-2.5 hours in a mortuary.) Then he distributes a few shards into a burn barrel near the fire pit and a few others at the quarry on the other end of the Avery's 40-acre property. What?!

No primary crime scene was ever established (or even offered with any degree of credibility). And no explanation of how a single bullet (without visible blood or brain matter) was found in a building with no other evidence of a crime committed.

There's just ZERO coherent narrative that accounts for all of the evidence that includes Avery killing Halbach that doesn't also include law enforcement planting or manipulating evidence. And once evidence has been planted, there's no way the other physical evidence can be believed. What a clusterfeck!

 

[redmeister]

Spoiler

If I was a betting man, I'd wager that Avery did actually kill the girl. But I think the police totally framed him to get a conviction.

 

[JackXX]

A comment on interweb sums up some of my own thoughts

Spoiler

While recognizing that Making a Murderer is going to have at least a slight bias—by virtue of access if nothing else—I just can't understand how a complete lack of a reasonably coherent narrative of events from the prosecution can result in a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. In fact, I'm still not sure what the prosecution thought happened.

1. Even if we take the accusations that Avery repeatedly called and requested Halbach and used his sister's initial for the appointment, it more or less makes sense that a customer (particularly one with an auto salvage yard, and therefore professional reasons to have extended, frequent contact with Auto Trader) might request a specific employee (even if for some degree of pervy reasons, which isn't at all clear) and make the appointment under the name of his sister, who was after all the one selling the van.

Then...according to the prosecution...

2. Avery talked Halbach into his trailer and/or garage, even though the only DNA evidence of her being anywhere inside the buildings was a bullet with trace DNA and no visible blood. He shot her multiple times...SOMEWHERE...even though no reasonable person could expect for anyone to be able to clean up the mess from multiple head shots without there being obvious evidence of a massive clean up. Instead, no Halbach blood or DNA, but an abundance of dirt, grime and Avery DNA. Likewise, no match is made to a weapon used for the attack.

3. Meanwhile, despite the need for an exhaustive clean-up of the crime scene which scrubbed any blood evidence from the buildings (but somehow missed a bullet on the floor), or any other visible evidence of significant blood loss elsewhere on the property, Avery left several visible smudges—his own and Halbach's—in the RAV4. Nevertheless, he left no fingerprints in or on the car. And, despite the on-site machinery and know-how to disassemble and crush the car, he simply parks it within eyesight of the crusher and covers it perfunctorily with scrap parts and tree branches.

4. Then, he wipes clean Halbach's car key and fob of any of her DNA but handles it enough to leave his own DNA on it, stashes it in a small cupboard in his own bedroom.

5. To dispose of the body, he builds a large bonfire in a fire pit outside his bedroom window, invites his nephew and others over. It may be possible to get a bonfire to the necessary temperatures to burn a body down to bone shards, but it would take hours. (Cremation usually takes 2-2.5 hours in a mortuary.) Then he distributes a few shards into a burn barrel near the fire pit and a few others at the quarry on the other end of the Avery's 40-acre property. What?!

No primary crime scene was ever established (or even offered with any degree of credibility). And no explanation of how a single bullet (without visible blood or brain matter) was found in a building with no other evidence of a crime committed.

There's just ZERO coherent narrative that accounts for all of the evidence that includes Avery killing Halbach that doesn't also include law enforcement planting or manipulating evidence. And once evidence has been planted, there's no way the other physical evidence can be believed. What a clusterfeck!

Yes this is pretty much how I feel about it.

 

[Skizzo]

Reminds me a bit of Paradise Lost. Another one worth a watch if anyone gets the chance.

 

[Cina]

Spoiler

If I was a betting man, I'd wager that Avery did actually kill the girl. But I think the police totally framed him to get a conviction.

Spoiler

unless there's evidence the documentary didn't cover (which could be the case) then I can't see how it was him. He was obviously at his trailer that day and the post above explains the unlikelihood of her actually being killed there.

 

[redmeister]

Spoiler

unless there's evidence the documentary didn't cover (which could be the case) then I can't see how it was him. He was obviously at his trailer that day and the post above explains the unlikelihood of her actually being killed there.

Spoiler

I don't think she was killed there. The evidence presented in the documentary makes me think it's a total police set up. However, she was still killed and if I had to bet who did it, I'd go for Steven Avery.

 

[manufanatic]

Spoiler

If I was a betting man, I'd wager that Avery did actually kill the girl. But I think the police totally framed him to get a conviction.

I agree

 

[Bubz27]

I've just put the first episode on, was debating it before I saw this thread. Really liked Jinx so if this is similar then great.

Spoiler

Don't really have anything to say here, just wanted to join in on the party.

 

[Cina]

Spoiler

I don't think she was killed there. The evidence presented in the documentary makes me think it's a total police set up. However, she was still killed and if I had to bet who did it, I'd go for Steven Avery.

Yeah that seems reasonable enough.

 

[Bubz27]

I've just watched 6 episodes straight. It's 5:15am. Bring on the next one. Can't wait to click all these spoilers.

 

[Skizzo]

I have no idea how I really feel after all that, and reading up elsewhere.

Spoiler

There is a change.org petition that people are signing and following to try and get him released. Will be interesting to see how that pans out.

 

[dumbo]

Finished it in 2 sittings. It's a great series and poses many questions about our legal systems.

Spoiler

It's bizarre that for all the proof of wrong doing in the film the only 2 people to face any punishment were the men with the sketchiest of evidence against them.

Also it's strange that the most creepy reptillian characters did actually turn out to be demonstrably bad people. Ken Kratz looked like the kind of unpleasant creep who would sexually harass victims of violence and Brendan's lawyer did come accross as a sniggering snake who would sell his own mentally challenged client down the river, even before their actions were revealed.

The thing that puzzles me the most though is how someone can be turned into a few charred bones without much trace. The prosecuter's version(s) of events seem entirely unbelievable. I believe that the police may well have had the will to kill, in order to set up Steve but I highly doubt that they would have the ability to make someone vanish in the way that the victim did - heck the way they bungled the apparant key stitch up suggests they could hardly be trusted with a human body. Steve may have done it but I would expect there to be significant evidence at the yard, all the evidence that was compiled and presented tells a convoluted, nonsensical and inconclusive tale. The only thing that really makes me unsure about Steve is the fact that his house was the last place that we know that the victim was alive.

The fallout may be interesting, could it have a similar affect to The Thin Blue Line and the Paradise Lost films.

 

[NinjaFletch]

I don't know how people can watch it. I'm about 3-4 episodes in and watching it just makes me too angry.

 

[Castia]

I'll give this a go after the high praise. The Jinx was one of the best things I've seen so I'm hoping this will be good.

 

[Skizzo]

I don't know how people can watch it. I'm about 3-4 episodes in and watching it just makes me too angry.

You've barely scratched the surface of frustration yet.

 

[redmeister]

I don't know how people can watch it. I'm about 3-4 episodes in and watching it just makes me too angry.

I finished it a few days ago and to be honest I wouldn't recommend it, as though it's very well done, it's ultimately incredibly unsatisfying. It's like Deadwood, it's a really good TV show, but you can't really recommend it.

 

[Skizzo]

For anyone interested, there's a subreddit with lots of resources, information, alternate theories, and other evidence that was introduced but not really covered in the documentary.

Spoiler

Scott Tadych and Bobby Dassey were a couple of shady feckers that didn't harbor enough investigation/questioning Imo

someone raised a good point too, that I thought about when I watched it. In the closing arguments, the defense said something along the lines of "the police believed they were framing a guilty man", and the way it was worded made it sound like they believed him to be guilty and just helped With some evidence. It gave them a bit of an "out" and the prosecution piggy backed off that in their own closing argument about. Seemed to be the only real misstep by the defense throughout the whole trial.

 

[the hea]

Just finished the last episode and I really liked it but it really leaves you angry and upset the way everything was handled.

 

[Scrumpet]

For anyone interested, there's a subreddit with lots of resources, information, alternate theories, and other evidence that was introduced but not really covered in the documentary.

Spoiler

Scott Tadych and Bobby Dassey were a couple of shady feckers that didn't harbor enough investigation/questioning Imo

someone raised a good point too, that I thought about when I watched it. In the closing arguments, the defense said something along the lines of "the police believed they were framing a guilty man", and the way it was worded made it sound like they believed him to be guilty and just helped With some evidence. It gave them a bit of an "out" and the prosecution piggy backed off that in their own closing argument about. Seemed to be the only real misstep by the defense throughout the whole trial.

Spoiler

Don't think that was a misstep. The jury would have been made up of people who are naturally trusting of law enforcement so the idea that they would purposely frame someone they thought was innocent is an impossible sell. The prosecution wanted to make it Avery vs The Police as much as possible because if the jury thinks that a Not Guilty verdict is as good as convicting some members of law enforcement then it more or less puts the burden of reasonable doubt on the defense in the juror's minds.

 

[crappycraperson]

Spoiler

Don't think that was a misstep. The jury would have been made up of people who are naturally trusting of law enforcement so the idea that they would purposely frame someone they thought was innocent is an impossible sell. The prosecution wanted to make it Avery vs The Police as much as possible because if the jury thinks that a Not Guilty verdict is as good as convicting some members of law enforcement then it more or less puts the burden of reasonable doubt on the defense in the juror's minds.

Spoiler

Yup, you can't outright come out and accuse the police of framing an innocent man. They went with the narrative that police were wrongly convinced of his guilt and hence framed him for it.

 

[redmeister]

I think the world would be a better place if literally everyone in the show was in prison, apart from a couple of the female members of the media, who I'd like to see in porn.

 

[Skizzo]

Spoiler

Don't think that was a misstep. The jury would have been made up of people who are naturally trusting of law enforcement so the idea that they would purposely frame someone they thought was innocent is an impossible sell. The prosecution wanted to make it Avery vs The Police as much as possible because if the jury thinks that a Not Guilty verdict is as good as convicting some members of law enforcement then it more or less puts the burden of reasonable doubt on the defense in the juror's minds.

Spoiler

they were walking a fine line, but I think they should have let Kratz go with that angle (which he did, and probably would have anyway) but don't pretend like you think the obviously crooked cops (who you've spent a month raking over the coals and calling liars) are all of a sudden moral guys just trying to convict someone they believe is guilty, evidence or not.

Perhaps calling it a "misstep" is harsh, but their closing arguments seemed so weak compared to their arguments throughout.

I know they're up against it, as they said themselves, that police corruption as their best defense means they're already fighting an uphill battle. I just remember hearing that closing argument and feeling my stomach drop when I heard it

 

[Randall Flagg]

Binge watched it and thought it was excellent

Sadly the stuff I read after I was done ruined it. It would have made me view him and the case in a very different light

 

[Skizzo]

Binge watched it and thought it was excellent

Sadly the stuff I read after I was done ruined it. It would have made me view him and the case in a very different light

Spoiler

I'm guessing the cat incident and the stuff with his niece?