Here is something very interesting. Def worth a listen. Rebutting a Murderer: Episode 1 | Common Sense Central | News/Talk 1130 WISN
The rebuttals are def a worthy listen, but these rebuttals are voiced with an overbearing biased tone the same as Making a Murderer was, and given the voice in the rebuttals is a Wisconsin based radio station one has to wonder who orchestrated this broadcast. I think that what they focus on doesn't represent the trial Avery was subject to, they focus on the show. The key evidence used against him - the bullet and the key were found suspiciously by Manitowoc police that weren't supposed to be working the murder case. When the key was processed for DNA it showed only Avery's, no DNA from Teresa was found, when the bullet was processed the results were contaminated and should have not been admissible. Just saying that I'm still not convinced one way or another as great as the rebuttal broadcasts are they don't work to prove he murdered Teresa Halbach, they work only to sway ones opinion of whether he was a good person or not.
The series is the one that suggested Manitowoc police were not allowed on the scene. That is false according to several different LEO's. That was a suggestion made within the department itself due to the pending lawsuit against them for Avery's wrongful conviction lawsuit. There was never an order barring them from being on the scene or only being allowed with an escort from another department to "keep an eye on them". Just another biased plant within the series that is repeatedly argued as fact. My opinion is the correct people are in prison regardless of how they got there. Multiple judges with no stake in the game see it the same way, hence no retrial or conviction tossing. You can't have that many judges in cahoots to plot a framing, There was an episode of Nancy Grace a couple Sunday's ago that showed a lot more of the Dassey confession/interrogations. It leads me to believe that he is also guilty as well. I had my doubts at first, but after seeing them and how cohesive his story was with details staying consistent I don't think someone with that IQ could have stayed that consistent "making events up". The only inconsistency was the hroat slashing, which I believe everyone agrees did not happen. Multiple times when he ran through what happened the throat slash was never mentioned.
Dan O Donnel from Milwaukee (who is a good reporter) isn't going to have any biased about a dude in Manitowoc. You can't even pick up 1130am in Manitowoc.
We just watched episode 3 with the court session where the officer who was on the scene during the Avery property search said that Avery's trailer was already completely searched and a Manitowoc officer "found" the girl's car key under a pair of slippers that officers had already checked/moved and found nothing there. Then the interrogation of Brendan, trying to lure him into saying she was shot in the head and you could tell he was just saying whatever he could think of that might have happened to her head "He cut her hair..." lol, I mean come on. Then he told his mom that "they got into my head" and he thought he would only be in jail for one day. Either this show is completely biased in favor of Steve Avery or the Manitowoc police, court system, and prosecutors are the biggest bunch of corrupt criminals I've ever seen. Interesting show but unless we ever find the truth, this is just going to end up being like the show Brad Meltzer's: Decoded that was on the History channel. A lot of speculation, but never an answer. I hate shows that don't have answers. I don't want to finish with the premise that I get to decide the truth/ending.
You can save yourself 7 hours then, that's exactly what this is and does The title says it all, Making a Murderer. Basically implying what it takes to put an innocent man in prison, you make them what they are not. I compared it before to the HBO documentary Paradise Lost about the West Memphis Three. If you ever watch that series you will see what a defense attorney who believes you are innocent will do to defend you. Unpaid for over a decade working on their case. Avery's lawyers basically abandoned him once the money ran out, even though a second wrongful conviction with the alleged planting evidence and framing not one but two individuals would make the 32 million dollar lawsuit seem miniscule. Was the prosecutor a slimeball? Absolutely. Was the evidence as portrayed in the docudrama sketchy? Without doubt. Was there an equal portraying of both sides of this case? Not in the slightest. The entire trial is on film. 4 weeks and however many hours all on video archive, but yet we only seen an hour or so of the rebuttals and defense statements. Cherry picked to get the exact results that it has gotten. Convictions are overturned, appeals granted and retrials issued all the time. It would take corruption of bizarre levels to sway appelate judges and WI Supreme Court justices. I cannot ever see that being the case. All of the decisions should be available online, would be interesting to see if any dissenting opinions were issued on the Supreme Court decisons. Or if they or the appelate judges mention any swaying evidence to them.
This is also interesting. They are feeling the heat. Manitowoc County investigator lashes out at Steven Avery reporting
Just found this. Group has been raising money to get the entire case. They have uploaded all court transcripts so far Table 1: Jury Trial Transcripts – Steven Avery Trial Transcripts and Documents
This isn't about showing bias toward "a dude in Manitowoc" it's about garnering opinion about a case that's gained national notoriety. What I mean is, that's all this is about now, people want to pick a side about whether he's guilty or not when they weren't on the jury listening to the case. Even the radio report wants to pick a side when they weren't part of the trial. It takes more deductive reasoning, critical thinking skills etc, to watch the documentary and listen to the rebuttals and walk away still questioning both sides than it does to settle on a definite, and doing so leaves the debate open.
Apologies in advance if this has been touched on already I have not read all 12 pages. I think this show reinforced for me anyway how little I would trust a jury of my peers. The excused juror said the initial vote was 7 (not guilty), 3 (guilty), & 2 (undecided). To go from that to guilty beyond a reasonable doubt surprised me, he basically said the 3 "guilty" jurors were not budging and he felt that they decided early in the trial. He said some of the jurors just wanted to get out of there and be done with it.....sketchy.
Just watched episode 4 with the tampered evidence tape that was supposed to seal the evidence container from the 1985 case, a needle mark in the top of the vial containing Avery's blood sample. No prints of Avery anywhere in her car, none of HER own DNA on HER key - only Avery's, and the fact that they checked his trailer 7 times before magically finding the key right on the floor. I can't believe this man is still in jail. Every episode makes me more mad than the previous.
Just watched episode 5 where the shady cop calls in a plate number of Theresa's RAV4 that he couldn't have known unless he was looking at the vehicle. The only problem was, he was calling it in with the dispatcher after her disappearance but before it was "found" on the Avery property. The look on his face when the defense catches him in a lie and assumably the fresh brown streak in his underwear was priceless. Again, I am more pissed off.
Have you even watched it? Let me guess, you don't need to watch it to know he's guilty...if that's the case, tell me why he should be in jail. A jury found him guilty while the police work and "evidence" point to him being either framed or targeted. That doesn't mean he's guilty. Regardless if "they have me right where they want me" the actual case is one of the biggest controversies in Wisconsin justice system history, possibly the country. That's the reason why they made the documentary.
Keep in mind that you are only seeing the "facts" that the film maker wants you to see and that it was done from the perspective of the Avery family and defense team. All the information they put in there is biased.
What did you think about the non-plantable DNA of Avery's that was found underneath the hood and on the hood latch? How about the cat that he doused in gasoline and set fire to? Oh wait, none of these facts were in the docudrama. Instead poor fluffy wandered too close to the fire that he built to warm an orphaned fawn. Only partial facts were included into this series. Do you honestly believe that judges on the appelate and state Supreme Court are in on his framing? That is a whole new level of corruption if so.
What makes the DNA under the hood "non plantable"? And what does setting a cat on fire, regardless of the inhumanity of it, have anything to do with the murder as evidence of guilt? Even if the facts shown in the series were partial and perhaps biased, as is the case in any defense or prosecution, they are compelling.
