- 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: New Netflix docu-series "Making a Murderer" (Spoilers)
Posted on 12/31/15 at 12:15 pm to Roger Klarvin
Posted on 12/31/15 at 12:15 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
Their "theory" is that an uneducated man with an IQ if 70, and with the aid of a 16 year old mentally handicapped kid, managed to brutally murder someone in his home and then destroy the forensic evidence so successfully and so completely that not so much as a trace of cleaning product let alone blood or hair from the victim was found at the scene. AND YET, this same person was so careless as to hide her car (with his blood, no cleaning attempt made, in it) using tree branches on his property dispute having the means to completely destroy it a few hundred yards away, managed to leave her keychain by his fricking nightstand and left her burnt remains within view of his front porch.
It insults my intelligence that anyone would expect me to believe that. The prosecutions theory involves components of both a criminal mastermind and someone too stupid to dress themselves in the morning.
0
Posted on 12/31/15 at 12:22 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
Buting is Buster from Arrested Development
David Wallace, IMO
Posted on 12/31/15 at 10:19 pm to LesGeaux45
Spoilers
I'm on episode 5 now. The judge just denied the defenses motion for a mistrial and doesnt instruct the jury to disregard the testimony from the other nephews testimony. WTF? This is by far the most shocking thing to me so far that has happened (at least shocking thing that is proven). How can they do that? That entire situation sounds botched, I would assume you have to disregard that. Just seems like a bad situation.
I'm probably gonna binge and finish the rest tomorrow, i just had to come rage because that made me so mad. Wtf at that judge man.
I'm on episode 5 now. The judge just denied the defenses motion for a mistrial and doesnt instruct the jury to disregard the testimony from the other nephews testimony. WTF? This is by far the most shocking thing to me so far that has happened (at least shocking thing that is proven). How can they do that? That entire situation sounds botched, I would assume you have to disregard that. Just seems like a bad situation.
I'm probably gonna binge and finish the rest tomorrow, i just had to come rage because that made me so mad. Wtf at that judge man.
Posted on 1/1/16 at 12:34 am to LesGeaux45
I'm on episode 4 now. These cops are corrupt as frick and the nephew's attorney is, at best, incompetent.
Posted on 1/1/16 at 9:27 pm to LesGeaux45
Just finished. Absolutely maddening.
Not to compare Steven Avery to Gov. Edwin Edwards, but I could not help but think of the Edwards trial throughout Making a Murderer. Look at how far the State of Wisconsin goes to do what they did to Avery. Imagine what the Federal Government will do to ruin someone who had already beaten/embarrassed them in the past, much like Avery had already embarrassed and was about to sue the State in court. The feds used any and every resource available to them to beat Edwards with no substantial evidence. Edwards may not have been totally innocent, but I challenge anyone to read about his trial in "Edwin Edwards: Governor of Louisiana" and say that justice was served.
Not to compare Steven Avery to Gov. Edwin Edwards, but I could not help but think of the Edwards trial throughout Making a Murderer. Look at how far the State of Wisconsin goes to do what they did to Avery. Imagine what the Federal Government will do to ruin someone who had already beaten/embarrassed them in the past, much like Avery had already embarrassed and was about to sue the State in court. The feds used any and every resource available to them to beat Edwards with no substantial evidence. Edwards may not have been totally innocent, but I challenge anyone to read about his trial in "Edwin Edwards: Governor of Louisiana" and say that justice was served.
This post was edited on 1/1/16 at 9:31 pm
Posted on 1/2/16 at 1:30 am to Fenwick86
Kind of a strange comparison. Although both are creepy and guilty of major crimes, maybe it fits..
Something I just saw, that wasn't said on the show. It kept saying that Avery served 18 years because of the false rape allegation. But this wasn't true. He also served time for ramming his cousins car and threatening her with a gun. He got 6 years for that crime and his sentences were run concurrently (the crime violated his earlier felony conviction release contingent on staying clean). They glossed over that whole point..
Also, I found a really great article, with interesting points that breaks down Avery's statements about the murder (LINK It brings up some really interesting points and re-enforces some of the things I picked up while watching the show..
Something I just saw, that wasn't said on the show. It kept saying that Avery served 18 years because of the false rape allegation. But this wasn't true. He also served time for ramming his cousins car and threatening her with a gun. He got 6 years for that crime and his sentences were run concurrently (the crime violated his earlier felony conviction release contingent on staying clean). They glossed over that whole point..
Also, I found a really great article, with interesting points that breaks down Avery's statements about the murder (LINK It brings up some really interesting points and re-enforces some of the things I picked up while watching the show..
Posted on 1/2/16 at 2:43 am to brmark70816
quote:This is from a blogger named Peter Hyatt. This "great article" is a blogger's linguistic analysis. He has zero credentials to make him an expert and is very suspect.
Also, I found a really great article, with interesting points that breaks down Avery's statements about the murder
quote:Some people hear what they want to hear. It was in one of the first episodes about his cousin and her husband, a sheriff's deputy.
Something I just saw, that wasn't said on the show. It kept saying that Avery served 18 years because of the false rape allegation. But this wasn't true. He also served time for ramming his cousins car and threatening her with a gun. He got 6 years for that crime and his sentences were run concurrently (the crime violated his earlier felony conviction release contingent on staying clean). They glossed over that whole point..
Even after Avery was exonerated for the sexual assault of Penny Beernsten and Gregory Allen rightfully pinpointed, the Sheriff's office still wouldn't admit Allen was the perpetrator, even going as far to make statements they didn't believe the DNA.
Posted on 1/2/16 at 10:19 am to drizztiger
quote:
This is from a blogger named Peter Hyatt. This "great article" is a blogger's linguistic analysis. He has zero credentials to make him an expert and is very suspect.
I thought it was a pretty fascinating breakdown. I didn't say he was an expert or anything, just gives a bit of a different view. Seriously, your bias and knighting is starting to reach another level. As for the guy and his "credentials"..
"Peter Hyatt is a civil investigator who has conducted more than 2,500 interviews including children’s interviews. He uses Statement Analysis is his work, and teaches Statement Analysis in Interviewing.
He also works part-time as an analyst for law enforcement and private companies"
If you read the article or blog post, he is quite fair and questions both sides. He casts doubts and breaks down statements, showing deception and lies. It's a practice that is used quite frequently. It doesn't really mean anything, just gives another viewpoint.
quote:
Some people hear what they want to hear. It was in one of the first episodes about his cousin and her husband, a sheriff's deputy
Once again, No. They never said that during any of the episodes. They talked about the crime. But he talks it down and they never talk about the repercussions. They never said that he did time for it and that he was going to jail regardless, which would be his 3rd time being locked up (3 different felonies). They made it seem like he was arrested and put away for no reason. He was going to jail anyway.
quote:
the Sheriff's office still wouldn't admit Allen was the perpetrator, even going as far to make statements they didn't believe the DNA.
You are fighting a losing battle and just mud slinging now. You don't know this. All you have seen is a statement or two from a couple of people that work for the departments, in a one sided documentary. The department never took an official stance or proclaimed him still guilty. Once the results came back, he was released and no one fought it. Where are you getting this from? The one guy on the stand that did the picture?
Posted on 1/2/16 at 11:28 am to brmark70816
Is it common for someome entering the appellate process ending up with the original trial judge presiding?
That seems insane to me. How can the guy than ran the original trial be expected to impartially judge whether the original trial was fairly held?
That seems insane to me. How can the guy than ran the original trial be expected to impartially judge whether the original trial was fairly held?
Posted on 1/2/16 at 11:32 am to Scoop
Also, who else found themselves distracted by the reporter?
Posted on 1/2/16 at 12:35 pm to Scoop
quote:Further..how could you let, not one but two, close relatives of the police that were prosecuting a person sit on the jury???? WTF
How can the guy than ran the original trial be expected to impartially judge whether the original trial was fairly held?
This post was edited on 1/2/16 at 12:36 pm
Posted on 1/2/16 at 3:20 pm to Crow Pie
quote:
Further..how could you let, not one but two, close relatives of the police that were prosecuting a person sit on the jury???? WTF
How did the defense not object to their being on there?
Posted on 1/2/16 at 4:58 pm to LesGeaux45
I finished the series last night. I think Avery definitely did it and I got the feeling that his attorneys did too, but being the only professional attorneys in the documentary, they still did their job anyway. I do think that the key was planted and possibly the blood as well. Brendan deserves to be released. His level of involvement will never be clear, but I think anything he did would have been due to manipulation from Avery.
Besides the cops corruption, the most surprising thing to me was the incompetence of several "expert witnesses." The female forensic anthropologist, DNA tech, and FBI guy were the worst. I laughed out loud when the forensic anthropologist testified that she was killed by gunshots to the head based on skeletal fragments and the FBI guy said he was certain about untested samples.
Besides the cops corruption, the most surprising thing to me was the incompetence of several "expert witnesses." The female forensic anthropologist, DNA tech, and FBI guy were the worst. I laughed out loud when the forensic anthropologist testified that she was killed by gunshots to the head based on skeletal fragments and the FBI guy said he was certain about untested samples.
This post was edited on 1/2/16 at 5:02 pm
Posted on 1/2/16 at 5:25 pm to Yellerhammer5
Brendan's first lawyer and his investigator are pieces of shite. That kid asked if he was getting out before WrestleMania came on. I don't believe he had anything to do with anything
The only thing that made me smile was the DA getting screwed by his texts at the end.
A couple of times I thought Steve did it, but man, he has no motive and the evidence is garbage. He was in prison for 18 years. I can't wrap my head around him doing something worse than he was accused of before.
The reporter was a hottie.
The only thing that made me smile was the DA getting screwed by his texts at the end.
A couple of times I thought Steve did it, but man, he has no motive and the evidence is garbage. He was in prison for 18 years. I can't wrap my head around him doing something worse than he was accused of before.
The reporter was a hottie.
Posted on 1/2/16 at 5:27 pm to Yellerhammer5
quote:
The female forensic anthropologist, DNA tech, and FBI guy were the worst. I laughed out loud when the forensic anthropologist testified that she was killed by gunshots to the head based on skeletal fragments and the FBI guy said he was certain about untested samples.
I don't think they needed the lawyers to make them look bad. They made me think I could be a fricking scientist. The FBI guy should have lost his job for saying what he said in court.
Posted on 1/2/16 at 5:45 pm to putt23
quote:
, but man, he has no motive and the evidence is garbage
It's was most likely a rape case. I don't think anyone else with a different motive (ex-boyfriend or family) would have had the knowledge of the averys and their land to frame them. If it was one of the other Averys, then I would still think that it was a rape and murder.
Whether or not the evidence is garbage depends on if it was planted. I think the defense did a good job with the key, but the EDTA test backfired and the hole in the top is expected. Anyone who has ever worked with them knows that. The only problem was the broken evidence tape.
I'm not saying that the cops aren't crooked or that there couldn't be reasonable doubt, just that I think he did do it.
Posted on 1/2/16 at 5:49 pm to Yellerhammer5
quote:Uhh how? They said many times they thought he was innocent. It's possible they were just doing their jobs but I didn't get that impression at all.
think Avery definitely did it and I got the feeling that his attorneys did too
Posted on 1/2/16 at 5:57 pm to Melvin
quote:
Uhh how? They said many times they thought he was innocent. It's possible they were just doing their jobs but I didn't get that impression at all
I may be reading into them too much, but at the end, one of them said that he really hoped that Steven Avery did it because of how the case turned out and him being wrongly convicted again. I doubt he would say that if he truly believed in his innocence and secondly, they dropped the case when he ran out of money. I know that they are not running a charity, but it seems like they could have helped get him support from somewhere else before bowing out of the case. Weren't they connected or had friends with the innocence project? Nobody knows all the evidence and testimony better than they do.
Posted on 1/2/16 at 5:59 pm to Yellerhammer5
quote:
It's was most likely a rape case. I don't think anyone else with a different motive (ex-boyfriend or family) would have had the knowledge of the averys and their land to frame them. If it was one of the other Averys, then I would still think that it was a rape and murder.
I hear ya, but if he raped and killed her there would be something on the bed. They didn't even take the mattress away.
I understand he could have killed her in another place, and also raped her in another place, but there was nothing that showed that.
They wouldn't let the Avery's go on the property for 8 days. Pretty excessive to me. How in the world did her car key have his DNA, but not hers? insane
Posted on 1/2/16 at 6:05 pm to putt23
What ever happened to that video inside the trailer when someone is rooting around that closet and jokes that they should check his shoes to see if they can frame him for any unsolved robberies?
Page 17 of 84
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News