Support NeoGAF

[electroshockwave]

Of course idiots are being absolute shit heads to people they've never met =/



I absolutely disagree with that. All the stuff where he let the kid be interviewed without him or his mother absolutely made it harder for the subsequent defence attorneys! They stuff he said there likely would not have been said had his mother or Kachinsky been there. If the mother was there it's likely that he might've been more comfortable and stick to what he said where "nothing happened" instead of altering his story multiple times trying to get the "right" answer and if Kachinsky was there then maybe he'd be all "you can't say that, you're leading my client".

Even if Kachinsky was there I doubt he would have been much help to Brendan. It's clear from the outset that he didn't believe that he was innocent and seemed more interested in using him for the prosecution's case against Avery.

 

[Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew]

Just finished the entire documentary. My wife is super pissed at me for not being super pissed at how the entire case was handled.

Spoiler

I think Brendan's lawyers did a bad job helping him out. His first lawyer is a snake and an evil incarnate himself. His second lawyers were good but they couldn't helped him more. Like truly helping him out. When Brendan was giving a testimony, they could've done remarkable things at winning the jury on the spot. They could've asked him things like if police got to his head, and whether he was crying because his girlfriend left him. Things like that.

Ugh. Ugh!!!! No words or buts can change the outcome, and I feel so sorry for both Steven and Brendan, but especially for Brendan because he was such a quiet and sweet little kid who was rattled up like nobody's business.

Fucking cops. Fucking lawyers. Fucking DA. Fucking Supreme Court. Old farts sitting there ruining a young soul's life forever. Like people in this trial were legit motherfuckers that need to be hung upside down on a fucking stake, grinning on the face of an innocent man and kid sent to prison for their own pleasure. Motherfuckers are corrupt to the core, and there's nothing that can be done until these old farts die and someone else decides to have a re-trial.

 

[Ayumi]

It was so depressing to see how much Brendan had changed in just 3 years. Worse that he said earlier on he wanted to lose weight because of his ex-gf, then 3 years in jail he just gained so much weight. Shows how messed up he got from the system.

I honestly couldn't recognize him at first, he suddenly looked 30 years old.

 

[Lan Dong Mik]

Just finished it.

Spoiler

What they did to that Brendan kid was fucking sickening and he deserves a new trial imo. My heart breaks for that guy. He had no idea they were going to set him up and fuck him over the way they did. Dude just wanted to be home in time to watch Wrestlemania so he told them everything they wanted to hear. Seeing that 2015 photo of him broke me man. Dude looks older than me and I'm almost 10 years older than he is. It's not fair what they did to him and I hope to god he gets a new trial.

I'm on the fence when it comes to Steven though. My gut feeling is he did it, but I don't understand why, unless there is some serious mental disorder going on with him and he genuinely doesn't remember doing it. He had a huge payday coming from the state, if he was hellbent on murder and torture you would think he would wait until after the pending civil suit or whatever was resolved to do that. I have a hard time believing that he could kill Teresa by shooting her in the head/slitting her throat and for there to be no blood anywhere on his clothes or property. He's obviously not an intelligent dude so it doesn't make sense if that is the way she was killed.

I was happy to see that no good piece of shit Kratz take an L at the end though. He seemed like the biggest douchebag on the planet. Like wtf was his obsession with Steven Avery being sweaty all the time. Dude was scum.

 

[kavanf1]

I'm only halfway through, but one of the things that made both my wife and I think "Steven didn't do it" were the recordings of his conversations with Lori when she called him from jail, at the time when he was supposedly murdering Teresa. Guy sounded completely calm and loved up with her, not exactly the behaviour of someone who had just stabbed someone a load of times etc.

 

[HotHamBoy]

So I finally finished it, then did my due diligence online. I don't think anyone can deny that the Averys are all really, really stupid people. The entire clan. Terrible genetics. It didn't help them at all, that's for sure. Just a whole bunch of dumb-dumbs. But regardless, that poor Brendan kid... Just so fucked up.

Spoiler

I don't know if Steve Avery killed her, but I'm pretty certain that the State's narrative is a work of fiction and that Brendan's confession is bullshit. I do believe they pursued a conviction and not the truth, I do believe they tampered with evidence to ensure a conviction. I do think a lot of things don't make sense, on either side. I think Steve is too stupid to not leave more DNA evidence. If he killed her, I really don't think he did it in the bedroom or the garage. His motivation for the murder makes less sense than the Sheriff Department's motivation for a framing, but none of the stories really add up in a satisfactory way. I have no doubt that the cops and lawyers mishandled the case. The problem is that the defense's only defense was that the cops framed him, and that was just a weak defense in the end - even if it was true.

If there is one thing I think the documentary does prove, it's that the prosecuters did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Avery was guilty, and they certainly failed to prove Brendan's guilt of anything. There was a public smear campaign before the trial, that first press conference was fucking dirty. It was impossible to get an impartial jury.

Oh, and FUCK Kantz and his fat fucking smug face. I did not think the prosecuting attorneys acted appropriately somber for the case they were presenting. They were so pleased with themselves.

 

[GavinGT]

After you're done watching this, you should watch The Jinx. The last few minutes of the final episode....holy shit.

 

[Mathezar]

I don't know how people can say Steven Avery is a dumb person, or things of that nature. In the documentary he comes off as an average Joe. He seems to handle himself just fine verbally in interviews and interrogations/questioning. If he really was of below average intelligence (like Brendan maybe), they would have screwed him around and gotten him convicted a lot sooner and this documentary probably wouldn't even exist.

 

[GavinGT]

I don't know how people can say Steven Avery is a dumb person, or things of that nature. In the documentary he comes off as an average Joe. He seems to handle himself just fine verbally in interviews and interrogations/questioning. If he really was of below average intelligence (like Brendan maybe), they would have screwed him around and gotten him convicted a lot sooner and this documentary probably wouldn't even exist.

I'm pretty sure that they cherry-picked his voice clips to make him sound less dumb.

Then again, he doesn't even own underwear, so maybe he's smarter than all of us.

 

[Ayumi]

Squad goals.

 

[TheYanger]

I don't know how people can say Steven Avery is a dumb person, or things of that nature. In the documentary he comes off as an average Joe. He seems to handle himself just fine verbally in interviews and interrogations/questioning. If he really was of below average intelligence (like Brendan maybe), they would have screwed him around and gotten him convicted a lot sooner and this documentary probably wouldn't even exist.

They stated what his IQ was and it is 70. This is very low.

 

[Moobabe]

They stated what his IQ was and it is 70. This is very low.

Brendad's IQ being that low I can understand, Steven never struck me as such though.

 

[Wind's Howling]

Squad goals.

If those kind of lawyers can not help the average joe I do not know who can.

 

[Fried Food]

They stated what his IQ was and it is 70. This is very low.

im pretty sure that was brendan

 

[TheYanger]

Brendad's IQ being that low I can understand, Steven never struck me as such though.

im pretty sure that was brendan

Brendan's was 69. Steven's is 70.

They state both at different points.

 

[electroshockwave]

im pretty sure that was brendan

I think in episode 1 they said Steven's was similarly low but there definitely seemed to be a big difference between him and Brendan. Maybe had a bad day or test or whatever. Still, I'd put Steven somewhere below average. Certainly doesn't fit that he'd be crime scene cleaner extraordinaire on the one hand then leave the car and keys on his property and the remains beside his trailer.

 

[Ayumi]

Lots of interesting/extra stuff on r/MakingAMurderer (Reddit), for those who haven't seen it yet. For instance, there's a photo of Steven and his family from 4 days ago where they're thanking everyone for the support.
Might wanna sort by Top posts for the most interesting stuff.

Link to photos: http://imgur.com/a/oWdXF

Edit: Recent interview with Dean Strang, for those who haven't seen it yet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9h5C901lGE

 

[bishopcruz]

The idiot should watch the damn documentary before commenting on why he thinks people regard him as scum.

People aren't mad because they think the jury saw the interview between Brendan and O'Kelley. People think you're piss because you allowed that interview to happen in the first place. People are mad because that interview demonstrated, from top to fucking bottom, that Brendan had not a single fucking person in his corner even attempting to defend besides his own damn mother.

Look he did some stuff right. He tried to get the confession dismissed, he at least considered a possible plea bargain. With confessions being add strong as they are to a jury, I don't blame him for that.

However his statements to the press, his working with the prosecution (which even Kratz thought was weird) can't be minimized.He allowed the kid to be interviewed AGAIN without him present, interviews that while technically weren't used against him led to things that WERE used, specifically the phone call to his mother, and the drawings of the crime scene are damning.

No he wasn't judged unfairly.

 

[KingBroly]

I think in episode 1 they said Steven's was similarly low but there definitely seemed to be a big difference between him and Brendan. Maybe had a bad day or test or whatever. Still, I'd put Steven somewhere below average. Certainly doesn't fit that he'd be crime scene cleaner extraordinaire on the one hand then leave the car and keys on his property and the remains beside his trailer.

Steven seems very socially awkward to me. Like, he just doesn't get it, or at least that's the sense I get from him. The more I think about it, however, the more I think he's innocent. The state's story of the crime doesn't add up. The evidence is sketchy, the fact that they didn't really seem to know when the blood tube evidence was broken into and by whom is a big 'the case is FUBAR' to me. Evidence not being found for so long then magically turning up because of 1 or 2 suspect people is highly improbable. They make him out to be some kind of evil genius who is also a moron. You really can't have it both ways.

 

[Creamium]

I asked this a few pages back:

What I still don't get is how the Manitowoc cops were allowed on site, even after they had openly announced that they wouldn't be involved. There was a conflict of interest, a higher authority (the state?) shouldn't have allowed any of those local cops on the case, especially those involved with Steve's prior case. I don't understand why they were allowed there (for days on end even), and their evidence is even allowed to be presented. All this could've been prevented if the Manitowoc cops were hands-off. That should've been an obvious decision from high-up at the start of the investigation.
I think Strang answered this in one of the itv's but I still don't see why they weren't excluded.

Does anyone have an answer to this? It's something that still bugs and eludes me.

 

[TVexperto]

So has there been a state investigation or something like that? They mishandled the trial and collection of evidence so badly ...

 

[Booker.DeWitt]

I asked this a few pages back:



Does anyone have an answer to this? It's something that still bugs and eludes me.

Dean strang said that the decision of not being involved came from manitowoc county themselves. It was not an court order or anything. They wanted to prevent bias, but I guess once they could not find anything against steven, they sent the filthy Lenk to the field. It was not ilegal if this is what you were asking, they had the right to be there since the murder was in their county

 

[Dan]

I asked this a few pages back:



Does anyone have an answer to this? It's something that still bugs and eludes me.

I think the answer lies somewhere between the so-called investigation not giving a fuck and being complicit in a framing/railroading. Simple as that.

 

[Booker.DeWitt]

 

[Ayumi]

<photos>

My favorite:

 

[Tugatrix]

My favorite:

there all the time who would have guess

this one is also great:

 

[Moobabe]

Brendan's was 69. Steven's is 70.

They state both at different points.

I wasn't disputing that it was stated (or even true) - simply remarking that he never struck me as having an IQ that low.

 

[Amory]

Despite the Rush Limbaugh ads I made it about 3 paragraphs.

ok?

I don't know who the guy is who does the podcast, just that he's a news personality in Wisconsin. He highlights a lot of the evidence that the state presented against Avery that was either glossed over or omitted entirely from the documentary.

Sorry you can't handle looking at irrelevant Rush Limbaugh ads. Hope you'll be ok.

 

[gamz]

ok?

I don't know who the guy is who does the podcast, just that he's a news personality in Wisconsin. He highlights a lot of the evidence that the state presented against Avery that was either glossed over or omitted entirely from the documentary.

Sorry you can't handle looking at irrelevant Rush Limbaugh ads. Hope you'll be ok.

But we know about all the evidence that was glossed over and it amounts to nothing really.

 

[gutshot]

 

[RepairmanJack]

Only half way through but jesus this stuff is infuriating and scary. I literally never want to piss off a cop ever. How the fuck long can a cop hold a grudge and it spread so damn much.

Am I the only one who thinks the ex-boyfriend and brother of Halbach are super suspicious? They knew the phone passwords, gave the camera to the woman that found the car, led the search, and in all interviews seems so hardcore on Steve then they openly say they haven't seen anything like the interrogations or anything else. They seemed odd as soon as they first showed up, but my suspicious has just deepened more and more.

I don't know how people can say Steven Avery is a dumb person, or things of that nature. In the documentary he comes off as an average Joe. He seems to handle himself just fine verbally in interviews and interrogations/questioning. If he really was of below average intelligence (like Brendan maybe), they would have screwed him around and gotten him convicted a lot sooner and this documentary probably wouldn't even exist.

I was actually just saying the same thing. The guy doesn't sound dumb, he just sounds simple(but not in the dumb way). Like, I love when he is on the phone and he says "They say I did it because I was the last one who saw her. But that isn't true, I'm not the one who saw her last so how did I kill her?"

What he's saying means absolutely nothing, but it's kind of sweet and simple that he's like "This is dumb, the killer must have seen her last. Not me."

I think he's pretty normal intelligence wise, he just seems more simple in a way of thinking and more direct in his way of conveying his thoughts.

 

[Amory]

But we know about all the evidence that was glossed over and it amounts to nothing really.

Well personally I didn't know that Brendan accused Avery of molesting him in one of the same phone conversations that they played in the documentary. They just cut that part out.

The documentary was slanted way toward Avery. I just found it interesting getting more information that wasn't given in the show.

 

[Messypandas]

My favorite:

Is was Steven wasn't it?

 

[gamz]

Well personally I didn't know that Brendan accused Avery of molesting him in one of the same phone conversations that they played in the documentary. They just cut that part out.

The documentary was slanted way toward Avery. I just found it interesting getting more information that wasn't given in the show.

Really? I didn't think so. The doc left out a lot of the defense moving the body also. All the important and relevant things were in there. Anyway, the point of the doc wasn't who is guilty, it's a doc about the system being fucked and flawed.

Brendan testimony is bunk anyway.

 

[Homeboyd]

The documentary was slanted way toward Avery.

And the actual trial (the thing that matters) was slanted way toward the state. Except Colburn and others involved are getting promotions, Kratz's new found celebrity status is affording him opportunities to sexually harass victims of domestic abuse, and Steven Avery sits in jail... for life.

So, let's call it a draw?

Spoiler

And all the stuff the documentary "left out" has been challenged, point by point. Oh, and you're right. The documentary IS biased, just not the direction you claim.

 

[Amory]

Really? I didn't think so. The doc left out a lot of the defense moving the body also. All the important and relevant things were in there. Anyway, the point of the doc wasn't who is guilty, it's a doc about the system being fucked and flawed.

Brendan testimony is bunk anyway.

Well, that's just it. It wasn't in his testimony or his interview with police. It was in a phone conversation with his mother that he probably assumed was private.

Even she says she knew that Avery would "horse around" with Brendan.

If he had been abused by his uncle, it sheds some light on why he might've been so hesitant to tell the police what he knew.

I don't know if that means Avery committed the murder, but he doesn't sound like the all-around good guy that the internet has decided he is.

 

[Vampire On Titus]

Well personally I didn't know that Brendan accused Avery of molesting him in one of the same phone conversations that they played in the documentary. They just cut that part out.

The documentary was slanted way toward Avery. I just found it interesting getting more information that wasn't given in the show.

That phone call was made after the blue ribbon coerced confession. Where he was clearly coerced to admit his culpability and made to draw pictures of a crime he initially plead innocence to at the start of the session. Also after the following police interrogation that day where the cops told him that he'd better go call his mom before they did. This is where the molestation angle comes from. It's one in a series of many lies and retractions Brendan told his mother after manipulative interrogation.

The documentary really isn't as slanted as you're thinking. They showed the best argument of both sides and left out a lot of compelling evidence in favor of Steven.

Has anyone following the subreddit or subsequent press listened to this podcast? Any new info or just the same batch of Ken Kratz misinformation?

 

[gamz]

I don't know if that means Avery committed the murder, but he doesn't sound like the all-around good guy that the internet has decided he is.

Nobody is saying he's a good guy. Everyone is saying he's been fucked over. Twice now.

 

[gamz]

Colbert

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-B54_IgXeB8

 

[bishopcruz]

Well, looking around the internet, one of my questions has been answered.

It was:

"Why didn't Dassey's defense team use the arguments of Kratz during the Avery trail, against him during Dassey's own trial?"

Well, it turns out, that the Judge wouldn't allow it. Apparently statements by prosecutors, even if they are made about other defendants in the same crime are not admissible as evidence in a case.

So essentially, it doesn't matter that Kratz literally said that "Only one man could have killed Theresa Hallbach!" or that the theories of the murder are conflicting. The prosecutors can say whatever they want in a trial and not get called on it in a follow up. How the HELL is that legal?

 

[Vampire On Titus]

Kratz as recently as the FOX News interview still maintains that the prosecution's story didn't change from the Avery Trial to the Dassey trial. The man is warped.

 

[gamz]

Kratz as recently as the FOX News interview still maintains that the prosecution's story didn't change from the Avery Trial to the Dassey trial. The man is warped.

The man has zero credibility.

 

[Homeboyd]

He was eating Xanax and Vicodin during the trial like skittles.. he doesn't remember anything. What do you want from him!?!?

 

[Booker.DeWitt]

Kratz as recently as the FOX News interview still maintains that the prosecution's story didn't change from the Avery Trial to the Dassey trial. The man is warped.

He is not practicing anymore right? because of the sexting scandal? Or is he back on prosecuting?

 

[bishopcruz]

Kratz as recently as the FOX News interview still maintains that the prosecution's story didn't change from the Avery Trial to the Dassey trial. The man is warped.

Has anyone called him on that? I mean it's obvious that that isn't true. There are two different stories. In his friggen CLOSING arguments he said that "Only ONE person could have killed Hallbach. There was no mention of sexual assault, a crime they have no actual proof for, in that case either."

Kratz lies or at least presents the evidence dishonestly because no one is willing to call him on it. It's ridiculous.

 

[gamz]

He is not practicing anymore right? because of the sexting scandal? Or is he back on prosecuting?

He is. It's a 6 month penealty.

 

[Orthogonal]

Well, looking around the internet, one of my questions has been answered.

It was:

"Why didn't Dassey's defense team use the arguments of Kratz during the Avery trail, against him during Dassey's own trial?"

Well, it turns out, that the Judge wouldn't allow it. Apparently statements by prosecutors, even if they are made about other defendants in the same crime are not admissible as evidence in a case.

So essentially, it doesn't matter that Kratz literally said that "Only one man could have killed Theresa Hallbach!" or that the theories of the murder are conflicting. The prosecutors can say whatever they want in a trial and not get called on it in a follow up. How the HELL is that legal?

Yep, its complete bullshit and is one of the biggest spotlights on the fallibility and illegitemacy of the court system. The fact that the State is allowed to express conflicting arguments to convict separate people for the same crime makes it an illogical system at best and completely corrupt at worst.

 

[bishopcruz]

Yep, its complete bullshit and is one of the biggest spotlights on the fallibility and illegiemacy of the court system. The fact that the State is allowed to express conflicting arguments to convict separate people for the same crime makes it an illogical system at best and completely corrupt at worst.

Look I know that most cases, generally speaking, are open and shut, I know several Prosecutors, they are good people working under a ridiculous caseload, and constantly have to make decisions often letting cases slide due to lack of evidence. The problem is, that like cops there is nowhere near enough oversight or accountability.

That being said, to act as if the court isn't stacked heavily in their favor is ridiculous. Kratz constantly paints himself as a victim, of a flawed documentary, that isn't telling the whole story. Kratz prejudiced the Jury long before trial, he made disingenuous arguments (hell, he still does) and he cared more for the conviction than the truth. If he cared at all about the truth then the lack of actual new corroborating evidence in Dassey's confessions should have given him pause. But he knew these two were guilty, so being dishonest was just part of the game.

 

[Vampire On Titus]

Has anyone called him on that? I mean it's obvious that that isn't true. There are two different stories. In his friggen CLOSING arguments he said that "Only ONE person could have killed Hallbach. There was no mention of sexual assault, a crime they have no actual proof for, in that case either."

Kratz lies or at least presents the evidence dishonestly because no one is willing to call him on it. It's ridiculous.

Nobody, to my knowledge, has called him on it directly. Where he could respond in real time. The FOX segment had Dean Strang come on afterward and challenge some of Kratz' claims. I'd love to see them featured simultaneously on some program, though.

This one is kinda weird because it almost doesn't need to be debunked. It's simply self evidently not true to anyone who's followed both cases. The fact that Kratz cant even admit this much is just a testament to his dishonesty and narcissism.

 

[Applesauce]

Kratz as recently as the FOX News interview still maintains that the prosecution's story didn't change from the Avery Trial to the Dassey trial. The man is warped.

Kratz is a piece of shit, plain and simple.