We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Making A Murderer (Spoilers)

Howzat said:
I thought it has been a fun an interesting discussion about a show. I don't think anyone who has posted thinks Avery is completely innocent of any crimes. Many of us however see some reasonable doubt and issues with our legal system.
Click to expand...

So no golf? Let me know if you change your mind.
 
Howzat said:
I said nothing about golf. I love golf. Golf is good. Murder is bad. :alien:
Click to expand...

lol, okay, then if you are ever on this side of the states, in NorCal, send me a note and I'll arrange a round!
 
Man I don't even know how to respond to that post. This forum was created for discussion, if you don't want to discuss then why are you here?
 
Michigan Slice said:
Agreed.
And while I don't know Where it would go, I'd imagine a change of venue request would have to be made.
Click to expand...

I'm surprised that wasn't requested in the first trial. If it was, I missed it.
 
ASN21 said:
Man I don't even know how to respond to that post. This forum was created for discussion, if you don't want to discuss then why are you here?
Click to expand...

Lol, it's not that serious, I was just pointing out that people won't put their money where their mouth is, that's all. No worries, I like to watch and read the threads too, that's "what I'm doing here." My offer is open to you too, if you are ever in my neighborhood, let me know, it's on me.
 
I'm watching this. I should finish it tomorrow. I'll be back to comment. So far it's very good. I'm starting episode 8. Closing arguments are about to start.
 
Drumdog said:
I'm surprised that wasn't requested in the first trial. If it was, I missed it.
Click to expand...
It was. Murder occured In Manitowoc County. Trial was in adjacent Calumet County
 
Plinyyounger said:
Anyone donate yet? I would be willing to bet bet my retirement check that nobody will. Talk is cheap.

The Internet inspires a lot of people to have strong opinions, but when the rubber meets the road, how many really believe what they express? Seems like most of the time people just want to be heard, complain or see their responses responded too.

I would much rather go play golf with all of you than debate this topic! Let me know, I'll buy a round in NorCal.

ken
Click to expand...

my issues are with the application of our system, not so much thinking avery is innocent. this show has people talking about an important issue. i'm not sure if anyone in this thread thinks avery is innocent.

and if i'm in norcal, i might take you up on that!
 
Plinyyounger said:
Lol, it's not that serious, I was just pointing out that people won't put their money where their mouth is, that's all. No worries, I like to watch and read the threads too, that's "what I'm doing here." My offer is open to you too, if you are ever in my neighborhood, let me know, it's on me.
Click to expand...

You should come out to the next local outing or NorCal vs SoCal battle in coming months.
 
Plinyyounger said:
Lol, it's not that serious, I was just pointing out that people won't put their money where their mouth is, that's all. No worries, I like to watch and read the threads too, that's "what I'm doing here." My offer is open to you too, if you are ever in my neighborhood, let me know, it's on me.
Click to expand...
Why do people need to fund anyone to have an opinion about this or anything for that matter?
 
ASN21 said:
You should come out to the next local outing or NorCal vs SoCal battle in coming months.
Click to expand...

I will be there for sure! Look forward to it.
 
Canadan said:
Why do people need to fund anyone to have an opinion about this or anything for that matter?
Click to expand...

Nobody does. But with so much PASSION and EFFORT from some posters explaining why/how the guilty verdict was incorrect, an effort to actually help the man should be explored. You or anybody else certainly don't have to contribute to his cause. I wasn't talking about "anything" else, just this thread.
 
Plinyyounger said:
Nobody does. But with so much PASSION and EFFORT from some posters explaining why/how the guilty verdict was incorrect, an effort to actually help the man should be explored. You or anybody else certainly don't have to contribute to his cause. I wasn't talking about "anything" else, just this thread.
Click to expand...

It's just conversation. There isn't the so called "passion" you're talking about.. It's just a conversation -- And in my opinion more about the conviction than about Avery.
 
3 spidoes in, some crazy stuff, Ive refrained from reading anything in here thus far
 
blugold said:
A decade later, you believe there is reasonable doubt, after watching a highly produced television series. (not a documentary) But the defense did not, at the time of the verdict, create reasonable doubt in the mind of the 12 juriors. By the law, there was no reasonable doubt.

I am biased in this case, I live(d) a county over from where the trial took place. I heard daily updates of the evidence as it was presented.

In my opinion, Steven Avery wasn't railroaded, he wasn't framed and he certainly is not the victim. He killed and burned a 25 year old woman. The jury agreed.
Click to expand...



This is actually my biggest takeaway from watching the series. in my opinion, the jury pool was already "educated" about the case in the year-long series of news reports and press conferences that occurred before the trial. The prosecution held a press conference to set out their accusation of Avery, which included the statements obtained from the nephew. The public was aware of these claims before a jury was selected for trial, even though the nephew's confession wasn't presented to the jury.


The goal of a trial is to present evidence to 12 fair and impartial jurors and have them make a decision based on the merits of the case. In my opinion, it would be impossible to have a fair and impartial jury pool from anywhere in the vicinity because of the highly-publicized nature of the case.

Whether prosecution and police intended to taint the jury pool is another question. At a minimum, I think they wanted to make the investigation very public to show that they had legitimate evidence against the person who was wrongly imprisoned for nearly 20 years. Ultimately, though, the jury pool was already aware of all of the claims and suggested evidence of the prosecution prior to trial, even though some of the prosecution's allegations (e.g., sexual assault) were never presented at trial.


That is probably my biggest takeaway from watching this series.
 
I just finished watching the series.

This series accomplishes for the defense what the pre-trial news conferences did for the prosecution.

In the Steven Avery case, after hearing the evidence presented and knowing some of the evidence which was left out of the series, I had a reasonable doubt in which I would have voted not guilty if I was a juror. Unless I have no doubt, he walks. Probably did it is not good enough.

In the Brendan Dassey case, COMMON MAN. The actions of his first lawyer and investigator were enough to merit a new trial for me but looked to be too much of a political hot potato for the Wisconsin courts to make the decision for a retrial. The same judge who presided over the trial doesn't allow relief and a new trial, yeah, I was surprised. I hope the Federal courts grants Brendan Dassey relief and the opportunity for a fair trial.

Unfortunately, in any scenario, Teresa Halbach is still dead and her family still grieving and are constantly re-living the horrible circumstances of her death because of all questionable circumstances of the investigation, evidence, trial and series.
 
Just because I'm a glutton for punishment I think I'm going to watch this whole thing over again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Girardcorp said:
Just because I'm a glutton for punishment I think I'm going to watch this whole thing over again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I said that to someone at my office yesterday.
 
While I'm thinking about these questions, I wanted to get them down before I forget them. Maybe they are answered in this thread as I'm only 12 pages into 23 pages.

1. If her voicemail was full and not accepting VM's but was later not full and able to accept VM's who checked the VM and deleted VM's? What did said VM's say? Yes I know her brother admitted at one point to checking the VM.

2. The lady and daughter that found the car were the only ones given a camera and were specifically told to check the Avery property. Why were they the only ones given a camera and why directed to search that area? Directions given by the then ex-boyfriend of her.

3. If she was scared to go to the Avery residence, why did her boss send her and why did they not go with her? Where is the negligence lawsuit against her boss and Autotrader by her family?

4. The Deputy that called in the license plate. He had to have been looking at the car/license plate. He just memorized the plate number and could recite it at will? Also, he seemed to call into Dispatch via cell phone and not over the radio. I doubt Dispatch answers the radio "This is (whoever)"

5. The mother and daughter that found the car said the plates were gone. Where did the plates turn up that they were able to then use them in court as evidence and who's fingerprints were found on them, if any?
 
bogeyme said:
While I'm thinking about these questions, I wanted to get them down before I forget them. Maybe they are answered in this thread as I'm only 12 pages into 23 pages.

1. If her voicemail was full and not accepting VM's but was later not full and able to accept VM's who checked the VM and deleted VM's? What did said VM's say? Yes I know her brother admitted at one point to checking the VM.

2. The lady and daughter that found the car were the only ones given a camera and were specifically told to check the Avery property. Why were they the only ones given a camera and why directed to search that area? Directions given by the then ex-boyfriend of her.

3. If she was scared to go to the Avery residence, why did her boss send her and why did they not go with her? Where is the negligence lawsuit against her boss and Autotrader by her family?

4. The Deputy that called in the license plate. He had to have been looking at the car/license plate. He just memorized the plate number and could recite it at will? Also, he seemed to call into Dispatch via cell phone and not over the radio. I doubt Dispatch answers the radio "This is (whoever)"

5. The mother and daughter that found the car said the plates were gone. Where did the plates turn up that they were able to then use them in court as evidence and who's fingerprints were found on them, if any?
Click to expand...

At our agency deputies, especially supervisors and detectives who wouldn't necessarily have a radio handy, would call into dispatch all the time, sometimes it's just easier to have a conversation via phone. We had a direct phone number for them. It's possible he could have been given that tag # as the missing persons number, and he was running it to make sure he had the correct tag # and was looking for the correct vehicle type.

And I thought I remember the plates being found in another vehicle on the property.
 
bogeyme said:
While I'm thinking about these questions, I wanted to get them down before I forget them. Maybe they are answered in this thread as I'm only 12 pages into 23 pages.

1. If her voicemail was full and not accepting VM's but was later not full and able to accept VM's who checked the VM and deleted VM's? What did said VM's say? Yes I know her brother admitted at one point to checking the VM.

2. The lady and daughter that found the car were the only ones given a camera and were specifically told to check the Avery property. Why were they the only ones given a camera and why directed to search that area? Directions given by the then ex-boyfriend of her.

3. If she was scared to go to the Avery residence, why did her boss send her and why did they not go with her? Where is the negligence lawsuit against her boss and Autotrader by her family?

4. The Deputy that called in the license plate. He had to have been looking at the car/license plate. He just memorized the plate number and could recite it at will? Also, he seemed to call into Dispatch via cell phone and not over the radio. I doubt Dispatch answers the radio "This is (whoever)"

5. The mother and daughter that found the car said the plates were gone. Where did the plates turn up that they were able to then use them in court as evidence and who's fingerprints were found on them, if any?
Click to expand...
I think they said they found the license plate in the house. Haven't watched in a week though so i could be wrong.
 
Girardcorp said:
I think they said they found the license plate in the house. Haven't watched in a week though so i could be wrong.
Click to expand...


I have not heard this and don't recall it being mentioned in the series
 
Wake said:
At our agency deputies, especially supervisors and detectives who wouldn't necessarily have a radio handy, would call into dispatch all the time, sometimes it's just easier to have a conversation via phone. We had a direct phone number for them. It's possible he could have been given that tag # as the missing persons number, and he was running it to make sure he had the correct tag # and was looking for the correct vehicle type.

And I thought I remember the plates being found in another vehicle on the property.
Click to expand...

I thought all police departments had body mounted "walkies". Am I wrong with that thought? Good point about double checking the plate number I didn't think of that.

Girardcorp said:
I think they said they found the license plate in the house. Haven't watched in a week though so i could be wrong.
Click to expand...

I must have missed that part about finding the plates on the property.

Another question that came to mind, did they ever check the key that was found to insure that it actually started the victims vehicle? You can't tell me on that 40+ acre salvage yard there wasn't another Toyota car that the key could have come from. Can they actually confirm that the "key fob" was on her keys? I couldn't tell you what my brother or sister have on their key fobs.

As far as if he did it, why did he not crush her car? She wasn't reported missing until 11/3 correct? He could have staged her car on 10/31 and crushed it 11/1 and no one would have been the wiser. Sadly, I am close with a case eerily similar to this case. In the case I have personal knowledge of, the gentleman that committed the murder, knew a guy that ran a salvage yard and within days of committing the murder had his friend crush the car and got rid of it.
 
bogeyme said:
I thought all police departments had body mounted "walkies". Am I wrong with that thought? Good point about double checking the plate number I didn't think of that.



I must have missed that part about finding the plates on the property.

Another question that came to mind, did they ever check the key that was found to insure that it actually started the victims vehicle? You can't tell me on that 40+ acre salvage yard there wasn't another Toyota car that the key could have come from. Can they actually confirm that the "key fob" was on her keys? I couldn't tell you what my brother or sister have on their key fobs.

As far as if he did it, why did he not crush her car? She wasn't reported missing until 11/3 correct? He could have staged her car on 10/31 and crushed it 11/1 and no one would have been the wiser. Sadly, I am close with a case eerily similar to this case. In the case I have personal knowledge of, the gentleman that committed the murder, knew a guy that ran a salvage yard and within days of committing the murder had his friend crush the car and got rid of it.
Click to expand...
I'm not comfortable saying all do, but yes the vast majority of patrol deputies and officers will likely be wearing a radio. However it would be very rare for a detective to wear one like that. Many supervisors won't either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top