Support NeoGAF

[RedNumberFive]

I only watched the first two episodes for now, so obviously I'm far from having a complete picture of the case, but Theresa's brother reaction was strange a couple of times in the second episode, if the episode "timeline" is actually consistent with the actual order of events. Just few days after the disappearance (less than 5) he seemed very calm and collected in interviews and almost "confident" in Theresa's death, talking about "grieving process" and "moving on" (maybe it's a language barrier thing, since english is not my first language, but it seems awfully soon to talk about grieving and moving on after so few days). In another interview though, when he and Theresa's ex boyfriend are asked if they were on the site, he kinds of...freaks out? He seems very nervous about the subject (admittedly even the ex boyfriend seemed upset)

Obviously I'm not pointing fingers or anything like that, it just felt strange, there's really not much to go on at this time. Sorry for playing detective lol

It's not a language barrier thing. The brother sounded pretty strange.

 

[Mad Season]

STEVEN AVERY'S EX-FIANCEE "STEVEN TIED ME TO THE BED, TOO"

http://www.tmz.com/2016/01/18/steven-avery-jodi-wife-letter-making-a-murderer/

Jodi Stachowski, the ex-fiancee of "Making a Murderer's" Steven Avery, claims he put her in forced circumstances similar to those of murder victim Teresa Halbach.
Jodi tells us she believes Brendan Dassey's retelling of Teresa Halbach's rape and murder, because Steven had at one point tied her to a bedpost with rope and tried to videotape it. She says Steven wanted to have sex while she was restrained but she was so adamant he backed down.
Jodi says Steven has a history of using fear as a weapon ... her most recent evidence of this is a letter she got from him in August, asking for money.

 

[Always-honest]

STEVEN AVERY'S EX-FIANCEE "STEVEN TIED ME TO THE BED, TOO"

http://www.tmz.com/2016/01/18/steven-avery-jodi-wife-letter-making-a-murderer/

Yeah, i have no doubt he's all kinds of fucked up. But that doesn't mean he killed Theresa.
This won't help him though, that's for sure. People will be less inclined to help him after hearing her confession.

Damn, that interview is heartbreaking. i hope for truth's sake that she is speaking the truth.
So much trash from all directions. Those letters... Ffffuck.

Those letters, lol... Damn i also read it in his voice.

Watch the interview people. There is so much more.

 

[alr1ght]

i read that in his voice

 

[DCX]

Just watching episode three. Just insane shit..

The justice system up until now is corrupt as fuck!

DCX

 

[Nappuccino]

STEVEN AVERY'S EX-FIANCEE "STEVEN TIED ME TO THE BED, TOO"

http://www.tmz.com/2016/01/18/steven-avery-jodi-wife-letter-making-a-murderer/

In some ways, wouldn't this make Steven less a suspect? He backed down when she was adamant.

Clearly the guy isn't all there, but he seems to have some level of decency.

 

[someday]

I only watched the first two episodes for now, so obviously I'm far from having a complete picture of the case, but Theresa's brother reaction was strange a couple of times in the second episode, if the episode "timeline" is actually consistent with the actual order of events. Just few days after the disappearance (less than 5) he seemed very calm and collected in interviews and almost "confident" in Theresa's death, talking about "grieving process" and "moving on" (maybe it's a language barrier thing, since english is not my first language, but it seems awfully soon to talk about grieving and moving on after so few days). In another interview though, when he and Theresa's ex boyfriend are asked if they were on the site, he kinds of...freaks out? He seems very nervous about the subject (admittedly even the ex boyfriend seemed upset)

Obviously I'm not pointing fingers or anything like that, it just felt strange, there's really not much to go on at this time. Sorry for playing detective lol

Yes, this was weird to me too! Most people wouldn't be talking about the grieving process before actually knowing for sure that their loved one was dead. It was like he already knew she was dead, even before the police knew anything.

 

[NYR]

Jodi seems like trash.

 

[Always-honest]

Jodi seems like trash.

She probably was or mayb still is. But the video interview is interesting.

 

[hey_monkey]

I don't get the issue with the letter to Jodi. So? People do messed up things to each other. No one is going to arrest her because he wrote a letter. The whole thing is asinine and juvenile - it's a couple of people who are uneducated and don't have anything else to do but stir up endless drama. Has nothing to do with anything else.

Again, I grew up around people like this and it's no surprise to me. America is full of this shit. If they were all murdering people, we'd be in trouble.

I'm disturbed by the way people related to the case at all will now be exploited, just as I'm freaked out by people speculating on other killers. Yeah, there are people who should have been investigated but they weren't and honestly, no one knows. Anything could have happened to that woman. I doubt we will ever know.

 

[Always-honest]

Maybe best to just watch the interview.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HTz673OMTF0&feature=youtu.be

Good interviewer, by the way.

 

[MIMIC]

I keep hearing about this and my professor has been raving about it. Imma have to give this a watch.

 

[Always-honest]

I keep hearing about this and my professor has been raving about it. Imma have to give this a watch.

You should. And it will get a sequel. No doubt about it. This will be talked about for a while.

 

[News Bot]

He might be guilty of domestic abuse, but being into bondage doesn't mean he's a rapist and murderer.

In fact, everything his ex says to justify her belief that he murdered Teresa (in spite of the glaring impossibility in Dassey's account) is false equivalence. Also how was he going to "make her pay" if she didn't make him look good... if he was in prison serving a life sentence? Her initial claim that police were pressuring her is now "they just wanted to get to the truth"? All that affection for Steven was all just an act now? Wasn't she arrested for continuing to visit Steven?

This case is FUBAR.

 

[Not a Jellyfish]

Jodie (Avery's ex) saying those things doesn't really mean much.

One, it shows that he showed restraint and did not just rape her.

Two, she had a documented drinking problem. For all we know she is talking to TMZ for money to purchase alcohol. Yes that is assuming the worst with this person but never know.

Edit: Even watching the above interview with her, I don't see why all of this comes out now. It just doesn't make sense.

 

[Tatsumi Oga]

What the hell. That really surprises me. I watched up till episode 6 and while watching it with my brother, we both said that he's lucky to have a girlfriend who sticks by him so much and doesn't just give up easily. In the documentary there was a part where she said they wanted her to move, find a job and stop seeing him. But she said that was never going to happen. Cause they eventually broke up then. I find it incredibly hard to believe how all that time she was standing by his side, supporting him and believing in him and now all of a sudden she believes he did it? Some people man..... goddamn.

I watched a bit of the video but I am not in the mood right now. What the fuck is it with some people? In the documentary she was so supportive of him, not a bad word, phonecalls where they talk about marriage and all that stuff. This new interview begins and what does she say about her relationship? That it was bad, stuff about a blow dryer and that he'd throw it in the bathtub if she was in it and he would get away with it. Really? So.... so very hard to believe. The relationship is over and she has plenty of reasons to just go on TV and spew lies.

 

[Vampire On Titus]

I wouldn't be so quick to just write Jodi off as trash Her interview is a sad one and it seems like she struggles with fairly severe alcoholism.

Still there are suspicious elements of her story as well as the timing of the reveal. This coming out of the Nancy Grace camp and now TMZ... Definitely a bit sketchy.

She's claiming Steven threatened her, making her lie to the film-makers. I wonder if this was during the period where all Steven's calls were being recorded? Laura and Moira were filming the Avery's for 10 years, traveling back and forth between New York and Wisconsin. I wonder if they know anything about the two boxes of rat poison or any hospitalization at all. It's unlikely something like that wouldn't make the series, though.

It would be interesting to hear their impressions on the Jodi reveal, regardless.

 

[Dan]

Avery's character isn't what should be on trial. Almost none of this is relevant to the case. Her opinion of Avery, positive or negative, doesn't matter. Hell, Avery's guilt or innocence doesn't really matter with respect to the utter insanity of what was allowed in the investigation and trials. That's unacceptable. There's no part of this story that ends with convincing everyone that Avery is guilty so everything that led to him being put in prison is all good.

I'm also pretty cynical about anything HLN, the whole network thrives on salacious crime stories. It's the home of Nancy Grace, every prosecutor's best friend for tainting public opinion. Anyone charged of anything is guilty, guilty! The crazy bitch that berated a mother about her missing son, driving the woman to suicide. Nancy Grace who's been going around this week saying she believes Len Kachinsky did absolutely nothing wrong. This is just FUD.

 

[Vampire On Titus]

Avery's character isn't what should be on trial. Almost none of this is relevant to the case. Her opinion of Avery, positive or negative, doesn't matter. Hell, Avery's guilt or innocence doesn't really matter with respect to the utter insanity of what was allowed in the investigation and trials. That's unacceptable. There's no part of this story that ends with convincing everyone that Avery is guilty so everything that led to him being put in prison is all good.

I'm also pretty cynical about anything HLN, the whole network thrives on salacious crime stories. It's the home of Nancy Grace, every prosecutor's best friend for tainting public opinion. Anyone charged of anything is guilty, guilty! The crazy bitch that berated a mother about her missing son, driving the woman to suicide. Nancy Grace who's been going around this week saying she believes Len Kachinsky did absolutely nothing wrong. This is just FUD.

I agree with you completely that the Jodi interviews are immaterial to determining Steven Avery's guilt.

 

[hey_monkey]

I wouldn't be so quick to just write Jodi off as trash Her interview is a sad one and it seems like she struggles with fairly severe alcoholism.

Still there are suspicious elements of her story as well as the timing of the reveal. This coming out of the Nancy Grace camp and now TMZ... Definitely a bit sketchy.

She's claiming Steven threatened her, making her lie to the film-makers. I wonder if this was during the period where all Steven's calls were being recorded? Laura and Moira were filming the Avery's for 10 years, traveling back and forth between New York and Wisconsin. I wonder if they know anything about the two boxes of rat poison or any hospitalization at all. It's unlikely something like that wouldn't make the series, though.

It would be interesting to hear their impressions on the Jodi reveal, regardless.

When he was in jail, yes, all his calls were recorded.

I have some issues with this. I haven't watched it all yet, because I find it hard to get through -- her pauses and struggles, etc. -- but some of the things really raise questions for me. Yes, things I said back then were true followed immediately with a totally different version that was also true and is supposed to be an accurate memory of something eight years before when she just couldn't remember something that happened eight years before. As with almost everything else in this case, there are gaping holes. I don't find this evidence of anything but that they were, and are, tragic figures, and that I already knew.

 

[Yen]

Can someone rejig my memory: what was the issue with the policeman who called in asking for/with details of the missing vehicle? I can't remember anything about this. He was able to match the plates to the car, or something? Forgive my vagueness, it's late, but this was in the first half of the series I believe.

 

[Dalek]

Can someone rejig my memory: what was the issue with the policeman who called in asking for/with details of the missing vehicle? I can't remember anything about this. He was able to match the plates to the car, or something? Forgive my vagueness, it's late, but this was in the first half of the series I believe.

The officer called into double-check the license plate of the missing car-he read it off and then asked if it was a RAV4. Obviously it seems he was looking at the car and confirming that what he was looking for was the vehicle in question and it seemed like a strange call. His body language when he is being questioned about this is suspicious as well.

1) Teresa visits Avery Property 10/31
2) She is reported missing on 11/3
3) Colburn calls in plates 11/3
4) Car is found, without plates 11/5

Here's the exchange... there is literally NO delay between the questions being asked and answered, and the entire exchange occurs within 20 seconds:
Dispatch: Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department, this is Lynn
Colborn: Lynn
Lynn: Hi Andy
Colborn: Can you run Sam-William-Henry-582?
Lynn: Um, OK, it shows that she's a missing person and it lists to Teresa Halbach.
Colborn: OK
Lynn: OK, that's what you're looking for, Andy?
Colborn: Ninety-nine Toyota?
Lynn: Yep
Colborn: OK thank you
Lynn: You're so welcome, bye-bye

 

[Saya]

The officer called into double-check the license plate of the missing car-he read it off and then asked if it was a RAV4. Obviously it seems he was looking at the car and confirming that what he was looking for was the vehicle in question and it seemed like a strange call. His body language when he is being questioned about this is suspicious as well.

This. And it happened two days before the car was "officially" found by Pam Sturm I believe.

Also, interestingly, when the car was found the license plates were gone. They were later found in another vehicle on the yard.

 

[LifEndz]

Wow, what a story.

So many things here that show the police / judicial system failed. Things like the Manitowoc police being involved in the investigation despite the obvious conflicts of interest and the promises of not being involved. The tube with Avery's blood, and the box containing it being tampered with (why on earth would that happen?). The disgusting way that the police keeps giving hints to Brendan Dassey on what they want him to say, and the fact that a clearly retarded 16 year old boy got treated as if he was capable of testifying accurately. Even if I completely ignore this case and Avery/Brendan, this series shows in a powerful way that the system can be very messed up.

Regarding Brendan's confession, I really don't see how him + Avery were able to clean up so well the bloody crime scene that the confession paints. It's so hard to believe that these two not at all bright guys could clean up all that blood, marks on the bed from shackles being pulled, Brendan's DNA etc.

Yeah. Those two criminal masterminds thoroughly and completely cleaned the room and garage of all physical evidence, but forgot to dispose of the car in the crusher and left blood stains in the car...despite having gloves on. Oh and can't forget the key just so conveniently being left in Steven's room. How anyone could think the prosecution satisfied its burden of proof is beyond me.

 

[KingBroly]

Jodie (Avery's ex) saying those things doesn't really mean much.

One, it shows that he showed restraint and did not just rape her.

Two, she had a documented drinking problem. For all we know she is talking to TMZ for money to purchase alcohol. Yes that is assuming the worst with this person but never know.

Edit: Even watching the above interview with her, I don't see why all of this comes out now. It just doesn't make sense.

Because the story has a lot more attention now because of the documentary. It's going to get people to talk about things, both old and new. It's going to put pressure on certain people to say things they may have been hesitant about before.

 

[hey_monkey]

Because the story has a lot more attention now because of the documentary. It's going to get people to talk about things, both old and new. It's going to put pressure on certain people to say things they may have been hesitant about before.

It may also get people to say things that aren't true, for money. The point is, we don't know. All of this happened almost a decade ago - and that's just the more recent stuff.

There's so little around this that's concrete or trustworthy.

 

[Mr. Mister]

Jumping in to post this article which does a great job summarizing my issues.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/01/25/dead-certainty

It's well worth reading the entire thing. Also worth noting that the woman who was attacked that sent Avery away the first time refused to be interviewed because she felt the film makers were biased.

Given her history, Beerntsen does not need any convincing that a criminal prosecution can go catastrophically awry. But when Ricciardi and Demos approached her about participating in “Making a Murderer” she declined, chiefly because, while her own experience with the criminal-justice system had led her to be wary of certitude, the filmmakers struck her as having already made up their minds. “It was very clear from the outset that they believed Steve was innocent,” she told me. “I didn’t feel they were journalists seeking the truth. I felt like they had a foregone conclusion and were looking for a forum in which to express it.”

 

[Vampire On Titus]

Dean Strang's comments on the Jodi interview @ 14:35

 

[poppabk]

Jumping in to post this article which does a great job summarizing my issues.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/01/25/dead-certainty

It's well worth reading the entire thing. Also worth noting that the woman who was attacked that sent Avery away the first time refused to be interviewed because she felt the film makers were biased.

What are the multiple alleged physical and sexual assaults that the film makers left out?

 

[Mr. Mister]

What are the multiple alleged physical and sexual assaults that the film makers left out?

What are you even talking about?

 

[Dan]

Jumping in to post this article which does a great job summarizing my issues.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/01/25/dead-certainty

It's well worth reading the entire thing. Also worth noting that the woman who was attacked that sent Avery away the first time refused to be interviewed because she felt the film makers were biased.

Article heads off the rails with this:

Perhaps because they are dodging inconvenient facts, Ricciardi and Demos are never able to present a coherent account of Halbach’s death, let alone multiple competing ones. Although “Making a Murderer” is structured chronologically, it fails to provide a clear time line of events, and it never answers such basic questions as when, where, and how Halbach died. Potentially critical issues are raised and summarily dropped; we hear about suspicious calls to and messages on Halbach’s cell phone, but these are never explored or even raised again. In the end, despite ten hours of running time, the story at the heart of “Making a Murderer” remains a muddle. Granted, real life is often a muddle, too, especially where crime is involved—but good reporters delineate the facts rather than contribute to the confusion.

Like, of course the documentary can't provide a coherent account of Halbach's death. Neither can the state, with its differing stories depending on which person they're prosecuting. There's no accounting of her death that doesn't require leaps in logic to overcome all the missing physical evidence and contradictory claims, or to otherwise explain what is there.

Then later the article starts conflating lazy Internet petitions with the aims of the documentary, which is just asinine. Morons begging the White House to pardon Avery doesn't mean the documentary itself was only interested in proving he was innocent, getting him free, and ignoring all the institutional problems. The doc gives the lawyers a ton of camera time in the last couple episodes to point out the big problems in our justice system.

It keeps going on about how the petition reflects poorly on the documentary, but that's on the audience. Portions of the viewership being misinformed about law or equally and unjustifiably certain in Avery's innocence doesn't make those same conclusions the point of the doc. There were plenty of morons who thought Skyler was a bitchy impediment to Walt in Breaking Bad, but that doesn't mean it's backed up by the actual show.

 

[Vampire On Titus]

Making a Murderer - Edward Wayne Edwards theory

All conjecture, All speculation and altogether pretty conspiratorial... But if this turns out to be true holy shit would it make for the greatest 2nd season of anything ever. Definetely the most bizarre of the alternative theories I've seen so far.

 

[Nappuccino]

Jumping in to post this article which does a great job summarizing my issues.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/01/25/dead-certainty

It's well worth reading the entire thing. Also worth noting that the woman who was attacked that sent Avery away the first time refused to be interviewed because she felt the film makers were biased.

I read this earlier, and while the article is very well written and raises important concerns, I don't think continuing to portray iffy evidence (the perspiration that is "impossible to plant," for example) as proof Avery is guilty seems like a case of one step forward, two steps back. The concerns are valid, and much of what the author says is worth considering, but moments like that are frustrating to me.

Also, while watching the documentary, I personally never felt like Making a Murder was arguing that Avery was innocent, or the only one this happens to--later interviews with Strang basically prove as much--but instead showing the incredible ways the police department fucked things up with seemingly a target on Avery. I suppose I can see why some people might reach the innocent conclusion, but I never felt that--aside, maybe Brendan. I also don't understand why the documentary makers should have pointed fingers at other possible perps. That just seems inane and a great way to bring libel suits on the show.

 

[Vampire On Titus]

Seems like the article wanted MaM to be "Serial." Where the journalist set out with the intention of solving a murder mystery. They don't answer those "basic" questions because they don't have answers. That's the point. Look at all these unanswered questions. Look at all these suspicions and yet a man was still put away for life.

 

[Mr. Mister]

Article heads off the rails with this:

Like, of course the documentary can't provide a coherent account of Halbach's death. Neither can the state, with its differing stories depending on which person they're prosecuting. There's no accounting of her death that doesn't require leaps in logic to overcome all the missing physical evidence and contradictory claims, or to otherwise explain what is there.

Then later the article starts conflating lazy Internet petitions with the aims of the documentary, which is just asinine. Morons begging the White House to pardon Avery doesn't mean the documentary itself was only interested in proving he was innocent, getting him free, and ignoring all the institutional problems. The doc gives the lawyers a ton of camera time in the last couple episodes to point out the big problems in our justice system.

It keeps going on about how the petition reflects poorly on the documentary, but that's on the audience. Portions of the viewership being misinformed about law or equally and unjustifiably certain in Avery's innocence doesn't make those same conclusions the point of the doc. There were plenty of morons who thought Skyler was a bitchy impediment to Walt in Breaking Bad, but that doesn't mean it's backed up by the actual show.

Interesting take but you are really over emphasizing that petition stupidity. My view is exactly what I expressed before. If every case had a documentary made by people convinced of innocence and hence edited appropriately we'd be up in arms about all of them.

Also loving that YouTube video.

 

[Vampire On Titus]

Also loving that YouTube video.

There's pretty much no chance in hell that could possibly be what happened lmao. But if it did it would be the greatest twist ever.

Looking at the dude's website he seems pretty obsessed with pinning every disputed murder case on Edward Edwards. So it's safe to say some heavy confirmation bias is influencing his theory.

 

[Syder]

I only watched the first two episodes for now, so obviously I'm far from having a complete picture of the case, but Theresa's brother reaction was strange a couple of times in the second episode, if the episode "timeline" is actually consistent with the actual order of events. Just few days after the disappearance (less than 5) he seemed very calm and collected in interviews and almost "confident" in Theresa's death, talking about "grieving process" and "moving on" (maybe it's a language barrier thing, since english is not my first language, but it seems awfully soon to talk about grieving and moving on after so few days). In another interview though, when he and Theresa's ex boyfriend are asked if they were on the site, he kinds of...freaks out? He seems very nervous about the subject (admittedly even the ex boyfriend seemed upset)

A lot of people have pointed out not only this but how willing to accept the police's version of events the guy seems. He also seems convinced of Brendan's involvement even though he had never seen the taped 'confession' at that point.

http://i.imgur.com/SOmTuyb.webm

 

[hey_monkey]

I'm sorry, but the filmmakers aren't presenting themselves as journalists, are they? One was a former lawyer and the other just a filmmaker, eh? Unless in interviews or something they've been talking about themselves as journalists, which I certainly may have missed -- I haven't read much from them or even about them. Just the basics on Wikipedia.

I'm just wary of assumptions is all.

eta: Oh, this New Yorker article repeats some of the unproven items, like "sweat" under the hood, details from Dassey's confessions, etc. I wonder if someone's made a chart comparing firm evidence, evidence in disputed (messed up tests, things under accusation of evidence planting, weird timelines, etc.), and things that get repeated but are just wrong. I'd really like to see something like that, but fuck me if I'm going through every page of this thread.

 

[neurosisxeno]

A lot of people have pointed out not only this but how willing to accept the police's version of events the guy seems. He also seems convinced of Brendan's involvement even though he had never seen the taped 'confession' at that point.

Then during Brendan's trial in an interview he says; "I don't know what we're even doing here since we have a taped confession." Because, you know, fuck due process. Mike Hallbach had made up his mind on both Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey before either of them stepped foot in the court room.

 

[pooptest]

I'm sorry, but the filmmakers aren't presenting themselves as journalists, are they? One was a former lawyer and the other just a filmmaker, eh? Unless in interviews or something they've been talking about themselves as journalists, which I certainly may have missed -- I haven't read much from them or even about them. Just the basics on Wikipedia.

I'm just wary of assumptions is all.

eta: Oh, this New Yorker article repeats some of the unproven items, like "sweat" under the hood, details from Dassey's confessions, etc. I wonder if someone's made a chart comparing firm evidence, evidence in disputed (messed up tests, things under accusation of evidence planting, weird timelines, etc.), and things that get repeated but are just wrong. I'd really like to see something like that, but fuck me if I'm going through every page of this thread.

I think, by this point, every piece of evidence pointing to SA has been refuted. Stroll on over to Reddit and there's a number of threads regarding any evidence you may have questions about.

It's just people grasping at straws trying to convince others (this thread included, but no intention to call others out) that SA is, without a doubt, the guilty party.

 

[devilhawk]

The victim's brother does come off as incredibly odd, but what he was being put through makes it hard to decipher what really is and isn't normal.

The lack of blood, rope, hair, fingerprints, DNA just screams towards there being a problem with the prosecutions case. The blood in her car is incredibly convenient and yet oddly misplaced considering the lack of other evidence in the car.

We can't say what truly happened nor rule out Steven's possible involvement. I think it is quite clear that the events did not happen as the prosecution presents though.

 

[Weckum]

He's slow. He didn't understand what was really going on. The part where he tells his mother "I'm stupid" is where I teared up for the kid. He pushed into this confession

Yeah, that part and the part where he's in the courtroom and people are talking about him being "slow". Can you imagine how much that must hurt, hearing people speak about you in front of you?

 

[mattiewheels]

After wrapping up this show last night, and spending way too much time following up on what's happened since, I'm becoming more and more convinced that the ex-boyfriend was involved.

If this is going down the Paradise Lost path, in the next season we'll find some crazy evidence about this like they did with one of the parents of the kids they convicted the West Memphis 3 of killing.

 

[Ayt]

The New Yorker should have just let Kratz write that article.

 

[Dan]

Interesting take but you are really over emphasizing that petition stupidity. My view is exactly what I expressed before. If every case had a documentary made by people convinced of innocence and hence edited appropriately we'd be up in arms about all of them.

I don't think I'm overemphasizing the petition stuff. That's half the article's closing argument, claiming the petition's goals were a direct reflection of the documentary's point, thereby concluding the documentary to be misguided. The other half is criticizing the doc for not becoming a policy paper explicitly listing steps to fix our judicial system.

 

[Bad_Boy]

So I think I caught wind of this show the other day on some random thread on gaf. Something about if you watch the first episode you'll be infuriated, but hooked. But I ended up watching the wrong show... How to get away with murder.

3 episodes later and I was kinda hooked.

So then I realized my error and saw the correct show, Making a murderer. Should I continue with How to get away with murder or start watching Making a murderer?

Somewhat two different shows, but which is better?

 

[Always-honest]

Making a Murderer - Edward Wayne Edwards theory

All conjecture, All speculation and altogether pretty conspiratorial... But if this turns out to be true holy shit would it make for the greatest 2nd season of anything ever. Definetely the most bizarre of the alternative theories I've seen so far.

Holy shit, haha.

 

[It's Reyn Time!]

You know what, even if it turned out the documentary crew were all direct relatives of Avery, being paid by him and using the world's greatest propaganda editor, the actual footage which made it into the documentary is still enough to see that the system failed catastrophically at every level.

 

[electroshockwave]

Then during Brendan's trial in an interview he says; "I don't know what we're even doing here since we have a taped confession." Because, you know, fuck due process. Mike Hallbach had made up his mind on both Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey before either of them stepped foot in the court room.

If nothing else I hope that seeing how O'Kelly and the police worked over Brendan in the appeal hearing gave him some doubts.

 

[Rur0ni]

So I think I caught wind of this show the other day on some random thread on gaf. Something about if you watch the first episode you'll be infuriated, but hooked. But I ended up watching the wrong show... How to get away with murder.

3 episodes later and I was kinda hooked.

So then I realized my error and saw the correct show, Making a murderer. Should I continue with How to get away with murder or start watching Making a murderer?

Somewhat two different shows, but which is better?

:lol

It's supposed to be a good show. It's fiction. "Making a Murderer" is actually real life.