|
Kal Torak posted:I think coordinating the murder of an innocent young woman by 5 or 6 law enforcement officers would be a massive conspiracy and extremely unlikely. It is probably two people and the rest are trying to do their job, which is put someone behind bars
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 05:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 17:15 |
|
|
http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/29326359.html One of the jurors was the father of a Sheriff's Department employee and another juror was the husband of a county clerk. No conflicts of interest here.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 05:36
|
|
|
Alastor_the_Stylish posted:http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/29326359.html According to the Juror who was excused, there were two jurors who "were not participating at all" and which he indicated had already intended on voting guilty from the start. Not that it's those two necessarily, but..
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 06:12
|
|
|
Literally execute every cop
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 06:20
|
|
|
I think I'm going to have to go back and rewatch - but honestly I'm not sure I can. I don't think the cops straight up killed her... that's a bit too far fetched for me. I think that someone else did it near the Avery compound and used the location as a convenient location to dump the body/car. When the police found the evidence, they did what they likely thought was "right"... they made him go to jail. And that "right" needed a little help - maybe move the car a little.. maybe plant some blood... maybe "find" a key. I also just can't see how the jury believed that Brendan was telling ANY sort of truth... and I am completely perplexed how he was convicted of something that Steve Avery wasn't (Avery was acquitted on the charge of sexing the corpse but Brendon wasn't, if I remember correctly) Also THE BLOOD. Looking at the state of the room and the garage, there is NO WAY that a murder took place there (including her being shot and her throat cut) without that place looking like a slaughterhouse. Even the people who realize the filmmakers are manipulating the story (because they are) should feel really uncomfortable about the outcome and the method of getting it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 06:47
|
|
|
This case, among many others, shows that the jury system is far from perfect. Would you trust 12 random American strangers with your car keys, let alone with your freedom? If I'm ever falsely accused of a crime I think suicide would be a pretty rational choice.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 06:55
|
|
|
You could always have a judge instead. But in the great country that we live in its entirely possible that the judge is an elected official with no legal background just like the typical cousin loving redneck on the jury. America!
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 07:05
|
|
|
This series is chilling. Right down to the bone chilling and harrowing. As someone who's had personal experience with how inept and corrupt the Wisconsin justice system is, the Brendan Dassey thing breaks my heart because I could've been him. I won't get full into details unless people want to hear it because I don't want to derail the thread, but the long and short of it is that I almost got implicated in a rape and murder as a teenager because the perpetrator's family is close friends with mine. This series is 100% accurate about how detectives aren't interested in justice, they're interested in validation. Once they have a theory on what happened, they will almost never drop it, and will dog it to the ends of the Earth so they don't have to admit they're wrong.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 16:26
|
|
|
Did I blink and miss it, or do they ever even explain why the woman who found the RAV4 was even poking around a big junkyard in the middle of nowhere in the first place?
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 17:33
|
|
|
precision posted:Did I blink and miss it, or do they ever even explain why the woman who found the RAV4 was even poking around a big junkyard in the middle of nowhere in the first place? The search party asked permission of Steven's brother, who was the only person there, to look around. He said ok.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
The suspicious thing about that was that it was a freaking *enormous* junkyard and this woman (who used to be a private investigator, I might add!) made a beeline straight to the car, practically. Her excuse for this was that they were "guided by God". Seriously.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 18:24
|
|
|
The implication the documentary was making there is that the brother and ex-boyfriend, who were leading the search party, must have had some meeting with the dirty cops where the whole thing was explained to them and they went along with it. The cops probably convinced them that Avery was totally 100% guilty for sure, and that moving the car was necessary to make sure he paid for the crime. Or maybe the ex-boyfriend did it who the gently caress knows.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:The implication the documentary was making there is that the brother and ex-boyfriend, who were leading the search party, must have had some meeting with the dirty cops where the whole thing was explained to them and they went along with it. The cops probably convinced them that Avery was totally 100% guilty for sure, and that moving the car was necessary to make sure he paid for the crime. Or maybe the ex-boyfriend did it who the gently caress knows. I don't think it has to be that sinister with that many people. Here's how I think it went: - Colburn finds the vehicle - Radios in to confirm it's the vehicle (why would he do this if he didn't have the vehicle?) - Keys probably still in vehicle - Moves car to junk yard and disguises it (by disguising it the way they did, they actually make it stick out) - They had a few days to plant the blood evidence - Get the search party to search junk yard knowing full well it will be discovered eventually I think the fact it was discovered so soon is likely because it was on an outside ridge and because it was disguised.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
The defence states at one point that they're not allowed to mention who else might have done it. They obviously had people in mind, did this ever come out?
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 20:14
|
|
|
Junkenstein posted:The defence states at one point that they're not allowed to mention who else might have done it. They obviously had people in mind, did this ever come out? The ex-boyfriend I think would have been the guy they would have named if they could have. Or possibly Brendan's brother.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 20:27
|
|
|
The ex-boyfriend looks creepy and shady as gently caress, doesn't really help his case.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
In my fictional movie adaptation, Ken Kratz will be played by High Pitch Erik
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
Junkenstein posted:The defence states at one point that they're not allowed to mention who else might have done it. They obviously had people in mind, did this ever come out? Every episode of Law and Order I've seen made it seem like proposing an alternate theory to the crime, or alternate killer, is a cornerstone of many defense strategies. Why the hell would they not be allowed to do that? blackmarketlimb posted:This series is chilling. Right down to the bone chilling and harrowing. I'd be interested in hearing more about this, if you're comfortable talking about it. It doesn't have to be a giant detailed post, but I'd like to know what the interview with the police was like, why they fixated on you as a suspect, etc.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
I hope Ken Kratz drowns in a pool of his own diarrhea.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 21:26
|
|
|
Alfred P. Pseudonym posted:I hope Ken Kratz drowns in a pool of his own diarrhea. The rage that I felt at Ken Kratz is like... I have never felt that pissed off towards any written villain in a TV show, I thought he was THAT reprehensible and awful. Just an unethical, immoral, unprincipled man. I'm going to paraphrase a review I read of the final episodes: "When Judge Fox is talking about the most evil man to ever step foot in that courtroom, he should *certainly* be talking about Ken Kratz, not Steven Avery." And yeah, that's pretty much how I feel. And the scariest thing about Ken Kratz is that he is real. He is still practicing law! I googled his name and there was the website for his own law firm, right there. It was incredibly disturbing because... This man is right there, out in the open, advertising himself. And after seeing what I saw in this documentary that is just beyond upsetting.. Something the documentary didn't mention about Ken Kratz that I turned up, read this poo poo and I will quote what I found to be the pertinent part, bolding the hosed up poo poo that this article loving glosses over: http://www.superiortelegram.com/news/douglas-county/3641659-suspended-former-da-sets-practice-superior quote:The court suspended Kratz in June after review of a complaint filed by the Office of Lawyer Regulation. Kratz was found to have sent inappropriate text messages to a domestic abuse victim while prosecuting her case. Kratz says he knows what he did was improper and a violation of trust. So not only was this guy found out as a creep and doing innappropriate 'sexting' to domestic abuse victims, but he was a loving drug addict who was stoned on vicodin and xanax throughout that whole trial. Jesus loving christ. I honestly didn't think I could loving hate Ken Kratz more, but holy loving wow.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 22:44
|
|
|
If this series had been a drama, people would have said it was unrealistic, and the villains were over the top. It's completely obvious to me after watching this and listening to Serial, that detectives and district attorneys have zero interest in the truth of anything. They're happy to lie about whatever they have to in order to get someone convicted. It makes me wonder if we'd be better off with journalists as detectives. It's one thing to get convicted in an initial trial. A lot of poo poo can go wrong in a trial, it's as much a show as an airing of the truth. But that's what the appeals system is supposed to be for. The most shocking thing to me was how many appeals and new trial requests were just completely ignored or waved off. It's clear the judges didn't even look at the cases. At least I hope that's what happened. I'm actually more comforted by the idea that the judges don't ever read appeals cases than the idea that they could look at the Brendan Dassey case and be like "Yeah, that's all legit." On the idea of cop murder, I don't think the cops murdered the victim. I think she went missing, the cops found out Avery was the last one to see her, and saw an opportunity. Lenk and Colburn might have even acted alone, but I imagine the institutional hatred of Avery was so high, that there were plenty of people willing to look the other way. The scene where Colburn hears the call where he calls in the license plate number is a big giveaway. The look on his face is "gently caress, I'm caught." when the lawyer plays that tape. He found the car in advance after the woman went missing, and they decided to find a way to get Avery to go down for it. They might have even genuinely believed he did it, and knew they had to have good evidence to make it happen. The bones I think could have been found at the remote burn site that was mentioned, and they moved them closer to the house to make a stronger connection to Avery. All the other key evidence is pretty obviously planted. I'm simultaneously recommending this to everyone I know, and warning them. I'm going to rewatch it this week as well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 04:19
|
|
|
quote:When he was 20, Avery and another man pleaded guilty to animal cruelty after pouring gas and oil on Avery's cat and throwing it into a fire; Avery was sentenced to prison again for that crime. I haven't seen it yet and I'm sure law enforcement is messed up, but frankly I'd totally been OK if they dragged the fucker out behind an alley and unloaded on him. Police have shot people that were just minding their own business, gently caress Mr. Avery. ED: Seriously the dude is a creepy hosed up psycho and that's probably why the police had such a hate-on for him. I'm sure the documentary showed him in a better light, and I'm sure the police were corrupt as gently caress, but I just can't feel the least bit sorry for this guy. Pulling out an 11 year old meme but..  Can make me give two shits about Steven Avery. Unzip and Attack posted:This case, among many others, shows that the jury system is far from perfect. Would you trust 12 random American strangers with your car keys, let alone with your freedom? If I'm ever falsely accused of a crime I think suicide would be a pretty rational choice. Correction: Only jurors that are too stupid to get out of jury duty or are too old and interested in screwing "bad guys" will judge you. Everyone else will find a way to get out of that poo poo on day 1. Blazing Ownager fucked around with this message at 06:50 on Dec 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 06:40
|
|
|
So obviously with the documentary you can only see the evidence that they decide to show. Does anyone know if there's anything they blatantly left out? One thing I was wondering IRT Brendan's case was his confession to his cousin since they only talk about it in court but never go to any lengths discussing it. His own confession was pretty clearly coerced but that confession to the her probably wouldn't have been. She later recanted but I wonder what caused her to give a statement and what the story is there.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 07:20
|
|
|
TrixR4kids posted:So obviously with the documentary you can only see the evidence that they decide to show. Does anyone know if there's anything they blatantly left out? Was it ever proven that Brendan "confessed" to Kayla? Someone (cops/family) may have put it in her head that Brendan was responsible, which she paired with all the explicit news coverage. As bad as I feel for the Halbach family, I feel equally bad for Allan and Dolores Avery. Dolores, although seemingly optimistic while on the phone with Steve, looked absolutely broken throughout the final episodes. I expected a back-and-forth Serial vibe from Making a Murderer, where each episode I'd waiver on guilty/not-guilty; that didn't happen. There was never anything that made me believe, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Steven Avery was guilty. For that, I wish there was one Devil's Advocate episode where the show outlined all the evidence against Steven Avery (similar to Serial), because everything shown from the prosecution/police wasn't presented well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 13:01
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:I haven't seen it yet and I'm sure law enforcement is messed up, but frankly I'd totally been OK if they dragged the fucker out behind an alley and unloaded on him. Get back to us after you watch it then. Also, the scope of the thing is far more than just Steven Avery.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 17:14
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:I haven't seen it yet and I'm sure law enforcement is messed up, but frankly I'd totally been OK if they dragged the fucker out behind an alley and unloaded on him. So you have the basic mindset of the jury members who convicted Avery of murder despite the avalanche of evidence that places his guilt into doubt. Congrats, you're part of the problem. E: I've seen some pretty dipshit opinions on SA, but I've never seen "cops do worse stuff to random strangers therefore I can't have empathy for this potentially innocent person who might have been framed by police and had his life ruined" Jesus loving Christ.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 18:21
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:I haven't seen it yet and I'm sure law enforcement is messed up, but frankly I'd totally been OK if they dragged the fucker out behind an alley and unloaded on him. Congrats on one of the worst posts I've ever seen
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 23:29
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:ED: Seriously the dude is a creepy hosed up psycho and that's probably why the police had such a hate-on for him. I'm sure the documentary showed him in a better light, and I'm sure the police were corrupt as gently caress, but I just can't feel the least bit sorry for this guy. I don't like Avery at all, seems like he was a major dickhead when he was young. The show actively portrays the family as not that savvy, and the kids being brought up are pretty dim. But the idea that some of the police officers, on two occassions deliberately avoid finding the real suspect is the larger indiscretion. So it's entirely possible to have empathy for a guy who was genuinely wronged by the legal system, while someone worse was allowed to go free.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 23:53
|
|
|
I can't get over the car being called in before it was missing, that seems like a huge loving deal. I also can't get over Judge Fox admitting Brendan's original lawyer was a piece of poo poo that thought Brendan was innocent and STILL denying a new trial. What is happening in this country?
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 01:26
|
|
|
I thought you had to be smart and intelligent to eventually become a judge. I'm barely on episode 5 but goddamn I guess so far this series proves you can be a loving literal retard and still become a judge/lawyer/sheriff. Also make sure you're kids go to school goddamn
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 02:00
|
|
|
MrCodeDude posted:Was it ever proven that Brendan "confessed" to Kayla? Someone (cops/family) may have put it in her head that Brendan was responsible, which she paired with all the explicit news coverage. After reading about it more it sounds like she told a school counselor who told the cops. I suppose you're right, it could've been rumors and then she tells the counselor etc. This was after the news coverage as well, it's just hard to understand why she would say this other than being a dumb kid.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 02:21
|
|
|
TrixR4kids posted:After reading about it more it sounds like she told a school counselor who told the cops. I suppose you're right, it could've been rumors and then she tells the counselor etc. This was after the news coverage as well, it's just hard to understand why she would say this other than being a dumb kid. What all did Kayla's story corroborate, anyway? That Brendan helped Steve move a body? Or did she also know the more intricate details of the throat slashing/rape/burning/etc? From what I remember, the police had an idea of what happened, and needed someone to testify against Steve. They first tried Jodi, but she refused to talk, so they moved onto Brendan.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 02:58
|
|
|
MrCodeDude posted:
Honestly, regardless of editing no one really seems to make a coherent argument. Sub 80 IQ guy seems more reliable sometimes. e: And honestly I give no shits about a dude that throws a cat into fire with oil. I love cats. This ballooned past that. Super odd all around and Krutz or whatever is getting death threats. Good times all around. Jinks was better. Which is a joke on how we relate to these stories. Jinks was better though. BrianPhillips fucked around with this message at 03:27 on Dec 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 03:07
|
|
|
MrCodeDude posted:What all did Kayla's story corroborate, anyway? That Brendan helped Steve move a body? Or did she also know the more intricate details of the throat slashing/rape/burning/etc? That he saw body parts in the fire and that he saw Teresa chained up to the bed. Both of which were in the news at the time she would've mentioned this to a counselor. Obviously her testimony even if she didn't recant wouldn't prove the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, I just wonder if she actually heard that from him or not and if not, why did she say stuff to the counselor. Doesn't really prove that he did anything other than being there at the time, but even that is doubtful from what I understand.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 03:19
|
|
|
TrixR4kids posted:That he saw body parts in the fire and that he saw Teresa chained up to the bed. Both of which were in the news at the time she would've mentioned this to a counselor. Obviously her testimony even if she didn't recant wouldn't prove the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, I just wonder if she actually heard that from him or not and if not, why did she say stuff to the counselor. How did the news know the information about Teresa being chained up to the bed? I thought the prosecution only released that information once they got the "confession" from Brendan? Why would the police even believe that she was chained up to the bed? There were no rope fibers found in the bedroom and Brendan indicated that they used a chain for her feet. That certainly would have caused damage to the bed frame - damage they didn't find? Also, no blood in the bedroom (or soaked into the mattress). I thought the investigators were later pushing for Brendan to confess that Steve murdered Teresa in the garage. Whole thing is weird/poorly investigated.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 03:47
|
|
|
BrianPhillips posted:Honestly, regardless of editing no one really seems to make a coherent argument. Sub 80 IQ guy seems more reliable sometimes. Its called Jinx or are you also sub 80 iq
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 03:48
|
|
|
Was this mentioned in the show? http://onmilwaukee.com/movies/articles/makingamurderer.html quote:Why did the state crime lab analyst who accidentally contaminated a key DNA sample ask for a waiver to get around protocols that said contaminated samples should be ruled inconclusive and retested? (There was not enough of the sample left for retesting). This same analyst provided key hair sample evidence against Avery in his earlier sexual assault case, the sexual assault it turned out that he didn't do. http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/lo...ede9a459ee7.htm quote:Culhane said DNA tests of a hair taken from the 1985 assault victim — one of the same hairs that Culhane had testified nearly two decades earlier was "consistent" with Avery’s — was in fact from another man, Gregory Allen, a dangerous sexual offender who had been on the radar of local police for years. They used the same forensic analyst from the 1985 case? 
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 04:35
|
|
|
MrCodeDude posted:Was this mentioned in the show? Not mentioned. Nice find. I think part of the issue was that the Defense wasn't allowed at all to bring up the 1985 case, and Manitowoc county's epic gently caress-up back then, because Steve had had to settle that Civil Case in order to pay for the lawyers to defend him in the Criminal Case - he wouldn't have had to do that (as my understanding goes) if the state had actually paid the $400,000 restitution, but they pulled that off the table when he was arrested for murder, I believe was what happened. Thus, Steve obviously couldn't turn around and accuse them of all the gently caress-ups from the 1985 case, having just received money for legally agreeing that both parties were moving on. I'm not entirely sure how settlements work in situations like this, but logically it makes sense that once you reach a settlement in a legal dispute you wouldn't be able to recycle those same accusations in a criminal case - though I think this might actually be subjective on some level, because I recall the judge did have to make a ruling on it in the preliminaries or pretrial motions, unless I am mistaken.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 06:01
|
|
|
*Show depicts insanely gross miscarriage of justice that sentences a coerced mentally challenged 17 year old kid (almost certainly innocent) and a man of dubious guilt to life in prison* but what about the cat????
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 09:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 17:15 |
|
|
This series was beyond my wildest expectations. If you can't believe this could happen, just go to the other side of the tracks in town and wait a while. My best friend, who is now a cop, lived this basic story with his family his entire life until we left for college. Even when he goes home now he's harassed by the police in town, who know he's also a cop. I don't understand why Avery's lawyers didn't present or go after more information about the vial of blood having a needle puncture mark on the lid. Also, the judge was on the loving take for allowing ANYTHING related to Brenden to be admissible. The appeals court should've thrown the conviction out and retried him at the very least. As others have said, gently caress Ken Kratz. That smug rear end soothsayer deserves everything that happens to him in life. Not only did he do all this but he sexually harasses a lady who had just been raped and that he's supposed to be helping? gently caress that guy straight in the pee hole.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 13:31
|
|
