- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Making a Murderer - Part 2
Posted on 10/21/18 at 10:40 am to brmark70816
Posted on 10/21/18 at 10:40 am to brmark70816
It's a reasonable conclusion considering he was on track for early release.
0
Posted on 10/21/18 at 9:29 pm to brmark70816
quote:
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 wouldn't have gotten six years on the underlying firearms charge in the absence of an additional rape charge. He wouldn't have gotten anything close to six years.
Posted on 10/21/18 at 9:55 pm to TXGunslinger10
Brendan Dassey's lawyer.... 
Posted on 10/22/18 at 6:29 pm to VinegarStrokes
She’s a fantastic lawyer in addition to being WYHIable
Posted on 10/22/18 at 6:51 pm to TXGunslinger10
She was looking good doing that lecture at northwestern. The high boots are a good look for her
Posted on 10/22/18 at 11:25 pm to VinegarStrokes
I watched the 7th Circuit of Appeals episode tonight, and I got the impression that she didn’t do that well.
That male judge had her on her heels.
That male judge had her on her heels.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 12:05 pm to TXGunslinger10
I’ve seen her interviewed and she seems very sincere. She is convinced he is innocent. But she never talks about the crime or the circumstances, just that the way he was questioned was not legal. She says his confession should be tossed, but Dassey confessed on 4 separate occasions at 4 different places..
Posted on 10/23/18 at 12:10 pm to brmark70816
quote:
I’ve seen her interviewed and she seems very sincere. She is convinced he is innocent. But she never talks about the crime or the circumstances, just that the way he was questioned was not legal. She says his confession should be tossed, but Dassey confessed on 4 separate occasions at 4 different places..
But I was under the impression that you can only really appeal the process and not the facts? Unless brand new evidence is brought forth, don't they have to focus on the process?
Posted on 10/23/18 at 12:46 pm to brmark70816
quote:
But she never talks about the crime or the circumstances, just that the way he was questioned was not legal.
Why should she? There isn't a single piece of evidence that physically connects Dassey to the crime. If his confession is tossed, he's free because the state has nothing else to use to convict him.
quote:
She says his confession should be tossed, but Dassey confessed on 4 separate occasions at 4 different places..
Name some details that can be objectively proven that Dassey gave without coercion or influence.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 1:28 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
The phone confession to his mother.
Avery and he destroyed and eliminated most evidence.
Avery and he destroyed and eliminated most evidence.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 2:43 pm to brmark70816
So nothing. There isn't a single thing you can reference to connect Dassey to anything.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 2:48 pm to brmark70816
quote:
The phone confession to his mother.
M. What all happened, what are you talking about?
B. About what Me & Steven did that day,
M. What about it?
B. Well, Mike & Mark & Matt came up one day and took another interview with me and said because they think I was lying but so, they said if I come out with it, that I would have to go to jail for 90 years.
M. What?
B. Ya. But if I came out with it, I would probably get I dunno, about like, 20 or less. After the interview they told me if I wanted to say something to her family and said that I was sorry for what I did.
M. Then Steven did do it.
J. Ya
M. (crying) Why didn't you tell me about this?
B. Ya, but they came out with something that was untrue with me
M. What's that
B. They said that I sold crack.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 3:06 pm to TXGunslinger10
Is part 2 completely biased as well?
Binged watched season one when it came out but was frustrated after I read up on the stuff they left out. They left out pretty much anything that would make you wonder if he was guilty, and there was quite a bit of it.
Even if he did it though, I think there is enough evidence to make there be reasonable doubt.
Binged watched season one when it came out but was frustrated after I read up on the stuff they left out. They left out pretty much anything that would make you wonder if he was guilty, and there was quite a bit of it.
Even if he did it though, I think there is enough evidence to make there be reasonable doubt.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 4:15 pm to iwyLSUiwy
quote:
Is part 2 completely biased as well?
It is from Steven and Brendan's POV but there are a lot of things the defense didn't do the last time. It is worth a watch.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 4:25 pm to iwyLSUiwy
Ultimately, I don't have a problem with the bias. They looked at all the evidence and had a story they wanted to tell. If you actually look at the evidence, what was left out isn't all that compelling anyway. Someone tried a copy/paste list earlier and that was quickly picked apart. Much of the rest of the evidence would be as well, and has been.
The thing that makes this not really bother me is the way that Kratz handled communicating with the press before and during the trial. These two didn't get what anyone with any sense would call a fair trial. You want to talk about bias. That was much, much worse than either part of this documentary, and in my opinion, a key factor in Kratz getting his conviction.
The thing that makes this not really bother me is the way that Kratz handled communicating with the press before and during the trial. These two didn't get what anyone with any sense would call a fair trial. You want to talk about bias. That was much, much worse than either part of this documentary, and in my opinion, a key factor in Kratz getting his conviction.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 4:58 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
*****Spoilers************
Bobby Dassey, wow....that dude is suspect as hell!
Bobby Dassey, wow....that dude is suspect as hell!
Posted on 10/23/18 at 5:12 pm to PortCityTiger24
quote:
It is worth a watch.
Yep.
The way the first episode ended was great.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 7:02 pm to TXGunslinger10
4 episodes in
Seems like its dragging along even slower than the end of season 1.
Shot of the prison
"I saw a dragon fly today"
"Yeah?"
"Yeah"
"Its a sign"
"yeah"
Shot of both parents starting at the floor for 5 seconds
Sounds unsympathetic, but I don't care about the family sob stories when they try to hammer you over the head with it.
Show me the actual legal process and what the lawyers are trying to accomplish.
Seems like its dragging along even slower than the end of season 1.
Shot of the prison
"I saw a dragon fly today"
"Yeah?"
"Yeah"
"Its a sign"
"yeah"
Shot of both parents starting at the floor for 5 seconds
Sounds unsympathetic, but I don't care about the family sob stories when they try to hammer you over the head with it.
Show me the actual legal process and what the lawyers are trying to accomplish.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 11:48 pm to geauxtigahs87
Watch until the end. It drags on some but it picks up and there's some really interesting and eye opening stuff. I'm so impressed with Zellner.
Posted on 10/24/18 at 12:07 am to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
If you actually look at the evidence, what was left out isn't all that compelling anyway.
All they left out is the prosecutions drawing conclusions from things they found - and most had nothing to do with proving murder.
What they left out is painting Avery as a bad guy.
I don't know if he's guilty but they didn't prove their case and most people who think he's guilty beyond a reasonable doubt do so because - he's a bad guy...all that is cited is character assasination...they left out character assasination stuff from the trial. That would show the public, he did it, because he's the bad guy.
I've never seen one post that the original doc left out important, relevant, forensic evidence that PROVES beyond A REASONABLE DOUBT that Avery did it.
But I've seen a lot of posts - but who else could have done it? He had porn on his computer! He called someone back using Star69!
What the frick is this? To prove your innoncence you now have to prove who else did it?
This post was edited on 10/24/18 at 12:09 am
Page 5 of 20
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News