re: Poll, Making a Murderer Spoilers obviously.

quote:

---

And if he was "retarded", it would have been used in his defense with his second set of attorneys.

ETA: Nor would he have been fit for the stand. He is and always was slow, not retarded. He had some normal classes in high school. He had a girlfriend. Now I think he's obviously fricked in the head over everything that happened.

---

They tried to use it in his defense but by then it was too late and the whole damn administration was corrupt. If you can't see that the kid is clearly retarded then there is no help for people like you and you probably would have taken advantage of him as well if you were an investigator. Predators prey on kids like him all the time. The kid asked about doing a school project and seeing wrestle-mania during the trial, for fricks sake he said he guessed in the interview like he does his homework because he is stupid. He is fricked in the head but not because of this trial. I don't see how you can't see that.

quote:

---

This is just a special type of ignorance. It's a ton of information about a case/documentary you're passionate enough to post on an anonymous message board about yet you have no desire to read more factual info about it and further educate yourself on the matter.

---

I've read enough of the fan sites from both sides to know that both are so heavily agenda pushing as to be fundamentally worthless. and, as I point out, a list of previous accusations is completely inadmissable in a court of law. And based on your posts, I had no interest in the biased website you were trying to promote in order to find out more info about something that does not even matter to the trial.

The issue in the doc is not whether Avery is guilty or innocent. It is about how the state of Wisconsin denied him a fair trial. He could be guilty, and I think you can create a timeline in which he is, but that utterly misses the point. The point is that the state used its power to taint evidence and deny someone their Constitutional protection of the presumption of innocence and a fair trial. Kratz's conduct was utterly appalling for an officer of the court, though not as appalling as Dassey's first attorney. That guy should have been disbarred.

Avery could be guilty, but I don't think the state came anywhere near its burden to proving it beyond a reasonable doubt, and was allowed to use evidence that was, frankly, obtained illegally. It's about a broken criminal justice system.

quote:

---

you probably would have taken advantage of him as well if you were an investigator

---

Another personal dig. Your anger is clouding your view.

quote:

---

I didn't sat it was just because of the trial. It was also manipulation and abuse.

---

No, it wasn't any of what you said. The kid has been fricked in the head since birth. You specifically said he was mind fricked because of the trial which is false. The whole family is dumb and he just happens to be the dumbest. To this day I still doubt he knows what the hell happened.

quote:

---

Agreed. He was incredibly slow and was manipulated by predators such as the investigators nad his lawyer.

---

FIFY since you are willingly obtuse.

quote:

---

Huh? Why would that mean it was too late?

---

If his first lawyer wasn't a clown, they could have exploited Brendan's stupidity for the well being of Brendan instead of giving the prosecutors an advantage.

quote:

---

The point is that the state used its power to taint evidence and deny someone their Constitutional protection of the presumption of innocence and a fair trial. Kratz's conduct was utterly appalling for an officer of the court, though not as appalling as Dassey's first attorney. That guy should have been disbarred.

---

My biggest takeaway from the documentary.

quote:

---

If you spend any time in court, you'll see that there's a good chunk of young society that can appear to be borderline retarded. Kids get in front of judges every day and stumble through "yeah" and "I dunno" answers, sometimes incriminating themselves just out of sheer stupidity.

I watched a judge ask a young defendant if he would prefer jail or community service, and the response was, "I dunno." The judge then spelled out the difference and the kid's answer was, "I don't wanna go to jail, but I don't want to pick up trash though."

Judges see stupid kids every day. The nephew is in special-ed classes, but he isn't retarded. He's just one of the dumber defendants that has gone through that court.

---

The kid didn't perceive to be dumb in front of the judge when he tried to fire his lawyer. There is a difference between what you are describing and Brendan. The kid had a mildly retarded iq score, how some of you are denying the fact that Brendan is retarded is beyond me.

Whether Brendan was retarded or not doesn't really matter. It was pretty evident in one of the videos that he didn't grasp the severity of his situation when he asked if he was going to be back at school to turn his project in. Then asking his mom if he was going to be home in time to watch Wrestlemania.

Perhaps some of that was naivety, but there is also a great deal of lack of intelligence. It was also pretty evident he was only confessing to get them to stop badgering and bullying him, and he admitted he was simply guessing at what they wanted him to say.

quote:

---

yet blindly adhere to your assertion that they "wouldn't have" tampered with other evidence

---

I do believe they tampered with evidence. Please show me where I said they didn't or "wouldn't have." You people don't actually read anything but comment on everything as if you do. Here is a quote from my first post in this thread.

quote:

---

the cops screwed up and planted evidence and they should also be punished

---

LINK

quote:

---

Got it, so you compare yourself to a retard, or in your words, dummy. The kid asked to go do his project after confessing to a murder, you think any mildly intelligent person would do that?

---

I'm starting to question your mental stability at this point.

When did I compare myself to a "retard"? Which is a very derogatory comment I might add.

When did I say he was mildly intelligent? I have said he was dumb or well below average intelligence now more than once.

Are you feeling OK?

quote:

---

MORE manipulated

---

And?

quote:

---

Learn to read. His first lawyer did not exploit his stupidity for his well being.

---

That has been stated repeatedly in this thread that they tried to use his "mental capacity" to show how manipulated he was in some of the interviews.

It's like you're trying to make this huge jump from "well below average intelligence" to "mentally incapacitated". That a really big jump and you should probably try to understand that a little more.

quote:

---

But what you're telling me the police have a bottle of his sweat in a cooler in the evidence room? No chance

---

quote:

---

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.

---

quote:

---

You people don't actually read anything but comment on everything as if you do.

---

I did read it, and that's why I commented on it. Maybe I'm misinterpreting your incessant arguing, but it appears you are against a retrial. I hope that isn't the case.