-
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
arts&crafts
Member
Brendan doesn't know how she died, the prosecutors dont even know how she died. They found a burned corpse in pieces, the rest is speculation.
Edit. just went back and missed the sarcasm.
So, I read the transcript from Brendan's first interview (2 interviews before he said he raped and helped kill Teresa) The investigators led him into every important detail. The investigators completely fucked that interview up. The only thing Brendan offered up unprovoked was, he said that after Steven stabbed Teresa, Steven put the murder weapon under the seat of Teresa's RAV4 and drove it to where it was later found. Which is bullshit, because there was no blood found under the seat.
Every other detail was pushed on him, where sometimes Brendan would just say "yeah". Or if the investigators kept repeating something over and over, Brendan would eventually parrot them.
Brendan had no chance, it's really sad because if he actually had nothing to do with it, he was led into giving himself a life sentence. If he actually did do/see something, we'll never be able to believe him now because any believability he had was tossed out the window with those interviews.
Every other detail was pushed on him, where sometimes Brendan would just say "yeah". Or if the investigators kept repeating something over and over, Brendan would eventually parrot them.
Brendan had no chance, it's really sad because if he actually had nothing to do with it, he was led into giving himself a life sentence. If he actually did do/see something, we'll never be able to believe him now because any believability he had was tossed out the window with those interviews.
Deadly Cyclone
Pride of Iowa State
I'm really not sure anymore if he is guilty or not. Stuff like the article below make me wonder what else the Netflix show left out from the "weeks"of testimony.
https://www.yahoo.com/tv/making-murderer-prosecutor-emails-us-9-reasons-steven-233447676.html
https://www.yahoo.com/tv/making-murderer-prosecutor-emails-us-9-reasons-steven-233447676.html
He may be annoyed, because most of the comments here are parroting back what they heard in the documentary.
I don't know what happened, but I understand where he is coming from: A lot of people watched a heavily-biased documentary and have formed their opinion solely on that.
I am not saying the documentary is factually inaccurate, I really am not. But I see a lot of knee-jerk reactions on the internet to this case.
MonorailCat
Member
Yes it's biased.
But if you can fill a 10 hour (!!) documentation with obvious incompetent (to put it mildly) police/prosecution work then it doesn't really matter. Thats too much fuckup.
These are the same things that keep coming back up over and over again. Again-if he fired the bullet and killed her-where is the blood?
Number two doesn't seem logical. Surely she would have very quickly realised she was approaching the same junk yard as she approached and drive away.
onadesertedisland
Member
There is a misconception that bias equals incorrect.
Oh I hear you. There is lots of back and forth discussion on his guilt here. Even I personally am 50 50 on whether he did it or not.
The weird thing about EthanC is he keeps making the exact same false statements over and over about when Brenden said what in his confession. Every time he's been called out on it and pointed at the actual transcripts.
Then he goes away for a while then comes back and makes the exact same false statements about the confession.
It really muddles the discussion, and throws it off having to again correct him. I want to hear about other evidence people are finding about not being in the documentary, like Brenden's bleach stained jeans and whatnot. Having this guy come in and make the exact same false statement kind of sucks.
that states it perfectly. If anything the show presents how someone could be railroaded, and the RESPONSE to the show shows how the general public really don't understand the purpose of a trial or the system.
Jesus Fucking Christ I'm sick of seeing this exact Ken Kratz bullshit linked over and over. Well that was sure a success on his part. Pretty much everything there is hearsay from him or easily countered or just doesn't even matter.
It's right up there. It doesn't have that
final "Oh my god" moment
Nice. I'll definitely check it out now. Thanks man
Yeah, I agree that the confession is pretty much worthless. I think what is happening in this discussion is there are two different points here: 1- Did they get a fair trial? 2 - Are they innocent?
Those are two very different things. For me:
1. I think they did NOT get a fair trial.
2. I think there is a chance that Avery is innocent, but when I try to think through what scenario could exist that could explain everything, well, I am at a loss. Unless you think that it was a frame-job that multiple people were responsible for, including planting the remains of a corpse on someone else's property. I mean, for me, I have a hard time with that aspect. So I lean more towards him doing the crime. But I have no idea if Brendan was even involved at all.
Deadly Cyclone
Pride of Iowa State
What if he fired once, killing her then immediately took the body to the burn pile (no stabbing, nothing else) and threw her in, piled on tires, and lit it?
The Dassey stuff is all wrong likely, but they could have shot her once with minimal blood. Or even stood just outside the garage, shot towards it and the bullet got lost under the junk in there, and threw her on the burn pile.
Not saying I believe he did it 100%, but some of that is compelling.
It really makes no sense. For them to be guilty, they had to go above and beyond cleaning up the blood/DNA from the house and garage, yet leave all the bones and SUV in plain sight. A magical key in plain sight. A magical bullet appearing from the ether. It makes no sense.
I was thinking the same thing. I mean they could have coerced anything out of Brenden. Why didn't they just get him to say they shot her once and threw her in the fire?
It would have made their lives a lot easier than having to prove the absolutely ridiculous tale they had Brenden concoct.
Deadly Cyclone
Pride of Iowa State
Yeah. Brenden made it sound like she was put in a trap from the "Saw" movies..
EASTC0AST_GH05T
Member
Mr Kratz please noooo
EthanC killed Theresa! We got you, you son of a bitch!
The Jinx is way more polished and theatrical, and is the better watch, but MaM had me more emotionally invested.
How would her blood get in the SUV in that scenario?
Nappuccino
Member
I'd give Sword and Scale a hesitant recommendation. The podcast starts out strong, but there's definitely a turn and the host starts to aim for shock value over reporting. There are a few episodes that you probably shouldn't listen to unless you're ok with audio recordings of actual murder without any set-up or warning.
Maybe because they had him on tape saying they stabbed her first while the investigator kept trying to get him to say they shot her. (Something that has to do with her head... )
It might have looked dumb to say the stabbing didn't happen but the he knew she was shot so he must have been there.
This had all been gone over. I'd be happy to go over point by point why it's all garbage if you want.
I wouldn't go so far to say it's all garbage. Stuff that was shown as evidence at the trial that wasn't in the documentary helps paint a much broader picture, like the bleached jeans.
I also just learned that there was deer blood on the jeans as well, which the defense used as an example of how there is no way to know what got on the jeans when.
.EthanC killed Theresa! We got you, you son of a bitch!
SneakersSO
Member
See, this is why Kratz is a terrific (& terrible) DA/Attorney - he likes to bring up things that weren't submitted as evidence in the case against Steven. He's a prosecutor, and this is his crown-jewel of his tarnished career, but lets just go over what he's stating.
1 - The cat incident occurred during his younger days, before he even went to jail in 1985, where he was absolutely being a reckless delinquent. No one is denying that. But as far as we know, he had a non-violent record during his imprisonment, and a non-violent record after his release in 2003. He WAS a shit head who unjustly got locked up, and he genuinely seemed to want to get out & turn his life around. If he had a violent record after his release, i'd agree with Kratz' first point. But the only reason he's using it is because he wants to paint Avery is a person capable of violence against innocent beings as a matured adult.
2 - Calling Auto Trader to request someone you have worked with 15 times in the past, and who most recently took pictures to sell the last vehicle you were looking to sell, is not a sign of guilt. They had a professional working relationship. Kratz in this email says he gave out a fake #, then says its his sister - thats not a fake number, its still a relative, a relative that lives on the same plot of land Avery lives on, and whose car Teresa had JUST sold. Also, Teresa CALLED Auto Trader to get more information on where she was going, and showed NO SIGNS of reservation about going there. She knew where & who it was, and didn't care. These two had a well-documented professional relationship, but apparently if you call someone with *67, you're a murderer in the state of Wisconsin.
3 - Avery told another inmate of wanting to create a torture dungeon, which was never presented into the courtroom as evidence since its hearsay anyway. But, Avery did buy shackles & cuffs 3 weeks prior to the Teresa incident with the intent of using them on his girlfriend. At the very least, some interest in S&M could explain this away, and this would not be the first time the presence of BDSM implements would be used to wrongfully imprison someone.
4 - Regarding bones & other items in the firepit in his backyard - Avery's defense has a Forensic Anthropologist going on record in this case that the bonfire as described (it was 3ft high, according to Scott's testimony), would not have been hot enough to do the damage done to the bones & other things found in the ashes in his burn pile. On top of that, we have another forensic expert in Steven's defense who claims there is evidence that the bones were moved.
5 - Kratz again continues to try & make the connection that calling her that day is tantamount to murdering her. Here's the problem - Auto Trader receptionist has testified that Teresa called her home office looking for directions to the Avery location, and requested that Steve Avery CALL HER TO GIVE HER DIRECTIONS. Which he did. Again, they have a professional relationship. She is taking pictures to sell a vehicle he is looking to have sold. That isn't a one trip process. He may have called her for any number of reasons. If Avery was looking to establish an alibi at the time she is supposedly being murdered, he'd have just gone & met with someone/anyone to do so. A phone-call to the victim doesn't establish murder. Then again, the calls she got during that time were ALSO FROM HER EX (Anonymous posted her phone records from the Avery case file on their twitter account, you can see who else called her). But they wouldn't know the Ex's alibi cause they never asked.
6 - As Avery's lawyer established yesterday on Fox News, the DNA under the car latch was never tested to be sweat. They don't know where that source of DNA from Steven came from, and its something that was stated during the trial. The assertion that its sweat is something Kratz has continually done with no evidence pointing to that. Kratz also keeps stating that it was under the hood, when its specifically on the hood latch, which makes a difference - one makes u think its all over several components, when the hood latch makes it seem like its one specific part & that its singular. Not only that, again, none of Steven's prints are found anywhere on the vehicle. Just his DNA. And we have a full DNA kit & case load from his 1985 case that has been proven to have been tampered with.
7 - the bullet & Avery's gun. As much as Kratz wants people to think this is a smoking gun, this is one of the most questionable pieces of evidence in this entire thing, outside of the key found in his bedroom. So, the gun was in police possession on 11/6, 6 days after the murder. However, even after SEVEN searches of the garage, the bullet was only found in March of 2006. And only after a new Brendan Dassey confession, which established that she was shot in the garage. And also, it was after a Manitowoc County Detective (Lenk or Coulborn) had been found gaining access to the garage when he had NO BUSINESS BEING IN THERE. So, if she is shot in the garage, where is the blood? Her blood mind you. And before someone says "he could've burned the blood, or cleaned it with bleach", realize that they did find blood in the garage - deer blood to be exact. So you're telling me Steven Avery, forensic authority that he is, would be able to surgically clean up Teresa and ONLY Teresa's blood in that garage? Also, no blood was found on the murder weapon, and the murder weapon was in custody from 11/6. If he shot her with that gun from the close range described by Brendan Dessay, there'd have been some blood blowback on the weapon. In fact, the forensic experts looked for that, and found none.
To Kratz - you end that email suggesting the Defense is saying that you 'helped' plant evidence. No, no one is suggesting that. They aren't even suggesting it was all of Manitowoc's Sheriff department that did. Just two individuals. Don't make this about yourself Kratz.
RustyNails
Member
Maybe not the killer, but the dude has a big, raging, veiny boner for the cops. He has too much vested interest to be posting in here frankly because he can't remain impartial. I'm open to Steven Avery being proven guilty. I just do not see the dots being connected as presented by the trial. EthanC's argument lies solely in Brendan Dassey's thrown testimony and nothing else. It's pointless.
Yes the cops can be corrupt. Yes Steven can be guilty. Yes they could have framed him. But what's absolute no is Brendan is speaking the truth. He doesn't even know what the word means.
SneakersSO
Member
One more thing about that bonfire - know the one piece of evidence that would lead someone to believe they were burning a body in that bonfire that is missing from every piece of testimony from EVERYONE who was at that bonfire? (Don't forget, Brendan's sister was also there, as well as a few other people possibly)
The smell! Burning human flesh & hair leaves a very distinct, and TERRIBLE smell. Unless burning a body around bonfires is a common thing with the Avery's, I highly doubt any of them would've ignored that.
The smell! Burning human flesh & hair leaves a very distinct, and TERRIBLE smell. Unless burning a body around bonfires is a common thing with the Avery's, I highly doubt any of them would've ignored that.
This is where it gets absolutely insane:
The prosecution argued that-
They raped and cut her in the bedroom, then dragged her into the garage and shot her 11 times. Then Steven drove her SUV up to the garage and tossed her throat-cut-shot-11 times corpse into the back of the SUV
Then he drove it over to where they found it on the lot, got a sled, then put her corpse into the sled and dragged it back to the fire pit. Which was basically right by where he put her body in the SUV in the first place.
And not a single drop of her blood was found anywhere on the property except the back of the SUV
RustyNails
Member
Also, Steve and his sister Barb both went to the kinky store to buy those things as per the affidavit submitted to the court. This raises more questions for me, and I would have liked the documentary to have explored this a little more...like, was it fuzzy cuffs? or cold iron? Why wasn't there any DNA found on them? As a matter for prosecution, it would have helped them to say "hey look, even Steve's girlfriend's DNA isn't there so he definitely wiped them clean". What's even more crazy is part of the shackles were found in Barb's home.
I've read two accounts of where the handcuffs were found. One account says at the sister's, and another account says they were in one of the burn barrels.
Which one is true?
SneakersSO
Member
If they have possession of those implements, I imagine they were all thoroughly tested & came up clean. I didn't know they were partially discovered in barb's home. Were they part of a set or something? If Steve is destroying evidence in a bonfire, why wouldn't he throw shackles in there as well?
Nappuccino
Member
One thing that could make sense is that Avery had the body, panicked, and didn't know what to do with it. He first thought to dump it elsewhere, but decided that was risky and drove the body back to be incinerated.
Avery isn't a smart guy, so I could see that argument getting some traction.
The sled thing sounds crazy given this. Why not just drive the body back to the fire pit instead of making a sled and dragging it back?
Beerman462
Member
Do the "he's probably guilty and the documentary was biased folks" not believe the juror who was excused and said that when he left only 3 jurors believed he was guilty and were "aggressive" about it or the juror that is now saying that they were scared of retribution from the cops?
RustyNails
Member
First this is the newspaper that reported Barb and Steve both going to the kinky store: https://news.google.com/newspapers?...AAAIBAJ&sjid=vI4EAAAAIBAJ&pg=1743,56083&hl=en
Second, here's the court transcript that shows the evidence being admitted in the court and where it was found
Transcript: https://www.dropbox.com/s/c9ow4lwzec007mi/dassey_4_16_07.pdf?dl=0
Nappuccino
Member
To make his story more insane and less believable? (Honestly, I don't know--I'm only about 4 episodes in and had to take a break . . . then I wandered in here. I remember listening to the Radiolab episode about this case though. I'm hoping they do a follow-up in light of this documentary.)
SneakersSO
Member
Thanks. So, nothing in the burn pit. Doesn't sound like they turned up any of her DNA, as i'm sure thats what they would test for firstly. Seeing them being submitted into evidence like this just tells me these were likely not involved in the crime.
Nappuccino
Member
All of this sounds like a smoking gun found in a vacuum.
What does this prove? Juries rarely have a unanimous vote going into deliberation. Do you think that people can only be convinced to join your side, and not to join the side that you personally think isn't true?
And most (not all) of the people who think that he might be guilty say that they couldn't vote to convict based on the inconsistent and possibly tainted evidence.
Not to mention that the car was found on the exact opposite side of the 40 acre property from Stevens house.
And the crusher was right between them.
Vault Dweller 111
Member
Maybe he did it.
Beyond a shadow of a doubt? Nah.
Beyond a shadow of a doubt? Nah.
Vincent Alexander
Member
Anyone have link to Brendan's interviews?
Never mind. I found transcript of confession. This to me is damning....the original confession he gives is completely unprovoked. They don't feed him any of the initial shit he confesses to, which is seeing her in Avery's home. Stabbing. Shooting. Burning. Or maybe I'm reading these out of order...
Never mind. I found transcript of confession. This to me is damning....the original confession he gives is completely unprovoked. They don't feed him any of the initial shit he confesses to, which is seeing her in Avery's home. Stabbing. Shooting. Burning. Or maybe I'm reading these out of order...
Holy crap. I always thought the SUV was found a few hundred feet from his house. This is absolutely crazy. Can you imagine him pulling a sled with a body on it that far? Wtf
And even crazier that the woman found it in 20 minutes
I also thought it would be hard to drive the SUV and park it so close to Avery's house, but they could have even potentially parked it there in broad daylight and no one would notice.
Similar threads
- Locked