Not that I'm aware of.
Also it seemed clear some still thought he raped that woman.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Making A Murderer - Netflix 10-part documentary series - S1 now streaming on Netflix
- Thread starter Armadilo
- Start date
Also it seemed clear some still thought he raped that woman.
Of course the cops would have said that, otherwise they look like complete fools for railroading him in that 1985 conviction.
Given the fact he had 16 alibis give the same story without talking to him (remember he was in jail with NO phone calls) and the prosecution had only the testimony of the victim, he should have been acquitted of that crime. The timeline was also ridiculous for him to have allegedly raped the woman. He would have had to rape her, then immediately drive back to pick up his wife and kids to go shopping. Remember the greasy hands too...his hands were always greasy and she said the attacker's hands were clean.
16 alibis, I get that they were all his family but c'mon, every single one of them was supposedly lying for him?
I think this was a really well done documentary. For me, I found it more compelling and interesting, and had me at the edge of my edge before the series got into the courtroom stuff. Those episodes, the ones at the courtroom, didn't really hold my interest as much.
Fuck the cops. Fuck the State. Fuck the justice system. They have ruined two human lives. Ruined two families. And all because those dickweed cops had a grudge on a man. Regardless of whether Steven did, or did not, do it, the series did a great job at shining a spotlight on the corruption.
Fuck the cops. Fuck the State. Fuck the justice system. They have ruined two human lives. Ruined two families. And all because those dickweed cops had a grudge on a man. Regardless of whether Steven did, or did not, do it, the series did a great job at shining a spotlight on the corruption.
I do one day Steven and Brendan are able to get new trials, and hopefully, one day, released from prison.
Best part was her claiming the rapist was wearing underwear.
And Steve Avery did not own underwear.
Both hilarious and infuriating at the same time.
Yeah, he may be guilty of the murder (I really don't know based on how the evidence was handled / presented) but that 1985 rape conviction was a brutal travesty. Maybe all that time in prison and he ended up more violent than he would have been. Who the hell knows, I'm not saying it's an excuse as there's no defending a murder, but spending all that time in prison knowing you're innocent must really fuck with your head.
I went into this blind, having no idea about this case so I actually thought that's what this documentary was about initially.
Deadly Cyclone
Pride of Iowa State
On like episode 4. 16 year old bombshell just happened.
What does the kid have to gain if he did help, from turning himself in? Like, if this is all true, he could have let his uncle rot.
Same, lol.
It's not what he has to gain, it's what the prosecution for Avery's trial has to gain.
Jacksinthe
Banned
A lot of Brendan's story shown on the series doesn't match up. The bedroom, garage, etc. None of it.
Perhaps you should read further into what I said earlier about there being dots to connect but not enough for a guilty verdict. I maintain Avery had the capacity and aptitude to commit this crime but can't throw a guilty verdict due to lack of evidence.
You're saying nothing new and nothing I've gone against, man. I'm saying there's a lot more than what the documentary shown and people would do well to go over some transcripts and evidence NOT in the documentary. I believe the key and bullet were planted. I also believe it's very possible Avery did it, but there's not enough evidence to convict so Lenk went out of his way to plant to make sure as much could stick as possible.
Deadly Cyclone
Pride of Iowa State
All this Brenden stuff is so dumb. Kid made up like 8 different ways she died and they somehow take it.
A Link to the Past
Banned
Based on further research, I think he may be guilty, but not beyond a reasonable doubt.
Deadly Cyclone
Pride of Iowa State
Jesus, how all the phone calls don't prove Brenden's testimony is worthless and his statements are not true is beyond me. In his calls with his mom he goes back and forth, the kid clearly isn't all there, and he's your key witness in a murder case?
Saren is Bad
Member
Is there a good summary of evidence/fishy stuff that the documentary left out?
Especially that second call after he called her with the "truth". Obviously he only told her that stuff because they told him he should, he still doesn't know what the truth is.
Kuro Madoushi
Unconfirmed Member
More spoilers and speculation
I keep flip flopping on the innocence thing. That Brendan confession, even with all the coercion is pretty damning. I don't know what to make of it anymore; the showrunners edited it to show there was a lot of leading questions and pressure, but then some other areas...make me see why people would throw him and Steven to the wolves. Still...
If I was a jury member though, I'd still need a few things established:
- Why was there no blood in the bedroom? There was a stabbing according to Brendan as well as choking. Her DNA wasn't in the trailer or the garage beyond a bit on the bullet in the garage.
- Where are the marks on the bed posts if she was restrained? Even if it was with rope and not chains and cuffs, if she was struggling, one should see SOME damage there.
- Why was there no blood in garage? Steven may be a criminal mastermind, but there's simply no way in HELL he could clean all that up even with help. The cracks with no blood is very telling too. This pokes holes in Brendan's 'confession'. Even with bleach, I don't see him cleaning all of that up.
- Where was the murder weapon? Knives had no DNA on them and the rifle, which was supposedly in Steven's room and matched the bullet had no coverage there.
- Steven's blood in the car was very telling, but where are the fingerprints? OK, maybe he wore gloves, so why the hell was there blood there when he only had a cut on his hand? OK, maybe he didn't have gloves and wiped the rest of the prints off, so why the hell didn't he wipe the blood, AND why would he other doing any of all that when he could just crush it?
- Why does the key contain none of Teresa's DNA and why was it only found on the 7th visit? Supposedly, during Brendan's confession, which this is pretty damning, he mentioned the gunshot in the garage and the key in the drawer (still very questionable), but that does not explain why a key who was owned by someone for years has NONE of her DNA on it and ONLY Steven's. Assuming he wiped it pretty cleanly and was meticulous, it makes no sense to leave HIS OWN GODDAMN DNA on it afterwards...does he clean hers and assuming his won't get on it? Does he clean it assuming he was trying to get both his and hers off of it? If that's the case, why clean the damn thing and not just burn or bury it with the rest of the evidence...?
- For me, if the prosecution could answer these for me, I'd be convinced, but the whole thing has been poorly presented and handled from them.
If I was a jury member though, I'd still need a few things established:
- Why was there no blood in the bedroom? There was a stabbing according to Brendan as well as choking. Her DNA wasn't in the trailer or the garage beyond a bit on the bullet in the garage.
- Where are the marks on the bed posts if she was restrained? Even if it was with rope and not chains and cuffs, if she was struggling, one should see SOME damage there.
- Why was there no blood in garage? Steven may be a criminal mastermind, but there's simply no way in HELL he could clean all that up even with help. The cracks with no blood is very telling too. This pokes holes in Brendan's 'confession'. Even with bleach, I don't see him cleaning all of that up.
- Where was the murder weapon? Knives had no DNA on them and the rifle, which was supposedly in Steven's room and matched the bullet had no coverage there.
- Steven's blood in the car was very telling, but where are the fingerprints? OK, maybe he wore gloves, so why the hell was there blood there when he only had a cut on his hand? OK, maybe he didn't have gloves and wiped the rest of the prints off, so why the hell didn't he wipe the blood, AND why would he other doing any of all that when he could just crush it?
- Why does the key contain none of Teresa's DNA and why was it only found on the 7th visit? Supposedly, during Brendan's confession, which this is pretty damning, he mentioned the gunshot in the garage and the key in the drawer (still very questionable), but that does not explain why a key who was owned by someone for years has NONE of her DNA on it and ONLY Steven's. Assuming he wiped it pretty cleanly and was meticulous, it makes no sense to leave HIS OWN GODDAMN DNA on it afterwards...does he clean hers and assuming his won't get on it? Does he clean it assuming he was trying to get both his and hers off of it? If that's the case, why clean the damn thing and not just burn or bury it with the rest of the evidence...?
- For me, if the prosecution could answer these for me, I'd be convinced, but the whole thing has been poorly presented and handled from them.
Brendan is dumb as a rock, he wasn't trying to gain anything. IMO I think he felt guilty about knowing what Steven did to Teresa so he told the investigators what he saw. I think he thought he had immunity or some shit, because he went from the 1st interview where all he did was see Teresa's body in the fire, to the 3rd interview where he's now a rapist and fully involved in the murder.
I'm 95% convinced Steven killed Teresa. However, based on the evidence shown in the doc, and the handling of the investigation, I would've voted not guilty if I was on that jury. The prosecution's case made no sense in relation to the evidence, and Manitowoc PD should've never set foot on that property.
Deadly Cyclone
Pride of Iowa State
Blood vial seems like a smoking gun. Interested to see where this goes.
NervousXtian
Thought Emoji Movie was good. Take that as you will.
I dunno, the documentary is made in a way to make you question his guilt... but despite I believe planted evidence and the fact they wanted to convict him due to the civil case... I think he did it.
The only other option really is that the police killed her and planted it all.
The only other option really is that the police killed her and planted it all.
Lactose_Intolerant
Member
Or the 2 relatives did.
Deadly Cyclone
Pride of Iowa State
We're about halfway through and I don't know. All this seems to insane to make me believe Steven did it. The bumbling cop who called in her license plate and car 3 days before it was found, the blood vial that had been tampered with, how quickly the lady found her car on the giant-ass car lot, and the fact that the car had brush thrown up on it. And on top of all that, the fact that if he did it he could have easily crushed the car, or even told his brother not to allow civilian searches on the lot.
A lot of this shit doesn't add up.
EDIT: Add the bullet and contamination to this list.
A lot of this shit doesn't add up.
EDIT: Add the bullet and contamination to this list.
It doesn't add up at all. As someone else earlier said-Steven would have to simultaneously the be the smartest person and the dumbest person on Earth to pull this off.
I agree. They weren't interrogating to gather information for their case-they were simply attempting to trick a confession out to quickly resolve their case.
No, it isn't.
That's the prosecution's closing statement, but it couldn't be farther from the truth. The roommate and/or ex-boyfriend could have done it, dumped the body in the fire, and left the Rav4 at the Avery property.
Anyways, two episodes to go. There's something really, really off about Kratz and his demeanor towards... everything. I don't know if it's selective footage or not since the documentary is clearly trying to make a point, but there's something very off about him. Can't quite put my finger on it.
JHoNNy1OoO
Member
Just finished watching this and holy shit fuck those juries. Like they said in the doc, those small towns tend to trust law enforcement a lot more than in the big cities. Still they really didn't take "beyond a reasonable doubt" seriously at all. Who the hell can see that first interrogation video with Brendan and think for even a second that he even understood what was happening or the ramifications of what he was saying. Let alone that the detectives were the ones putting forth the ideas and not Brendan himself.
The prosecutors as well to see that evidence and go along with it. Absolutely disgusting and I hope their asses burn in hell for ruining these peoples(and who knows who elses) lives.
Blood was boiling throughout the entire doc pretty much.
The prosecutors as well to see that evidence and go along with it. Absolutely disgusting and I hope their asses burn in hell for ruining these peoples(and who knows who elses) lives.
Blood was boiling throughout the entire doc pretty much.
That's such an insane reach. Kill Teresa, put her in the back of her SUV, drive to the Avery's private property, drive right up to Steven's trailer without him hearing, (assuming the fire is still raging at this point) throw Teresa's body into the fire, start a fire in Steven's burn barrel and throw Teresa's cell phone and purse in there, drive her SUV to the Avery's junkyard, somehow have a sample of Avery's sweat to wipe under the hood, call someone to pick them up because they are now car-less, and escape without 1 witness?
storafötter
Member
All I can say is that it is almost without doubt that Brenda was pressured to say something he didnt do. However he did probably see something I have a suspicion of. When it comes to Avery he could be guilty but at the same time seeing how corrupt the police are and how not very intelligent Avery is, I doubt he would be able to cover up a scene like that at his place.
I think the people close to Theresa are most suspicious (room mate and ex), alongside with Brendas brother who went all against him and his uncle. I thought it was interesting that they said Theresa was a distant cousin to his Nephew, but they did not ever go further on that. She knew the Averys then? wasnt she like from another state? or was it a county. The whole Avery family seem to be able to go against another (false story from Brendas girl cousin) so they must have grudges due to Stevens first sentencing and prior to previous convictions (he still burned a cat that piece of shit). I am not in doubt that Steven would have done something dangerous to someone if you consider his own history, but that doesn't make it right to give him the blame for something he didn't do. He had a short fuse and I doubt that ever disappeared during those 18 years.
However there is a problem with suspecting Theresas room mate or ex. They have to have known the are and the Avery family to be able to do all those things. Which makes the cop thing a bit more far fetched. But the cops could have found the evidence elsewhere and just moved the evidence to put the blame on Steven. I think that theory is more plausible when you come to terms with how suspicious many of the planted evidences were and the way the search for Theresa was handled.
edit:
Okay I just read the reddit link and it confirmed some suspicious elements to the documentary. They did mention very brief about a note Steven had with Theresas number, and the boss of hers talking of her feeling threatened with Avery. The documentary suspiciously ignored those things even after mentioning them.
You also have to add to the more implausible scenario that they would have to know the area, community and the Averys well to pull that shit off. However who knows maybe they do.
However deleting phone messages is still a reason for suspicion despite how far fetched getting all of those things done are.
I think the people close to Theresa are most suspicious (room mate and ex), alongside with Brendas brother who went all against him and his uncle. I thought it was interesting that they said Theresa was a distant cousin to his Nephew, but they did not ever go further on that. She knew the Averys then? wasnt she like from another state? or was it a county. The whole Avery family seem to be able to go against another (false story from Brendas girl cousin) so they must have grudges due to Stevens first sentencing and prior to previous convictions (he still burned a cat that piece of shit). I am not in doubt that Steven would have done something dangerous to someone if you consider his own history, but that doesn't make it right to give him the blame for something he didn't do. He had a short fuse and I doubt that ever disappeared during those 18 years.
However there is a problem with suspecting Theresas room mate or ex. They have to have known the are and the Avery family to be able to do all those things. Which makes the cop thing a bit more far fetched. But the cops could have found the evidence elsewhere and just moved the evidence to put the blame on Steven. I think that theory is more plausible when you come to terms with how suspicious many of the planted evidences were and the way the search for Theresa was handled.
edit:
Okay I just read the reddit link and it confirmed some suspicious elements to the documentary. They did mention very brief about a note Steven had with Theresas number, and the boss of hers talking of her feeling threatened with Avery. The documentary suspiciously ignored those things even after mentioning them.
You also have to add to the more implausible scenario that they would have to know the area, community and the Averys well to pull that shit off. However who knows maybe they do.
However deleting phone messages is still a reason for suspicion despite how far fetched getting all of those things done are.
You can't make up *one* scenario and claim the whole possibility is an insane reach.
The exceedingly simple point is that saying Avery did not kill Theresa does not, in fact, imply that it was a cop that actually killed Theresa.
But while we're at it, I'll indulge you: Yes, I find even the exact scenario you painted more likely than the official story told by the prosecution.
Up to episode six so far and have been mind blown every step of the way - and this is despite already being familiar with the case.
Unsure of Steven's guilt, but by no means would I have convicted based on reasonable doubt.
One of my feelings is that I just don't believe Steven is smart enough to kill her without evidence of (her) blood or DNA. And there was no evidence of a cover up
Unsure of Steven's guilt, but by no means would I have convicted based on reasonable doubt.
One of my feelings is that I just don't believe Steven is smart enough to kill her without evidence of (her) blood or DNA. And there was no evidence of a cover up
You're reaching. You might as well say, "maybe she spontaneously combusted. You can't tell me for a fact that she didn't." It's not the job of investigators to come up with every absurd possibility. None of the evidence even remotely suggests it was anyone except Avery. I'm talking about the whole picture here, not just things like the key and bullet which very well could've been planted. Avery was the last to see Teresa. A few witnesses confirm that Avery had a fire after she "left". Her bones, cell phone, purse, and car (complete with Avery's blood and sweat) were all found on Avery's property. It's beyond ridiculous to even suggest her ex bf or roommate did this or could've pulled off the perfect murder / frame job.
Who else would have access to Avery's DNA? Who else could freely enter Avery's private property without being seen?
Edit: To your edit. I agree that the prosecution's story was also a crock of shit. However, I still believe Steven killed her, just not the way they said he did.
You are getting mixed up between what you were shown in the documentary and what the jury heard.
Even if this documentary is on the side of Stephen and Brendan, the prosecutors in both cases are seriously doing poorly in presenting their cases whenever they're on screen. Who knows if that was deliberate or not, but I just don't see any weight in their arguments when the defense attorneys just poke holes in every piece of evidence.
Also, is it just me or is Theresa's brother extremely irritating? Every one of his press conferences are cringe-worthy.
Towards the end of episode 9 where the prosecutor says "Brendan confessed cause it was eating him alive and he couldn't live with it" I was like, that's really the best you've got!?
Also, is it just me or is Theresa's brother extremely irritating? Every one of his press conferences are cringe-worthy.
What gets me is that Avery's defense team proved that Brandon's testimony was false, and coerced by the cops. They were able to get those charges dropped from Avery, and the ones that remained he was found not guilty for.
However, the state then goes on to convict Brandon for the exact same charges they had just acquitted Steven Avery for. If Steven Avery is Not Guilty for those crimes, how is Brandon guilty?
And in one case they say she was killed (shot) in the garage by Avery.
Next case she is raped and gets her throat slit in the bedroom. No blood or any evidence ever links the kid to the crime.
He wasn't a key witness in Avery's murder trial.
Kuro Madoushi
Unconfirmed Member
It doesn't change the questions I'd need answered to say definitively guilty.
The blood in the car and the DNA on the hood, I can't explain; that's highly suspicious and puts Steven in the radar. The burnt remains are also highly suspicious, and also implicate Steven as well obviously. The bullet in the garage and key are HIGHLY questionable. The lack of DNA in the trailer and garage are key for me. If I was on that jury, that would have to be answered for me.
Switching gears up a bit here, I've been browsing that Twitter account that has supposed connections to Anonymous. I said before it seems like a hoax and nothing was done, well, I don't know if anything was done exactly but the account seems to indicate something was sent and they're waiting. There's also a woman on there that claims she saw Steven at a gas station the time of the crime - again this is all highly suspect since it's the Internet and anyone can say anything. The account just told her to get in touch with Buting. Additionally, the burnt remains...? Well, that account linked to a site in google maps and suggested the body could've been burnt there and the remains moved onto Steven's yard too.
Regardless of what happens, I would be incredibly stoked to see a season 2 where a complete turnabout happens and that Anonymous actually did do something.
I like how the person who cut open the "DO NOT OPEN" tape cleverly covered his tracks by using plain old scotch tape.
In addition to this, Ken even states in his closing argument in Steven's trial: "This was the work of one man and one man only" or along those lines. He then goes right on to then prosecute Brandon for assisting with the murder!
POWERSPHERE
Member
This Is the exact reason that you should feel compssion and empathy for Brendan. Stephen is a bit of a dirtbag [Who I think is innocent but has done some dirtbag stuff] but Brendan is just a soft kid being thrown under the bus. Breaks my heart.
Anyway, you guys putting any weight on the Anonymous documents that are ment to leak in a day or so?
He may as well have been, considering that the DA broadcasted Brendan's original confession to the world in that March 2nd press conference. I'm sure that had an impact on the jurors who believed them both to be guilty.
Similar threads
- Locked