Making a Murderer

[drxman1]

So question for the law dogs, why weren't Brendan and Steve tried together? I mean, are they not both accused of the same crime?

I think if Brendan had Steve's attorneys he may have gotten off or at least a reduced sentence.

Have seen some good discussion in this thread. People are "outraged" over the potential trouncing of the accused's rights...but where is this outrage for the woman who was brutally murdered, mutilated, burned, and probably raped? You know, whether Brendan was coerced into raping and murdering her or not, he still most likely did it. Does that really make it better?

 

[crazyqx83_rivals88013]

Just finished it last night. Here are my immediate thoughts:

We live in a world where DA's will call you scum for eliciting a "police planted it all" defense and then get caught in an ethically and morally deplorable sexting scandal.

Why would the court "allow" the defense to present a "police planted it all" defense but not let them present evidence that it might have been someone else? Why are we more concerned with maintaining the dog and ******* pony show that is the judicial system than letting people prove theyre innocent? Ill tell you why. All those intricacies and procedural ******** protect lawyers. The american judicial system: by lawyers, for lawyers.

Kachinsky was nothing more than a politician. A bad one. He may have been the best thing to ever happen to the state's case against brendan.

Did i understand it correctly that o'mikel went to church with halbach? How in the everloving **** is brendan not getting a new trial with the judge and prosecutors sanctioned for gross misconduct?

Brendan confessed both times in the exact same manner. Can't come up with any reasonable details and denies involvement until the detectivs, and then o'mikel, start twisting his reality saying that confessing is the only way he will be let go and feeding him any details that make any sense at all. (what did you do to her head, brendan... I cut her hair. I punched her. I put a little rouge on her cheeks.... Dammit! You shot her, didn"t you?).

How sketchy was barb's husband? And he was going out hunting with a .22 the exact time halbach was murdered? Hmmmmm....

Jurors voted 7-3 (with 2 undecided) for not guilty initially? How warm and fuzzy does it make you feel that your liberty is in the hands of "well ****, I've got to get home to my own bed and this pay sucks ***... There's no sense arguing with the weirdo that is adamant that he's guilty." wonder if the sheriff's dept. had anything to do with that juror's (who turns out he was adamant not to convict avery) "family emergency"?

If you don't think $36M, public firing and complete loss of reputation and ability to ever work in law enforcement again was enough to frame a guy the county had hated for 25 years, then I don't know what to tell you.

No polygraph, huh? Pretty telling that they don't give you one when you ask for it.

To me this case proves that the system can frame you, not be particularly careful or patient in doing so, and still get away with it. Scary.

 

[Bill Derington]

Bill your taking suspicious things and using it against Avery just like a lot of people are taking suspicious things and using them to defend Avery. You've admitted you think he is guilty, BUT also they didn't prove it........

Not to call BS on you, but you do understand that not proving it is pretty big in this mans life where he has spent the majority in a cage!

I agree and understand the bullet and the significance, but IIRC what was found was the bullet from a .22 that would not have, most likely, made it threw the body/head of anyone to be left.

I will say a friend that is an attorney and knew of the case told me of a situation that if Avery did it could make since. That Avery could have had the RAV4 in the garage to remove it from sight in case someone was asked they could say it was gone. That would give reason for him to have the body in the back.......I guess if your putting a murder scenario together that ties up some loose ends.

Bill, Dassey never said "did Steven tell you that" he originally said "do you think Steven did it". Huge difference IMO, and he originally said he saw nothing and knew nothing.......however his "confession" based on kiss the girls is and was odd since I don't think he ever read the book(his claim not mine).

I think even though most attorneys would have charged more those attorneys should have defended Dassey too!

I understand the difference, and I've stated as much on here that with what we saw it should've been not guilty or a retrial. We're not on a jury though, we're just a bunch of people on a message board. Also, the more info we get, the clearer the picture is that the show left out a great deal of info that incriminates Avery. If that info is put in the show there's not nearly as much buzz though.
I don't think there's a huge difference in what Brendan said, at face value it's not suspicious, but after the vehicle is found on the property that would raise a flag. I agree about the book comment.
I wondered why they also didn't defend Dassey. I understand they're trying to make a living, but they seemed passionate about his treatment, by his lawyers and police.

All I'm doing is taking what we know, and weighing against each other.

The woman's body, personal items, and vehicle were found on his property. He was the last to see her, and even if you think he didn't do it by his past actions and actions that day was obsessed by her. Even if Brendan was handled wrong by the police he still told them details that only someone that had seen it would know.
Teresa's phone activity stopped when she arrived at Averys. Bleach was on Brendan's clothes, he said they used bleach to clean the garage, bleach destroys dna.

Its just my opinion that he killed her, I don't think that simply because the police said so. I felt the same as many of you guys while watching the show.

 

[crazyqx83_rivals88013]

Teresa's brother did it.

One of the funniest parts of the whole series was when he was being interviewed by the media about brendan's trial saying basically: this trial is over. All they have to do is put in the vhs or dvd of the confession and let the jury watch it. Then the reporter asked if he had seen the confession and says "no."[laughing]

Typical.

Humans are largely unsophisticated creatures. When something traumatic happens, we want the easiest and quickest resolution to comfort our fragile little psyche's.

 

[crazyqx83_rivals88013]

Someone put her body in the back of the RAV4, WHY?

If she was stabbed in the stomach and her throat slit while tied to the bed, where's the blood? There would be blood everywhere but they found none. None of her dna in the bedroom either.

Now if they'd said he killed her somewhere else, put her body in the car and brought her to the burn pit, you might have a case. But that's not the theory.

I don't see how anyone can say definitively, one way or the other.

It's pretty clear that she was never stabbed or had her throat slit or was tied to the bed in avery's bedroom. But after the DA laid out this elaborate horror story on the news, what was he supposed to do? Admit that there was no evidence to back up that publicly shouted theory that was 100% used to influence potential jurors?

 

[GLR5555]

There's also the bullet, which whether it should've been allowed doesn't matter on here. It was from his gun, and it had her bone fragments on it.
There's just things Brendan knew that are too out of the ordinary, but were correct, for him to just be making things up. He asked the first night the police came just asking questions if Steven had told them anything or something to that effect. The leg irons and ropes, that's not something a slow 16 year old would come up with on his own, and it was something Steven had just purchased since his GF had been in jail. The numerous and blocked phone calls the day she went missing plus the prior history, the dude had a hard on for her.

You mean the same bullet that was miraculously found 4 months later? After the garage was searched by Calumet County many times. That bullet?

 

[drxman1]

I think we all sort of felt the same after originally watching the documentary. But after the dust settles, the mind starts to process it, and with the revelation that SIGNIFICANT information was omitted, there is really no doubt in my mind they did it.

Steven Avery fits the profile of a murderer to a TEE. History of cruelty to animals is a huge red flag for future sociopathic behavior. He has a well documented history of violence and making threats to women. His relationship with that drunk Jodi was much rockier than we were led to believe, including restraining orders. He was locked up as a rapist for 18 years. Evidently he was false imprisoned, but spending that kind of time around other rapists, murderers, and hardened criminals is not good for the mind. They had reports from other inmates about Steven talking about future sex/torture chambers when he got out. Steven basically stalked Theresa Halbach for weeks, going as far to set the appointment for his sisters house next door so that she would come back onto the property.

He had motive, he had intent, and he had time and the means to commit these despicable acts.

I imagine the cops knew all this and did what they thought they had to, to secure a conviction.

 

[Bill Derington]

Crazy, that's one thing I took away as well. No matter how you feel about the case, this happens in every murder case across the nation, and there's no way it doesn't affect the jury.
Someone gets murdered, a person is arrested and the details get printed in the paper. I know the public want to know, but maybe we should ask our self what's more important.

 

[Bill Derington]

You mean the same bullet that was miraculously found 4 months later? After the garage was searched by Calumet County many times. That bullet?

I'll agree that is hard to swallow

 

[GLR5555]

I'll agree that is hard to swallow

Exactly! Not sure Linda Lovelace could swallow it either. LOL

 

[anthonys735]

I live in one of the few places where there is no high speed internet access so

Sounds awful. Move.

 

[anthonys735]

I think we all sort of felt the same after originally watching the documentary. But after the dust settles, the mind starts to process it, and with the revelation that SIGNIFICANT information was omitted, there is really no doubt in my mind they did it.

Steven Avery fits the profile of a murderer to a TEE. History of cruelty to animals is a huge red flag for future sociopathic behavior. He has a well documented history of violence and making threats to women. His relationship with that drunk Jodi was much rockier than we were led to believe, including restraining orders. He was locked up as a rapist for 18 years. Evidently he was false imprisoned, but spending that kind of time around other rapists, murderers, and hardened criminals is not good for the mind. They had reports from other inmates about Steven talking about future sex/torture chambers when he got out. Steven basically stalked Theresa Halbach for weeks, going as far to set the appointment for his sisters house next door so that she would come back onto the property.

He had motive, he had intent, and he had time and the means to commit these despicable acts.

I imagine the cops knew all this and did what they thought they had to, to secure a conviction.

...and that's exactly what the Documentary is about. You can't just convict someone to life w/out being PROVEN. Gut feelings don't cut it. You're filling in some pretty big voids.

Example:
"Stalked" is a pretty stiff word. At best you have excessive unverified phone calls. No restraining order. No evidence he was around her other than at the HIS home. No formal reports to her boss about his behavior that we've seen. She still willingly went to his house that day without alerting anyone or asking someone to accompany her. Big difference in an annoying customer and a stalker.

 

[drxman1]

...and that's exactly what the Documentary is about. You can't just convict someone to life w/out being PROVEN. Gut feelings don't cut it. You're filling in some pretty big voids.

Example:
"Stalked" is a pretty stiff word. At best you have excessive unverified phone calls. No restraining order. No evidence he was around her other than at the HIS home. No formal reports to her boss about his behavior that we've seen. She still willingly went to his house that day without alerting anyone or asking someone to accompany her. Big difference in an annoying customer and a stalker.

Actually no I don't think I'm filling in "pretty big voids."

Her boss commented on her getting nuisance calls, but I think there may be more there we don't know about. What about the story of her showing up to Avery in a towel?

They have her last placed at the scene, her car with his blood in it, her bones in his fire pit, and a confession from his potatohead nephew-coerced or not...evidence so damning that his only play is that police tampered and planted the evidence. Which I think they probably did to a certain degree. But did the cops killer her? No, I don't think so.

Think about it. What are the odds he was actually framed and completely innocent? Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, its probably a duck.

 

[Ribsandwhitebread]

where the hell do you live that doesnt have high speed internet?

 

[jtrue28]

Who was "Blaine" (sp)? Apparently his boss called at 6pm the night of the murder. Was he ever questioned about that? That was an important time period to corroborate Brendan's alibi.

 

[crazyqx83_rivals88013]

The problem I see with juries is the type of people who end up serving on them. For the most part, anyone with a decent job and livelihood would much rather go to work than serve on a jury. The running societal joke is talking about how to get out of jury duty.

So you're left with a pool of a large number of people with nothing better to do. That's a gross generalization I know, and it's not to say everyone on a jury is an idiot. But the population you're pulling from probably isn't a fair representation of our best and brightest.

I'm not a lawyer but deal with a fair amount of civil law with my job. A lecture i heard while preparing for my license given by an attorney basically went: juries are made up of people not smart enough to get out of jury duty. They are dumb, impressionable and unpredictable.

The fact that the intial poll during deliberation was 70% not guilty and yet he still got convicted is pretty telling. Jury results are basically which side (guilty or not guilty) has the most amount of people that would rather just go home to their own bed than get paid minimum wage to worry about some dude they've never even met. See 12 Angry Men.

 

[anthonys735]

What about the story of her showing up to Avery in a towel?

I haven't once said he was framed or didn't do it. I've said numerous times my hunch is that he did do it. I'm saying I have doubt because I feel like some evidence was planted. I don't think he got a fair trial. If they planted evidence where does that start/stop?

You're saying you think it went down just like Dassey said, which is nearly impossible.

 

[GLR5555]

I believe Dassey's "confession" was the biggest case of police misconduct in the entire case. He was definitely coerced into providing the facts as the investigators saw it. That kid was railroaded by corrupt police.

 

[Rickman]

Great show, great thread. After watching, I thought it was 50/50 on Steven being guilty. Probably 20/80 on Brendan. Would have voted not guilty on both juries.

There was obvious police, prosecutor, and defense lawyer misconduct. This very likely includes planting of evidence.

The new facts I learned post show make it 95/5 against Steven and 85/15 on Brendan. Very likely they are both guilty, but I'd hate to be a juror.

Bottom line, w our justice system, the misconduct should have freed them. But it seems likely they did commit a heinous crime.

So many questions I still have - especially about the cell phone messages. Guessing the password and deleting messages - something seems really rotten there.

 

[drxman1]

I'm saying that Dassey is unreliable. He has changed his story so many times you can't believe really anything he says.

Why is he changing his story? He's being pressured by outcomes. The police, his mother, his attorney, the private investigator....And thus, it is not unreasonable to consider that the first story he told is probably the most accurate.

 

[anthonys735]

I'm saying that Dassey is unreliable. He has changed his story so many times you can't believe really anything he says.

Exactly.

 

[420grover]

Sounds awful. Move.

No thanks. This land has been in my family for 200 years. I can do pretty much whatever I need to on my phone.

 

[420grover]

where the hell do you live that doesnt have high speed internet?

Gracey, Ky. There's about a mile stretch of road where it's not available.

 

[mdlUK.1]

I'm saying that Dassey is unreliable. He has changed his story so many times you can't believe really anything he says.

.

I can agree with this.

 

[anthonys735]

No thanks. This land has been in my family for 200 years. I can do pretty much whatever I need to on my phone.

Other than stream video.

 

[Violent Cuts]

I'm saying that Dassey is unreliable. He has changed his story so many times you can't believe really anything he says.

Why is he changing his story? He's being pressured by outcomes. The police, his mother, his attorney, the private investigator....And thus, it is not unreasonable to consider that the first story he told is probably the most accurate.

The first story he told was that he didn't do anything. And I don't know why it's reasonable to believe anything he said.

 

[GLR5555]

His statement reminded me so much of Jesse Miskelley's statement in the WM3 case.

 

[crazyqx83_rivals88013]

If the cops were going to frame Avery why would they need to put the bones, camera and clothing in the fire pit right behind his house? Why would they need to sneak her vehicle back in there?
They wouldn't have too, if like some are saying they planted his blood that alone would make him the prime suspect no matter where the car was found. Not only that but he was also the last to see her because the cops had to intercept her as soon as she left.
Now throw in the creepy way he had been hounding her, coincidentally on the day she went missing and always asking specifically for her.
There's just way to many things pointing his direction, and too many things the cops would've had to of pulled off on the fly for me to think anyone but Avery killed her.
Brendan also drew the picture of her shackled with chains on the legs and ropes on the arms, that's odd by itself, but then it just happens Avery bought those very items a couple weeks prior. Then the blood being on the hood latch, like the poster wrote, thats not a place someone would think to put blood in a frame job.

There was absolutely no evidence he left the compound that day/night. If they wanted any shred that this was done by him, they had to prove that everything happened within walking distance of his trailer.

If that car had been found 2 miles away, that immediately discounts his involvement.

 

[Bill Derington]

That's true, but the cops don't know this until 4 days later when she's reported missing and the Averys are interviewed. How would they even know she was at Averys to take pictures?

So again you have to believe the cops sneak the car and skeletal remains on the property, after Avery is alerted that she's missing. His whole family lives and works on this property. If they get caught not only will Avery get the whole 36 mil but they'll also go to prison.

 

[GLR5555]

It was also hard to believe that those two ladies searching that compound found that car within 30 minutes. That was finding the proverbial needle in a haystack.

 

[krazykats]

Honestly if Avery did the crime he easily could have got on there and deleted his messages to his *67 calls. I mean if you found my phone right now you could easily delete every voicemail I have.

Of course the don't delete, instead go into a garbage container still stored in my damn phone, but for a complete idiot they could have thought they deleted them.

Wonder what kind of phone she had. Also wonder why Avery would burn her camera. I'd think it being in her car would look more like she "left" if he did it and wanted to stage a scene.

 

[krazykats]

That's true, but the cops don't know this until 4 days later when she's reported missing and the Averys are interviewed. How would they even know she was at Averys to take pictures?

So again you have to believe the cops sneak the car and skeletal remains on the property, after Avery is alerted that she's missing. His whole family lives and works on this property. If they get caught not only will Avery get the whole 36 mil but they'll also go to prison.

More than 1 way into that junk yard. Avery seemingly was out of town or somewhere else when they found the car.......where was he?

 

[GLR5555]

More than 1 way into that junk yard. Avery seemingly was out of town or somewhere else when they found the car.......where was he?

I believe at that time, he was not allowed back on his property during the active police search. They were instructed to stay away for like 8 days.

 

[Midway Cat]

So question for the law dogs, why weren't Brendan and Steve tried together? I mean, are they not both accused of the same crime?

I think if Brendan had Steve's attorneys he may have gotten off or at least a reduced sentence.

The government can choose how it wants to prosecute the case. You saw them present two different theories of the crime, so I think it's pretty clear why they chose to proceed as they did. Theoretically, Brendan's attorney could have filed a motion for joinder, but he was much more interested in getting his client to confess so that he could be on the government's side.

Besides, I'm not sure I'd want Brendan sitting at the table with me if I'm Steven Avery. It has its advantages and its disadvantages. Sure, we could show the jury the police misconduct during Brendan's alleged confessions, but there's also chance that they might believe his version of events. It's a tough call, but Steven's attorneys had no real say in the matter regardless.

As to your question about why Avery's attorneys didn't defend Brendan as well--You serious, Clark?

Like everyone else, attorneys don't work for free. You might think that these guys made a huge amount of money off of Avery's case, but you have to keep in mind that they hired support staff, experts, and an investigator. This case dominated their practice for months, if not longer, and they essentially abandoned the rest of their cases and lived in Manitowoc County for several weeks when the trial was ongoing. They earned every dime they were paid, and I'd be willing to bet that it wasn't some kind of windfall when all was said and done.

If you hire a carpenter to rebuild your deck and he notices that your roof is about to cave in, he's not going to offer to fix it for free just because he's passionate about his work. If you call B.B.d.K. for homeowner's insurance, he's not going to offer you a free life insurance policy because he cares about his clients.

The job of a defense attorney is somewhat different because emotions run high and the stakes are astronomical at times, but it's still a job. I doubt you'd let someone leave the ER with a life threatening condition they were unaware of, but you wouldn't perform some kind of invasive procedure without charging them for it.

It might seem callous, but it's unreasonable to expect these guys to work for free.

 

[Bill Derington]

I believe at that time, he was not allowed back on his property during the active police search. They were instructed to stay away for like 8 days.

That was after the vehicle was found.

 

[drxman1]

I wasn't asking a question about why Brendan didn't have Steve's attorneys, I was conjecturing had he had them, his case may have gone better.

 

[GLR5555]

I wasn't asking a question about why Brendan didn't have Steve's attorneys, I was conjecturing had he had them, his case may have gone better.

I feel the same way. His initial attorney was a POS.

 

[krazykats]

I believe at that time, he was not allowed back on his property during the active police search. They were instructed to stay away for like 8 days.

He wasn't there when she was reported missing nor when they came to search his property.

 

[krazykats]

I asked the question and mainly because they already know all the ins and outs of it so for Dassey they wouldn't need all the support. And actually yes, some attorneys do quo bueno(?) work IF in fact they think it will somehow benefit them. They can write it off on taxes; so they could have negotiated the 240K from Avery and then decide how much they need to write off to offer services to Dassey.

It does happen.

 

[GLR5555]

I believe as of last week the Wisconsin Innocence Project has decided to take a look into Stevens case.