re: Poll, Making a Murderer Spoilers obviously.

Anybody else think the bus driver was kinda trashy hot? She had some jug-a-lugs.

quote:

---

Anybody else think the bus driver was kinda trashy hot? She had some jug-a-lugs

---

She was quite possibly top 5 classiest in the entire documentary.

quote:

---

Anybody else think the bus driver was kinda trashy hot?

---

I had a strange attraction to the older blonde reporter. She was pretty sexy for her age. The younger brunette with glasses was strong as hell as well.

quote:

---

I was watching this thinking how on earth that jury came back with a guilty verdict: there was no motive (that we heard), no murder weapon, no physical evidence

---

Yes there was. Here is everything important that was left out. Cliffs

-Shackles and handcuffs (like the ones Brendon drew in the confession with the PI) were found in Steve's house
-The car key had DNA from Steve's sweat. I understand it's very plausible to have planted the blood. But what you're telling me the police have a bottle of his sweat in a cooler in the evidence room? No chance
-Avery has been accused of rape before
-Steve specifically requested that Halbach come to his house that day. He used a fake name when doing so. He also called her directly 3 times the day she disappeared and used the *67 function to block his number on 2 of those calls. She had previously told her boss she did not want to go back to the Avery house
-The bullet with Halbach's DNA on it was fired by Steve Avery's rifle. This is the most important part. In order for this conspiracy to work this evidence would mean the police (or whomever you think actually did it) stole Steve's gun, shot Halbach, burned her body on Steve's property, hid her vehicle on Steve's property, planted his blood and his sweat on her car, and planted a key to her car in his house. Ask yourself the likelihood of all this happening.

Most of you don't want to hear it, but he did it. Yea the cops screwed up and planted evidence and they should also be punished but Steve Avery is guilty. The real tragedy is that Brendon Dassey is in prison. Dude just wanted to turn in his 6th period project and watch wrestlemania

I agree with you. The question of did he do it and did he deserve to be convicted based on the shite show of a trial and police proceedings involved with the investigation are two entirely different questions.

quote:

---

I agree with you. The question of did he do it and did he deserve to be convicted based on the shite show of a trial and police proceedings involved with the investigation are two entirely different questions.

---

Right, but in the eyes of the law and the question of guilt or innocence, these are the same question.

I'm pretty sure that Steve did it. He didn't do it in his home, more likely that he took her out in the woods, did what he wanted with her and killed her, burned her at his home or at the quarry.

The police knew that he did it and fabricated some of the evidence to make the case.

His nephew may have known something, but I doubt that he was involved. If he had been involved, he would've given the police the info instead of parroting their questioning back to them.

quote:

---

But most here aren't looking through the eyes of the law. It's one thing to say "He shouldn't be in prison" but it's another to state definitively "He is innocent! "He absolutely did not do it!", which is what nearly every post in this thread and the original Making a Murderer thread says. The evidence overwhelmingly points towards him being guilty. Basically if you think Adnan Sayid is innocent (which would mean he is the most unlucky person in the history of our country) then there is a high probability you also think Steve is innocent. It's fun to believe although not practical

---

I don't know what most here are looking at it through. What I do know is that I can't say that he is guilty. That's not how it works. The way that this investigation and subsequent trial were handled is unbelievable. It wasn't proven that he was guilty, and in this country, that leaves only innocence. Whether you or I think he did it doesn't matter. I'm not OK with him being in jail right now, because it completely disgusts me how this whole situation was handled, and no one should be OK with it.

I never posted I thought he was "innocent". and let's make this clear. no jury in America is asked to find someone "innocent". their instructions are to find someone guilty or not guilty. there is a difference. to pronounce guilt, juries must determine that the prosecution has narrowly met the burden of legal proof “beyond a reasonable doubt". based on what was presented in that documentary, the prosecution did not do that.

and I'm sure you thought the same thing prior to googling the trial and any subsequent articles on the subject.

That list is pretty unconvincing, and I can see why they left it out. I mean, they condensed a SEVEN WEEK trial and a 10-year investigation into 10 episodes (8 really, as he's convicted in E8). Stuff was going to get left out for obvious reasons of time. You can't include everything, and the doc kept the most damning evidence against him (except one thing I think they should've kept). But let's look at the list:

-Shackles and handcuffs (like the ones Brendon drew in the confession with the PI) were found in Steve's house

You mean an auto salvage yard has a bunch of chains? SHOCKING. That's not convincing at all, especially when we look at Brendan's confession and how it was elicited.


-The car key had DNA from Steve's sweat. I understand it's very plausible to have planted the blood. But what you're telling me the police have a bottle of his sweat in a cooler in the evidence room? No chance

This was in the documentary. Know what also had no chance? That ONLY Avery's DNA was on the key. There is no earthly way that thing wasn't scrubbed down and then evidence planted, or else the key would have multiple person's DNA.

-Avery has been accused of rape before

So we're going to use a proven FALSE conviction as a strike against Avery because he was accused? That's insane.

-Steve specifically requested that Halbach come to his house that day. He used a fake name when doing so. He also called her directly 3 times the day she disappeared and used the *67 function to block his number on 2 of those calls. She had previously told her boss she did not want to go back to the Avery house

I specifically requested my dentist to see me and called him multiple times to confirm. Clearly, I'm stalking him. I don't doubt Avery was creepy, he is. And his white trash family would make anyone uncomfortable, but this doesn't come close to proof of murder. It proves he was a creepy. Hes guilty of that, for sure. But what's interesting to me is her ex-boyfriend accessed her voicemail the day after she disappeared and deleted several VM's. The cops never followed up on that.

What's odd is that you leave out the most damning piece of info: Avery greeting her with just a towel on a previous time. I think it's likely he did come on to her previously.

-The bullet with Halbach's DNA on it was fired by Steve Avery's rifle. This is the most important part. In order for this conspiracy to work this evidence would mean the police (or whomever you think actually did it) stole Steve's gun, shot Halbach, burned her body on Steve's property, hid her vehicle on Steve's property, planted his blood and his sweat on her car, and planted a key to her car in his house. Ask yourself the likelihood of all this happening.

Yes, the bullet found was fired from his gun. This is extremely likely, as it was his property and his gun. He probably fired it before.

No one thinks the cops killed her, and the police misconduct does NOT require them shooting her, as no one (other than the prosecution in order to discredit the defense) has made this accusation. The police had unfettered, exclusive access to the property for two weeks. They had access to Steve's DNA and blood samples from the previous case. and they were under suit for $38 million. Yet you think it's unlikely that the cops could planet evidence in this situation despite having means, motive, AND opportunity?

The real problem is that the physical evidence does not in any way support the state's theory of the case. There was no blood spatter in the house or the garage, which would have to exist. Or you believe Avery is a criminal mastermind who managed to destroy every microscopic trace of DNA and blood evidence in the house, only to then leave the car on his property, a key in plain sight, and then the bones in his yard (after moving them three times). So, this requires Avery to be an elite mastermind when cleaning his house, yet then leave key evidence just lying around. So he's both a genius AND a moron.

The part that gets me is that Brendan's confession is so obviously coerced and untrue. He just agreed with what the cops said and drew pictures as instructed. Yet the DA and the police, knowing that his confession did not match the details of the crime Avery was convicted for, then prosecuted Brendan on a DIFFERENT theory of what happened. The fact they would seek a conviction for Brendan, who is so obviously innocent it makes my head hurt, casts doubt on to whether the Avery case, which is more solid, is legit.

I ask myself: do I believe these cops and DA are so unethical and corrupt that they would frame Avery for murder? And my default is "no", but I saw how they railroaded Brendan, so I'm forced to admit that, yes, these guys are so corrupt they would frame a man for murder.



TL;DR:
Brendan is clearly innocent. Avery may be guilty, he may not be, but the case against him is so tainted that the state got nowhere near its burden to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. And Avery was denied the presumption of innocence in court. You can't convict a guy on "more likely than not". The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt, and I don't see any way you can argue the state met this burden.