So I just finished watching this and I'm still dumbfounded as to how Brendan was found guilty. His "confession" didn't match the crime scene at all and he was convicted on all three counts. Like how in the fuck does that happen? I know his first lawyer was terrible and was basically tried to get to confess( that part when the investigator literally draws the scene for Brendon is amazing and infuriating at the same time) but I thought the second lawyer was a little better and was trying to fight for him. I will say that it probably wasn't the best idea to put Brendon on the stand. Kid's really not all that bright and when he got asked questions he didn't know the answer to, he said I don't know, which is probably more honest but doesn't come off well. Still, there was NO EVIDENCE connecting him to the crime scene. Just that forced confession that the DA couldn't corroborate because it didn't fucking happen that Brendon later recanted anyway. I feel like Steven didn't get a fair trail but WTF with that Brendon conviction.
-
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
neurosisxeno
Member
That was infuriating. When Steven's Civil Lawyer was deposing him and he keeps insisting he doesn't believe DNA evidence linking Greg whatever his name was to Penny is better proof than a clearly manufactured description that he did a bad job drawing.
RustyNails
Member
The 2nd set of lawyers Brendan received after that snake Kachinsky were barely better. They were inept and cocked up. They don't play the part where Brendan says the cops got to his head and they either don't stop or they make Brendan go on stand. Seriously, you morons. You're going to let a mentally challenged kid like Brendan Dassey go on the stand to be questioned by extremely cunning, experienced, professional trial prosecutors? You let him go on the stand after he shows how clueless he is while talking to the detectives?
Agree it was a terrible idea to let him take the stand. The kid mentally crumbles anytime an adult challenges him and you going to put him on the stand and let that slimeball of a DA question him? Terrible decision that I think sealed his fate but still ALL THREE COUNTS??? I just don't get it. How could they convict that kdi of all three counts? It literally makes no sense.
What else would there have been besides the confession tapes? The best case was to let the jury see the kid wasn't all there.
gamerMan
Member
Something weird that struck me while watching this: If Stephen Avery didn't do it, who did? I mean the cops wouldn't kill Teresa Halbach. Were there any other prints found in the Rav4? Did all the evidence of the real perpetrator disappear? Whoever did it would have had to have a grudge against Stephen Avery. I don't think the cops planted evidence, if anything it had to be one of his family members.
The cops planting the key makes no sense to me. Where did the cops get the key from? They would have had to find it somewhere else and place it at the crime scene. How would they know where the key was unless they murdered Teresa, which makes no sense to me. I mean the cops were searching the place for days and the key was never found on the property. So where did the cops mysteriously find the key before planting it? I think what makes more sense is one of his family members set him up after committing the murder. They somehow planted the evidence in plain sight for the cops to find.
They should have pounded in that there was zero circumstantial evidence corroborating the confession he gave through physical evidence presented to other witnesses.
Which witnesses? What evidence? Hostile witnesses are hard to control on direct.
CapitalismSucks DonkeyBalls
Banned
Go back a few pages in this thread for answers to all of these questions.
In short, though: Teresa's brother discovered the Rav4 and contacted Manitowoc police who sent Colburn to the scene. Colburn called in the license plate of Teresa's and verified that it was a Rav4 (although, at the time, he wouldn't have known the make and model of the vehicle unless he was standing there looking directly at it).
Teresa's brother turned the keys over to Colburn who was then able to later plant it in Avery's home after the multiple searches through his home had been conducted.
As far as possible killers, it's speculated that it could have been anyone including Brandon Dassey and Scott Tadych or, as one adventurous theory has it, Edward Wayne Edwards.
Mackenzie 92
Member
Recent pic of Brendan.
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
I was under the impression that it is entirely the Defendant's decision whether to be examined as a witness. The lawyers may advise but it is ultimately the Defendant's decision. I also got the impression Brendan got on the stand due to his mum telling him to set the story straight.
figadapaura
Member
That pic just makes me sad.
This is true. Dean Strang has explained it numerous times when asked why Steven didn't take the stand. Brendan really wanted to say the police took advantage of him, but as soon as he started getting cross-examined he fell back on just saying 'I don't know'. Shows how easy it is for authority figures to put pressure on him.
This is true. Dean Strang has explained it numerous times when asked why Steven didn't take the stand. Brendan really wanted to say the police took advantage of him, but as soon as he started getting cross-examined he fell back on just saying 'I don't know'. Shows how easy it is for authority figures to put pressure on him.
Nappuccino
Member
It depends on how much you like being angry with the world, I think.
Recent pic of Brendan.
My heart breaks. Damn!
Doesn't the latter mean they shouldn't be charged for the former?
Princess Carl
Member
Recent pic of Brendan.
Makes me cry. Shit is so fucked.
Can i ask since you belive hes guilty.
Do you think he also commited the first crime or do you think being in jail made him crazy?
If he did do the first crime, he wouldnt even really think hey i got away with it i can again, because he was in jail for a long time,
Now if he didnt do it, than why on earth is he a killer now?
Lets say hes guilty. Only thing i can come up with is he was mistakenly assumed not guilty in first case, and got out and couldnt control himself. His nephew was messed up and in his sick world he was helping him get some or whatever it is sick rapists think.
If hes not guilty, than i guess theres a huge conspiracy where cops went dirty bc they looked dirty from first case and just went all the way to protect themselves.
I also still dont believe brandon just admitted to something he didnt do. That was the moment the case went from hmmmm to me to oh ok these guys are just not right in the head. Like branden said, he figured he was fucked the moment he knew what was going on and so he just didnt know how to handle the situation and got himself into jail, bc hell maybe steven would have killed him too
BronsonLee
Member
So Dean Strang and Jerry Buting are going to be having an event near me in the Philadelphia area.
Unfortunately, I can't go because I'll be in Dallas...for Wrestlemania
Unfortunately, I can't go because I'll be in Dallas...for Wrestlemania
TheStruggler
Report me for trolling ND/TLoU2 threads
Recent pic of Brendan.
can see the pain behind that smile, heartbreaking and fucked up
Evolved1
make sure the pudding isn't too soggy but that just ruins everything
Those guys did one hell of a job. Whenever I see actual courtroom footage it's almost always a cringe-fest how badly the lawyers compare to the picture media has painted for decades... but these guys were sharp. And if they weren't genuine, they were damn good actors.
Stark contrast to the seemingly villainous tools on the prosecution. From judges to cops, what a disheartening shitshow.
And we saw how well that worked out. I don't mean to be harsh but kid just isn't smart enough to handle that kind of pressure and as soon as they started in the hard questions, he folded and his attorneys have to have known that was going to happen.
Is that true in this case? We know easily he folds to pressure from authority figures, why couldn't they say "If you testify, you will go to jail for the rest of your life". I'm sure something like that would've worked.
Well there's is definitely more to the story but we will never know that now since the investigation was so poorly done by the police. My feeling is that if you can't trust the police then I'm assuming that Avery is innocent until proven otherwise.
How are they both guilty when your admitting the police planted evidence? The only thing you have to go on is the evidence and if the evidence is planted then what reason could you have to believe that they are guilty?
TheStruggler
Report me for trolling ND/TLoU2 threads
A bigger part of me thinks Avery didnt do it compared to doing it, you think after so long he would just admit it. The guy is taking everything into his hands now to prove his innocence to get out.
Jesus.
Ok, first, you are not supposed to "pick a side" as a jury member, and you are not supposed to think about how much you like the cops or the trials. You are supposed to analyze the evidence presented, discuss with your fellow jury members, and conclude whether or not there is reasonable doubt to best of your ability. That's it.
Read on how the justice system is actually supposed to work.
What in the hell are you talking about here, either?
There is no question on whether or not he was innocent of the first conviction. Period. He wasn't "mistakenly assumed not guilty". He was mistakenly assumed guilty, and eventually exonerated by conclusive evidence.
Your whole interpretation of this case is completely fucking nuts.
How do you square away both ideas at the same time?
Which parts were planted, and which were not that leads you to the conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt?
I don't see how Brendan walks in on his uncle raping and murdering someone, says, "imma help too" and then commits this act without letting anything on to his mom or friends at school.
Brendan just isn't that together to 1) be so unaware as to just go along with a murder and simultaneously be 2) aware enough to not let anything slip.
Even the prosecution couldn't put together a scenario where they did it together. Brendan and Steve were convicted of the same crime committed in two very distinct manners.
TheStruggler
Report me for trolling ND/TLoU2 threads
exactly
Evolved1
make sure the pudding isn't too soggy but that just ruins everything
There is literally zero evidence of his involvement when you remove that obtained under questionable means. The confession putting him there was false. The key and blood were tampered with, likely planted. The bones were likely planted. The bullet was likely planted. It was all suspicious, and far from beyond reasonable doubt. Anything better than stretched circumstantial is fruit from the poison tree.
That cop called in her fucking Rav before the search team "discovered" it. They had the car. He is caught in this lie on the stand!
Finished watching it. Found it far easier to believe Avery was guilty of anything than Brandon. In Brandon's case, would have loved to see a psychologist analyze Brandon, but you're not going to get expert testimony from a case handled by a public defender.
the only things I'll say with any certainty - Manitowoc police should not have been allowed anywhere near Avery's place, and I wouldn't want Avery involved with my sister or aunt.
If there were a definitive way to prove that evidence was planted, then yeah. Mistrial, another trial, whatever, just that the guilty verdict becomes void. However the best the defense could show was motive and opportunity. It is up to the jury to decide how valid each piece of evidence was and factor it all into their deliberation. Obviously they decided either the cops didn't plant the evidence, or that all the other evidence provided still was enough proof that he did it.
the only things I'll say with any certainty - Manitowoc police should not have been allowed anywhere near Avery's place, and I wouldn't want Avery involved with my sister or aunt.
If there were a definitive way to prove that evidence was planted, then yeah. Mistrial, another trial, whatever, just that the guilty verdict becomes void. However the best the defense could show was motive and opportunity. It is up to the jury to decide how valid each piece of evidence was and factor it all into their deliberation. Obviously they decided either the cops didn't plant the evidence, or that all the other evidence provided still was enough proof that he did it.
That's not how reasonable doubt works.
TheStruggler
Report me for trolling ND/TLoU2 threads
this part confuses me can't he serve jail time for lying under oath, the son of a bitch was caught red handed
1. Steven did not commit the rape he went to jail for. No one says he did, it's just not possible.
2. People admit to crimes they did not commit literally all the time, so I don't know what you find so hard to believe about that.
BronsonLee
Member
That'd require him to be charged, which, you know
Reasonable doubt just means the jury thought he was guilty. Not possibly guilty or probably guilty, straight-up guilty. You can have that without believing in the validity of every single piece of evidence.
If you wanted to argue that Manitowoc's involvement compromised the investigation and any of its findings, sure. That's an argument the jury should and likely did have. Maybe the Calumet officers found enough evidence on their own for a conviction. Maybe the jury just believed the Manitowoc police. I have no idea. As difficult as it is for us to argue whether the prosecution met the burden of proof, we're mainly working off of ~10 hours of carefully edited footage vs 6 weeks of testimony.
Tevious
Member
I can think of 36 million reasons why the police could've killed her. Even if they didn't, why would it be out of the realm of possibility that they wouldn't frame him when that's essentially what they did to him in 1985? And they could have even just planted evidence solely because they really did believe he was guilty and they wanted to make sure he got convicted.
The key appears to be the spare key; the one that can start the car, but doesn't open the glove box. There's a picture of Teresa in front of her car and when zoomed in, you can see at least two keys in her hand. This raises a lot of other questions. Unless she was driving around with her spare that day, her original keys appear to be lost, and it makes it seem as though police got that key from either the brother or the roommate and had it planted there.
Vincent Grayson
Member
Thing is, the jury never should have been in the position to make a decision, because the entire thing should've been declared a mistrial many times over. Like, I get how a person on the jury might decide he's guilty without a doubt. What I don't understand is how all the blatant violations of justice didn't tank the trial long before that.
Jmanunknown
Member
You wanted a psychologist to analyze Brendan you got it http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-c...rendan-Dassey-Psych-Evaluation-11-10-2006.pdf
No, many of us have read the full court transcripts.
Zomba13
Member
Oh wow. And they had that at the time?
FrenchMovieTheme
Member
this is scary in that i guarantee there are plenty of average citizens that have this viewpoint. it would be scary as fuck having these random people decide if you were innocent or guilty given that i highly doubt, even after being explained "the rules", people don't understand how things work.
Nappuccino
Member
I mean, I can believe in a world where Steven committed the act, and the police seized the opportunity to make sure he'd go away for it.
I can't believe in a world where Steven would get life for the story presented to court, and yet . . . that happened.
crisdecuba
Member
1. It was proven conclusively through DNA evidence that Steven Avery did not commit the first crime. You might remember that the DNA evidence actually showed who DID assault that lady. Does that make sense?
2. Re: confessing to something you didn't due, check this out for more information: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_confession -- does that make sense?
It's Reyn Time!
Member
That's...not how this works.
Sadly that's exactly how it happened this time.
A Link to the Past
Banned
Nah. Just because police plant evidence doesn't necessarily mean that the victim of the bad evidence is not guilty of the crime they're pinning on him.
TheChewyWaffles
Member
That's what floored me. Where was all the blood splatter? Were they both Dexter or something?
For those who have read the full transcript, what was the prosecution's explanation for the lack of blood? I assume the defense raised the issue on cross.
BruceLeeRoy
Banned
Finally finished this last night.
How depressing.
The worst part is despite how inept the cops were and how shady and manipulative the whole circus became its the jury that I find most upsetting.
That they could come to the conclusion that they were presented enough evidence to hand out sentences of GUILTY just flabbergasts me. Reading through some of the posts in this thread is completely terrifying.
"You might be able to say you would never commit a crime, but you can't say someone wont accuse you of one"
How depressing.
The worst part is despite how inept the cops were and how shady and manipulative the whole circus became its the jury that I find most upsetting.
That they could come to the conclusion that they were presented enough evidence to hand out sentences of GUILTY just flabbergasts me. Reading through some of the posts in this thread is completely terrifying.
"You might be able to say you would never commit a crime, but you can't say someone wont accuse you of one"
Similar threads
- Locked