Making a Murderer to get new episodes

Don't know how I feel about this

farther and farther I got form watching the show, the more I felt like he did it

I think he most likely did it as well.

I think it's still pretty important to shine light on the questionable process that ensured his conviction though. There's such a thing as framing a guilty man. They aren't going to always be right about who they're framing.

They left a ton of shite out of the series that makes him look much guiltier. Google it.

Like how he personally requested her specifically to come to his house, twice.

Its been a while since I saw that, but my thoughts are that he did it, the cops knew it and they did sketchy shite to make sure he got convicted of it.

The REAL travesty of the whole ordeal is Brendan. He is mentally challenged and a child and they completely fricked him over and he most likely had nothing to do with it. Even if he did have something to do with it, he does not have the capacity to know right from wrong. He has the mind of a 1st grader basically.

His new lawyer is a fricking shark. She's a boss.

quote:

---

He is mentally challenged

---

Overblown, but I agree he isn't a genius.

quote:

---

they completely fricked him over

---

His own lawyer did most of this fricking, by the way.

quote:

---

he most likely had nothing to do with it.

---

Meh. I think it's the other way.

quote:

---

Even if he did have something to do with it, he does not have the capacity to know right from wrong.

---

No fricking way. He knew it was wrong what was done to that woman.

quote:

---

He has the mind of a 1st grader basically.

---

Again, overblown. He's not going to be curing cancer, but I've seen no objective evidence of this. His IQ is what, 70? That's very low, but at the edge of intellectual disability. And that speaks to cognitive functioning. He clearly has a high degree of adaptive functioning compared to this score. I think he is a borderline case, not intellectual disability, although I'll defer to those with a psychological background.

You can't honestly believe the case the prosecution presented was enough to convict Avery

quote:

---

Wouldn’t be surprised to find out he’s a product of incest or ate lead paint as a kid or something.

---

Remember his own attorney's investigator described it as a "one-branch family tree." Incest is apparently one of their family traditions.

quote:

---

After being tricked into confessing to MURDER he asked if he could go back to school to finish a project.

---

He is a simpleton. Doesn't mean he and Avery didn't do the crime. I'm using Occam's razor here - I'm not commenting on the quality of the case presented or the evidence of police misconduct. And they definitely wanted Avery for this crime.

Doesn't mean he didn't do it. I'm out of reasonable alternatives. He called her, concealing his number. He lied about seeing her, initially, then recanted. Her vehicle and remains were found on the property.

So, the Avery "family" did this and he's the most likely one. "Bitches owe him." Don't like the way it went down if you don't like, but, in all likelihood, the cops got the right guy. He doesn't get a pass because he got away with a bunch of stuff before, and got busted for something he didn't do. Guy has cruelty to animal in his background and that's a big red flag for a serial killer.

The cops, however hamfisted, have probably saved lives in this instance by containing Stephen Avery - the worst apple in this bad, bad, rotten barrel.

He did it.

But, the police framed a guilty man.

The manner in which their case stated it happened is not how it went down. The story doesn't match up to the lack of physical evidence in the trailer or garage. She wasn't killed in the trailer. More than likely, he abducted her, took her to the back part of the property where there's a gravel pit, and burned her back there, leaving both the car and the burned bits there. The cops came along, pretty much knew who did it, but wanted a stronger case (the gravel pit part of their property (is it even theirs?)) is somewhat public access - it's traversed by all sorts, people off-road back there, kids hang out there, etc, so defense can more easily say 'could have been anyone'), so they put her car in the junkyard, put some of his blood in it, (later had their lackey walk right to it and "find it"), and moved the bone bits they found near the gravel pit to his backyard fire pit. Then they got Brendan, who may or may not have been involved, and taking advantage of his borderline retardation, they bullied him for hours on end and fed him the story they wanted until he could repeat it back to them.

quote:

---

He did it. But, the police framed a guilty man.

---

quote:

---

Then they got Brendan, who may or may not have been involved, and taking advantage of his borderline retardation

---

I'm not too far from this position. It's not the cop's "fault" on Brendan, though. You take the tools you have - you make the case you can. It's up to the lawyers and judges to regulate the "fairness" of it.


I recall the scant few times I was pressed into service as an investigator for the military. The 2 major ones - 1 was a somewhat famous incident (in the aftermath of a particularly damaging storm affecting SE Louisiana and Mississippi, if you catch my drift), at least at the time, and the other is a complete unknown in the wilds of the Sunni triangle.

The more famous of the 2 - I had a whistleblower, so I actually knew, more or less, exactly what had happened. I was going to lead with the, "I can't help you if you don't tell me the truth" - then I was going to follow with the, "We know all. Make it easy on yourself" - then move to the fear up.

I hadn't had any sleep. I was hoping these jackholes would just clam up and ask for lawyers, like anyone who'd see a single cop show would do - but, oh no, they broke under the "I can't help if you don't tell me the truth" - and tried to blame the other. I ended up pulling a 36-hour shift, and again when I had to testify (I was on night shift and my boss was a 100%, certified a-hole).

The other involved some unaccounted for CDS at a clinic. All of the personnel with access passed the urinalysis and their quarters were searched to no avail. They all seemed like clean cut, All American kids. After multiple interviews over the course of about 2 weeks I concluded that, most likely, someone assembled a "go" bag of medication - they inherited a locker of medication that was unsecured and not signed for. This was only discovered when there was a formal audit and inventory and someone spilled the beans about the "other" locker. As the shite had hit the fan, whoever had assembled it either ditched it then or it was long gone. The only other alternative was that they had sold it, because they were all clean, from a drug sense.

So, I had no criminal case to make because I had no evidence.

The evidence is everything, from a prosecution standpoint.

Very interesting.

And as you can see in this thread, I 100% think Avery is guilty.

If Brendan did help, he still should be released if any good lawyer takes the case IMO. He's a mentally challenged minor confessing without a lawyer or parent and no other evidence ties him to the murder.