Support NeoGAF

[SummitAve]

Yeah that stuff has been talked to death already in this thread. There's two sides to all those points so it just depends on which persepctive you are considering, and the fact remains that Avery did not receive a fair trial.

 

[Tatsumi Oga]

Yeah that stuff has been talked to death already in this thread. There's two sides to all those points so it just depends on which persepctive you are considering, and the fact remains that Avery did not receive a fair trial.

Ah i see man. I didn't know that. Haven't checked the whole thread out yet. Started talking about the doc and went from there. Do you happen to know in what page it is talked about..cause....damn 3000+ pages....

 

[SummitAve]

Ah i see man. I didn't know that. Haven't checked the whole thread out yet. Started talking about the doc and went from there. Do you happen to know in what page it is talked about..cause....damn 3000+ pages....

Yeah I want to say those were some of the points Kratz brought up that weren't included in the doc after the first wave of media hit recently. Its not reasonable to expect everything would be featured in the doc, and there has also been plenty of facts brought up that do support Avery that were left out as well.

There's an endless list of these questionable details, and the intrigue over whether or not he killed her distracts from the more glaring issues of a fair trial. We will likely never know what happened unless significant new evidence turns up so I feel the focus should be put on what we know for sure. The trial and investigation were BS.

 

[Tatsumi Oga]

Yeah I want to say those were some of the points Kratz brought up that weren't included in the doc after the first wave of media hit recently. Its not reasonable to expect everything would be featured in the doc, and there has also been plenty of facts brought up that do support Avery that were left out as well.

Yeah exactly. I definitely believe that.

The guy i was talking to is putting a lot of stock into that book Kratz is writing, i definitely can't say i think the same. Not at all. Not one bit.

 

[TheRagnCajun]

I've said it before in this thread and I think its worth saying again: This movie taught me more than anything not to form an opinion based on information/testimony/evidence not properly established and argued in court - even if the system is flawed. All this stuff about Steven's past and other evidence is interesting, and its good discussion, but I won't be satisfied until he gets his day in court to fight it and do so with a fair trial.

 

[gamz]

Yeah exactly. I definitely believe that.

The guy i was talking to is putting a lot of stock into that book Kratz is writing, i definitely can't say i think the same. Not at all. Not one bit.

Kratz probably the last person you want any information from.

 

[gamerMan]

I think the problem with this case is that in order to believe Stephen Avery, you going to have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the cops are crooked. When you accuse the cops in our systems, the cops are presumed innocent until proven guilty not the suspect. In our criminal justice system, you can't accuse the cops and expect to win unless you have more than circumstantial evidence. The government has a enormous power and if they wanted to frame someone, they could. I don't know if they did here, because all the evidence was circumstantial. If there was a reliable test for EDTA that would have done it.

This is just one case that we have heard about but I am sure these type of cases happen all the time. What judge, prosecutor, or supreme court is going to believe you if you say your defense is that the cops are crooked? None.

I'm pretty sure Stephen Avery would have gotten off if his defense didn't accuse the cops. There just was not enough evidence to convict him beyond a reasonable doubt in the case.

 

[Giant Panda]

I'm pretty sure Stephen Avery would have gotten off if his defense didn't accuse the cops. There just was not enough evidence to convict him beyond a reasonable doubt in the case.

There was a ton of evidence though, just most of it was either likely planted, or obtained in a faulty way like Brendan's confession. If the defense didn't question that evidence it would have been a slam dunk conviction.

 

[gamz]

I think the problem with this case is that in order to believe Stephen Avery, you going to have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the cops are crooked. When you accuse the cops in our systems, the cops are presumed innocent until proven guilty not the suspect. In our criminal justice system, you can't accuse the cops and expect to win unless you have more than circumstantial evidence. The government has a enormous power and if they wanted to frame someone, they could. I don't know if they did here, because all the evidence was circumstantial. If there was a reliable test for EDTA that would have done it.

This is just one case that we have heard about but I am sure these type of cases happen all the time. What judge, prosecutor, or supreme court is going to believe you if you say your defense is that the cops are crooked? None.

I'm pretty sure Stephen Avery would have gotten off if his defense didn't accuse the cops. There just was not enough evidence to convict him beyond a reasonable doubt in the case.

What did you want the defense to do? That was the obvious narrative.

 

[NIGHT-]

This case has so many twist and turns its unreal. I don't know if Avery did it, but it's clear he didn't have a fair case.

 

[robochimp]

For anyone in the Milwaukee area; Strang and Buting live in concert, March 18th Riverside theater.

http://www.pabsttheater.org/show/strangbuting

 

[kingocfs]

For anyone in the Milwaukee area; Strang and Buting live in concert, March 18th Riverside theater.

http://www.pabsttheater.org/show/strangbuting

lol

In all seriousness I hope they tour.

 

[poppabk]

I think the problem with this case is that in order to believe Stephen Avery, you going to have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the cops are crooked. When you accuse the cops in our systems, the cops are presumed innocent until proven guilty not the suspect. In our criminal justice system, you can't accuse the cops and expect to win unless you have more than circumstantial evidence. The government has a enormous power and if they wanted to frame someone, they could. I don't know if they did here, because all the evidence was circumstantial. If there was a reliable test for EDTA that would have done it.

I'm surprised that there wasn't more done with regards to the EDTA. It was presented at trial as proof that the blood didn't come from that vial, but it hardly proved that. There should have been a mock sample prepared from the vial to see if EDTA was detectable in a sample they knew came from the vial. The expert should have not been able to say that samples he didn't test did not contain EDTA, honestly I am surprised that wasn't sufficient to get a new trial.

 

[Dalek]

lol

In all seriousness I hope they tour.

Theyre opening for Deep Purple this summer.

 

[Haines]

Im only on ep 6 so unless something changes i dont understand how he isnt guilty after brandons confession

The kid crumbles under pressure only to back pedal when he realises confessing isnt helping him.

You have someone confessing to doing it with him for no reason to lie, and you guys think hes innocent? Maybe something happens in the next few eps tho

 

[Dalek]

Im only on ep 6 so unless something changes i dont understand how he isnt guilty after brandons confession

The kid crumbles under pressure only to back pedal when he realises confessing isnt helping him.

You have someone confessing to doing it with him for no reason to lie, and you guys think hes innocent? Maybe something happens in the next few eps tho

Are...you doing something else while watching?

 

[f0nz0]

Im only on ep 6 so unless something changes i dont understand how he isnt guilty after brandons confession

The kid crumbles under pressure only to back pedal when he realises confessing isnt helping him.

You have someone confessing to doing it with him for no reason to lie, and you guys think hes innocent? Maybe something happens in the next few eps tho

The kid "confesses" later on the cops arrest him..His thought process is "man I'm gonna miss wrestlemania" this kid isn't all there mentally

 

[Haines]

Are...you doing something else while watching?

Browsing the net.

I thought i watched and listened to his talks with his mom tho.

The kid confessed like 3 seperate times to cops and a couple times to his mom.

I understand he isnt all there, but he wouldnt just make up a whole murder and confess to it?

 

[hey_monkey]

He didn't make it up wholesale. They asked leading questions until they got what they wanted. Even goddamned O'Kelly told him what to draw in that interview. So this kid answers ten versions of "and the head, what happened to her head?" and then asks if he gets to go to school to turn his project in. Since after all, they told him often that if he just spilled, he'd be fine.

Garbage humans, all of them.

 

[figadapaura]

I feel like you can't have watched Brendan's "confessions" properly if it's not obvious that the police took complete advantage of him. The sad reality is that people confess to crimes they had absolutely no involvement in all the time.

 

[entremet]

Does anyone know why the Avery's seem to have what may be considered pretty broad cognitive impairments?

Lead paint? Substance abuse in utero?

 

[figadapaura]

The fact of the matter is confessions themselves, coerced or not, don't mean shit. Especially ones that contradict each other and don't match the evidence. There is absolutely no physical evidence that puts Brendan anywhere near this crime and the prosecution's theory is fucking absurd considering the evidence we do have. Doubt is beyond reasonable in this case.

Does anyone know why the Avery's seem to have what may be considered pretty broad cognitive impairments?

Lead paint? Substance abuse in utero?

Whatever it is seems to have affected more than just the Averys.

 

[Tatsumi Oga]

I know you should never really take anyone at face value, especially not lawyers, because they simply will do all they can to exonerate their client. Even when it's crystal clear someone did it. But Steven's two lawyers that we saw in the doc, Strang and Buting, right? I thought they are really genuine and they mean well. You can clearly see how shocked they are by the whole case and that the guy simply isn't getting a shot at a fair trial. They certainly appear more genuine and real to me then the guy Brendan had as a lawyer, the one that was fired.

This whole case reminded me of this by the way

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_McMillian

And of course

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randall_Dale_Adams

The second one has a reall well done documentary as well.

 

[Giant Panda]

The fact of the matter is confessions themselves, coerced or not, don't mean shit. Especially ones that contradict each other and don't match the evidence. There is absolutely no physical evidence that puts Brendan anywhere near this crime and the prosecution's theory is fucking absurd considering the evidence we do have. Doubt is beyond reasonable in this case.



Whatever it is seems to have affected more than just the Averys.

Yes, confessions can be pretty unreliable especially when police put pressure on the suspect. I recommend to anyone doubting this to watch the Central Park 5 doc on Netflix for more proof.

 

[U2NUMB]

Browsing the net.

I thought i watched and listened to his talks with his mom tho.

The kid confessed like 3 seperate times to cops and a couple times to his mom.

I understand he isnt all there, but he wouldnt just make up a whole murder and confess to it?

I think he mentioned or I totally recall him thinking if he just told them what they wanted to hear he could go home and play video games or watch WWF or something like that. The problem with his confessions to me is if it was ANYTHING like how he said it went down there would have been mountains of evidence in that room.

 

[Messypandas]

Watching again I actually laughed out loud when they mentioned the Chief Deputy had Avery's profile sketch framed and hung in his office even while he knew he was innocent. The whole thing is a nightmarish black comedy.

 

[Colocho]

Browsing the net.

I thought i watched and listened to his talks with his mom tho.

The kid confessed like 3 seperate times to cops and a couple times to his mom.

I understand he isnt all there, but he wouldnt just make up a whole murder and confess to it?

Notice he just agrees with whatever the cops are telling him. He rarely, if ever, tells them new information without the cops pressing him.

 

[Kill3r7]

I'm surprised that there wasn't more done with regards to the EDTA. It was presented at trial as proof that the blood didn't come from that vial, but it hardly proved that. There should have been a mock sample prepared from the vial to see if EDTA was detectable in a sample they knew came from the vial. The expert should have not been able to say that samples he didn't test did not contain EDTA, honestly I am surprised that wasn't sufficient to get a new trial.

Once the judge allowed the expert to testify and test results to be introduced into evidence there wasn't much else the defense attorneys could do at trial outside of question the methodology and validity of the test results on cross, which they did. It is also safe to assume that they objected to the evidence being introduced just to preserve the record.

 

[Woody Invincible]

Watching again I actually laughed out loud when they mentioned the Chief Deputy had Avery's profile sketch framed and hung in his office even while he knew he was innocent. The whole thing is a nightmarish black comedy.

Dude was so proud of that sketch. Really sad to think that sketch is that man's crowning achievement.

 

[CapitalismSucks DonkeyBalls]

Does anyone know why the Avery's seem to have what may be considered pretty broad cognitive impairments?

Lead paint? Substance abuse in utero?

Rumored incest as well. Unsubstantiated, but it could lead credence to the wide-spread cognitive impairments found in various family members.

Dude was so proud of that sketch. Really sad to think that sketch is that man's crowning achievement.

And it fucking sucked too. Terrible "drawing."

 

[Messypandas]

And it fucking sucked too. Terrible "drawing."

Fucking tracers

 

[Gruco]

Browsing the net.

I thought i watched and listened to his talks with his mom tho.

The kid confessed like 3 seperate times to cops and a couple times to his mom.

I understand he isnt all there, but he wouldnt just make up a whole murder and confess to it?

False confessions are alarmingly common and easy to get. The interview with Brendan is textbook in terms of how he's being lead, how he doesn't realize the seriousness of the situation, his eagerness to please authority figures, and the unwillingness of the cops to hear any answer except the one they've decided on.

Worth a listen:

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/507/confessions?act=1#play

 

[TheStruggler]

the only time i laughed during this whole documentary was when Brendan would phone the mom and they begin the convo with "hello" "yeah" "yeah". I feel so bad for Brendan though he was manipulated and the cops said he could trust them and eventually go home, he thought that if he lied and told them what they wanted to hear he would be able to go home to watch wrestlemania. They took advantage of a 16 year old boy, that had the cognitive ability of a 7-10 year old. So much shame.

 

[BronsonLee]

Dude was so proud of that sketch. Really sad to think that sketch is that man's crowning achievement.

His sketch was better than DNA evidence!

 

[TheYanger]

Browsing the net.

I thought i watched and listened to his talks with his mom tho.

The kid confessed like 3 seperate times to cops and a couple times to his mom.

I understand he isnt all there, but he wouldnt just make up a whole murder and confess to it?

Beyond what everyone else said...you realize what he confessed to is basically completely counter to all of the evidence too, right? Like, whether they did it or not, what Brendan said happened CLEARLY did not happen.

That's WHY they didn't use the confession.

 

[CapitalismSucks DonkeyBalls]

Fucking tracers

Might as well have framed Avery's picture and said, "I drew that."

 

[TheStruggler]

Beyond what everyone else said...you realize what he confessed to is basically completely counter to all of the evidence too, right? Like, whether they did it or not, what Brendan said happened CLEARLY did not happen.

That's WHY they didn't use the confession.

Yea the whole confession and evidence is bogus because they sent two men away on two different stories which doesnt make sense because if Brendan was an accomplice, the stories would be the same. They convicted Steven for the garage murder, they convicted Brendan for the "bed, slit throat" murder. It does not align up at all!

 

[NIGHT-]

It's quite frustrating to read that most people on my Facebook seem to think he's guilty. Their reasons? All the stuff that was left out of the documentary that shape him up to be a "killer"... Sigh

 

[figadapaura]

I sincerely hope that people would change their minds on the 'stuff that was left out' if they knew that the origin is Ken Kratz. Show them the letter he sent Steven in prison. Gross worm of a human being.

The media really do have a lot to answer for and that's why they should never be involved in cases to the extent they were this one.

 

[Coop]

Ken kratz sent him a letter?

 

[number11]

Just finished watching this. There's probably nothing more I can add to the conversation...

But I just wanted to say that Manitowoc has some extremely attractive journalists lol. I want a documentary just about that guy with the grey hair and lady in the glasses.

 

[Applesauce]

Ken kratz sent him a letter?

Yeah, sent him a letter trying to get him to confess so he could write a book or some shit.

 

[Doodis]

Am I the only one who kept thinking of 12 Angry Men while watching this? That came out in the 50s, and it's like we've learned nothing as a society since then.

To spoil the film if you've never seen it, here's the last line of the wikipedia summary: There is no indication as to whether the boy is actually guilty or not; instead the film makes it clear that this is outside of the question – if the jurors cannot be certain that he is guilty, if there is any reasonable doubt, they must acquit him.

 

[msdstc]

That was not a vacuum container. It was just a ordinary glass tube with a purple cap. And the laboratory itself said that they don't poke holes on the caps to draw blood from the tube, (which makes total sense, since when you are testing blood you are NOT using a syringe and a needle to draw the blood from the tube). THe drop of blood should not be there, and even if it wasn't, the seals being broken are more than enough evidence to tell someone used that blood for something at some point in time.

LOL it says vacutainer right on the tube. Again this is what the documentary has handled poorly. They've completely misrepresented the whole blood tube scandal.

 

[Dalek]

Am I the only one who kept thinking of 12 Angry Men while watching this? That came out in the 50s, and it's like we've learned nothing as a society since then.

To spoil the film if you've never seen it, here's the last line of the wikipedia summary: There is no indication as to whether the boy is actually guilty or not; instead the film makes it clear that this is outside of the question – if the jurors cannot be certain that he is guilty, if there is any reasonable doubt, they must acquit him.

I thought about it the entire time, and you're right. Society hasn't learned. They never consider reasonable doubt-they think "Well, if he didn't do it-who did?"

 

[Major Williams]

Just watched the first episode last night. This got my blood boiling. I can't believe there's more episodes. I can't believe I care about a small case in a small town.. but I can't stop watching.

 

[Haines]

The fact of the matter is confessions themselves, coerced or not, don't mean shit. Especially ones that contradict each other and don't match the evidence. There is absolutely no physical evidence that puts Brendan anywhere near this crime and the prosecution's theory is fucking absurd considering the evidence we do have. Doubt is beyond reasonable in this case.



Whatever it is seems to have affected more than just the Averys.

Ok, did he not get jailed for life tho? Im on ep 7, but i do remember the judge saying there was no reason to not take his confession seriously

 

[figadapaura]

Ok, did he not get jailed for life tho? Im on ep 7, but i do remember the judge saying there was no reason to not take his confession seriously

So what? Someone being convicted only makes them legally guilty, not necessarily actually guilty. Without that distinction Steven would still be a convicted rapist.

Maybe finish the documentary first, but I'd advise you to watch or read more of his interviews. It's painstakingly obvious that the police are feeding him lines. I can't fathom why the judge deemed it admissable, but after watching the documentary I can't be sure he's not corrupt like the rest of the fucks in that town.

False confessions happen. A lot. Don't blindly trust LEO's. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkLHXKHb1Vc

 

[SlaughterX]

Lol @ all the people in the first page thinking the should spend the rest of his life in prison for accidentally fireballing a cat. I mean yeah it's wrong and stupid (this guy isn't too intelligent to begin with), but come on. Animal crusaders need to stop being so dramatic.

Anyway I'm late but I just watched the first episode a couple of days ago after hearing so much about it and yeah, police do some fucked up shit, not to mention state attorneys and prosecutors, and they should be held accountable for ruining innocent peoples lives just because.

 

[gamz]

Wow. Fantastic Q&A with Errol Morris. His thoughts of MAM and his own doc Thin Blue Line. The dude is a master documentarian and he was really generous praising MAM.

http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/...the_thin_blue_line_and_making_a_murderer.html

There’s something so horrific about process in that story. Another thing that I was struck by watching Making a Murderer was the feeling of the inexorable grinding of a machine that is producing, potentially, error. You know, Brendan Dassey is forced to confess to something that he didn’t do. It’s never explained in the court how it is that it is assumed that Brendan Dassey is telling the truth, but there’s actually no evidence for what he’s saying—none.

And there are many, many unanswered questions. Certainly, the question of their innocence or guilt—particularly, Steven Avery’s innocence or guilt. If you’re asking me, would I sign a petition stating that I believe that Steven Avery is innocent? Well, I don’t know. I really don’t know from watching Making a Murderer, but there’s one thing I do know from watching Making a Murderer—that neither Brendan Dassey nor Steven Avery received a fair trial, and that that trial should be overturned.