re: Making a Murderer - Part 2

Did either of them have compelling evidence that they were specifically targeted by law enforcement? Or that evidence that would have exonerated them had been suppressed by the people who put them in prison?

Well yes, they were all specifically targeted by police and evidence was manipulated. That is why they got so much money..

"Rivera's attorneys have long argued that Waukegan police and Lake County prosecutors manipulated, even fabricated evidence to win and then preserve a faulty conviction. Prosecutors had claimed that the victim's blood was found on Rivera's tennis shoes. But it was later discovered that that type of shoe wasn't even available in the US when Staker was killed"

"His lawyers claimed that police framed their client and strong-armed witneses against Jimenez. "

Those quotes are pulled directly from the articles..

So you're saying there was a very good chance that he'd have won at least $25 million, maybe more with the amount of shady shite law enforcement did to him.

I didn't see in your articles where evidence had been suppressed while he was in prison, either.

The point is, $36 million wasn't some ridiculous number that no one would have considered.

I don't know about 25M, that was the city of Chicago, which has much greater resources. But he was in line to get a ton of money, probably in the 10-12M range. The witness did identify him, so maybe she shares some civil fault. Even Avery asked her for money. He was going to jail either way. But he did more time than he should have..

Settlement? What the hell are you talking about? You're assuming he would have settled if he didn't absolutely have to. He had them by the balls.

quote:

---

I am not saying Steven ain't the killer but there's all kinds of suspicion. That whole family is weird as hell.

---

Brendan is innocent in my opinion.

just started watching Part 2 tonight.


i rewatched Part 1 before I started cause my memory was foggy on it.

How in the hell is this guy still even in jail?

he was clearly coerced and had no lawyer present.

am i missing something here?

quote:

---

Do what?

---

Avery had charges pending and was out on bail. He had run a woman off the road and threatened her with an illegal fireman (prior felon and couldn't own a gun). When he was found guilty of the attempted rape/assault, that time was tacked on to the time he received for the other charges. He got 6 years on those other charges. So he was going to jail either way, he just served a lot more time than he should have..

He pretty clearly did it, you have to stretch the definition of reasonable doubt given the volume of evidence.

That being said, there was clearly prosecutorial and police misconduct and the conviction should be thrown out.

But make no mistake, he deserves prison and I don’t feel bad for him. One thing I think is interesting is that the original documentary never mentions that 6 of his original 18 years were for other charges and he was going to serve those regardless.

quote:

---

He wouldn't have served six years, and the original does indeed mention that other conviction.

---

I don't know how you know this. He served the sentences concurrently. So he had to serve the first 6 years, before the other started. Maybe you mean good behavior or parole, but he was writing letters to his wife threatening to kill her (he lost all visitation rights as a result). So he wasn't the model prisoner.