re: New Netflix docu-series "Making a Murderer" (Spoilers)

quote:

---

Is it fair to say the judge should have issued a gag order from Day 1 given the delicate history of the state vs this particular defendant...or is that too much hindsight is 20/20?

---

Agree completely. The magnitude of the press coverage and awareness of the prior case alone. I do not believe this is a case of hindsight or Monday Morning QBing. I don't know if either party suggested or what the judge's discretion was in Wisconsin, but if available, it should have been invoked.

quote:

---

I also do not forget that, once assigned, his job is to win the case.

---

This is one of the huge problems with the system that the doc calls into question.

quote:

---

but this same documentary series bent over backwards to make Steven Avery appear to be the nice, sweet, hard-working family man that he definitely is not.

---

I don't really agree with that. I thought they showed plenty of warts. Hard-working? When did they show him doing that?

quote:

---

Press conference where he implored that those 15 and under to not watch because the details were so disgusting.

I mean, that is just absurd in every single way. To have a press conference like that prior to trial.

---

They effectively presented a script for a new Saw movie...based off of a clearly false confession from a mentally-retarded child. Truly, beyond the pale. And the judge allowed it to continue unabated. The venue shift in this case was pure window-dressing.

quote:

---

I thought they showed plenty of warts.

---

Right at first - the first couple of hours, maybe.

quote:

---

Hard-working? When did they show him doing that?

---

They showed him talking about it, generally, working with cars. His dad wanting to raise fish with him, etc. Just normal, everyday folks (which none of the Averys qualify for that.)

And I don't even strongly dislike the guy. I felt for him for that first conviction and 18 years - that's not a bitter pill to swallow - that a bitter shite ton of bad meals to swallow.

The turnoffs were him threatening to kill himself if his parents didn't rush out and put the business up for bail, etc. But you had to do that analysis independent of what the documentary showed.

quote:

---

It wasn't out in the open.

---

Okay, so you're just being obtuse at this point. It was found in clear, plain sight on the floor. There is a picture of it.

quote:

---

But you had to do that analysis independent of what the documentary showed.

---

Many have already done that, and are reaching the same conclusions. I read all about it before I had even watched the documentary because I didn't think it was worth watching at first.

Wisconsin tried to shut down the Documentary

They should bomb that whole retarded town.

I think what a lot of people in this thread are failing to realize is that none of you will ever be able to decide Steven Avery's fate. Most of you are going off of 2nd hand information and media reports. None of you could ever stand in judgement in this case, as there's a reason why jurors are selected based on prior information they already know. Most of you have already decided one way or the other and are unwilling to listen to the opposing side. I know this because a lot of the responses are selective in what part of posts they choose to respond to.

In reality, there are compelling arguments on both sides. The problem with this case is that a lot of the evidence that was discovered was found by the very sheriffs department that Avery was going after. Therefor we can not look at the evidence without believing that there could have been an ulterior motive. The evidence is questionable from the get go. Some people can't look beyond that. Could Steven Avery have committed the crime AND the sheriffs department plant evidence? Yes. Is there proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the sheriff's department planted evidence. Not IMO. Did they plant evidence? I think they did. Do I think Avery did it? I think he did. Is there proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he did? No, thanks to the sheriff's department.

But instead we now have to question this case because of the people who were involved in it. The sheriff's department should never have been anywhere near it. We have lost the chance to properly judge this case unclouded because they got involved. We can sit here and go back and forth about the circumstances of this piece of evidence or that piece of evidence, but the truth is that every piece that was found by that sheriff's department is in question. The only thing that we know with 100% certainty is that it was wrong for them to be involved. This case will always be in judgement now. And if Avery was guilty, is released, and commits murder again, part of that blood is on the sheriff's department for bringing in questions about this case in the first place.

Anyway, just my two cents. Please carry on...