Jump to content

Making a Murderer Discussion - HUGE SPOILERS INSIDE

DEF

By DEF
in Off Topic

Recommended Posts

  • Paid Members
DEF Veteran

DEF

Posted
  • Paid Members
Posted

Hi kids, by now I'm sure many of you have seen Netflix's 10 part Documentary about Steven Avery's trial. If you haven't STOP READING THIS THREAD NOW!

 

I thought it would be cool to get peoples thoughts on if he did it as it were. It's not really the kind of thing I read up on online but I figure the collective UKFF brain trust has a wealth of knowledge on the subject by now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Paid Members
Nexus Mentor

Nexus

Posted
  • Paid Members
Posted

I was at my most uncomfortable whenever it returned back to Brandon's story.

 

"What does compromise mean?"

"I don't know"

 

"Yeah I was just guessing?"

"What do you mean guessing?"

"Like...with my homework."

 

I don't know if he did it. I don't know if he was around. I just know that they basically coerced a confession out of a teenager with no legal representation present, and it was horrifically uncomfortable viewing.

 

I still don't understand how if she was murdered in either the house (to make Brendan guilty) or the garage (to make Steven guilty), they managed to destroy/hide the DNA evidence so well, yet were stupid enough to leave the car on the fucking auto lot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Paid Members
Bus Surfer Grand Master

Bus Surfer

Posted
  • Paid Members
Posted

The full interview transcripts are all online and it's pretty clear that the documentary is pretty favourable towards Avery.

 

Brendan's conversation on the phone with his Mother pretty much confirms to me they did it, whilst the police quite worryingly did all they could to ensure they went down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Slapnut Veteran

Slapnut

Posted
Posted

I gave up after episode 6 because it was boring me to tears, but I agree with you Silky Kisser. I'm not 100% sure! but from what I've seen I think they probably did it.

 

Twitter would tell you that they are both 100% no doubt innocent though, because authority are scum etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HeavyT Rising Star

HeavyT

Posted
Posted

I think Avery did it but he did not get a fair trial. Almost like they needed something to nail him with it so they just went ahead and did it. The key, tampered blood vial, coached confession etc. casts a lot of doubt over it. In my mind probably too much to convict him

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Slapnut Veteran

Slapnut

Posted
Posted

Fucking hell, it's not about whether they did it or not, it's about a fair fucking trial. Presumption of innocence, reasonable doubt, the failings of the justice system, police corruption. 

 

 

Did you even watch the same documentary as I did?

 

Of course it's about whether they did it or not, that's the whole idea of the documentary.  I didn't say it was a fair trial - it definitely wasn't - but what's wrong with discussing whether or not we think they did it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Paid Members
Dead Mike Grand Master

Dead Mike

Posted
  • Paid Members
Posted

Finished the penultimate episode last night so we saw both being convicted. It’s incredibly hard to watch & moving stuff. I’m a sucker for procedural and courtroom dramas so this was exactly my cup of tea.

 

I honestly can’t see how anyone’s who’s watched it can believe there wasn’t reasonable doubt to acquit? I read the transcripts of the phone conversation that Brendan had with his mother & there’s still little more there that goes beyond a retarded child being mishandled & coerced into giving a confession that he didn’t understand, with consequences that he was blissfully unaware of. The very idea that anyone could believe a woman was tied to bed, raped, had her head shaved?!? & her throat slit. Then was moved from the bedroom into a garage where she was shot in the head & there was literally not a single hair, spec of blood or any shred of DNA that placed her in either location, nothing. From 5 months of investigation is baffling.

 

This doesn’t even take into account the proven conspiracy, police lying under oath, planted evidence, the blatant motive for framing Avery ($36m worth) & all the other nonsense.

 

The quote from the defence lawyer at the end was brilliant. ‘Most people can say with confidence that in their life they’ll never commit a crime. Nobody can claim they’ll never be accused, and if you are? God help you’.

 

 

I gave up after episode 6 because it was boring me to tears, but I agree with you Silky Kisser. I'm not 100% sure! but from what I've seen I think they probably did it.

Twitter would tell you that they are both 100% no doubt innocent though, because authority are scum etc

 

 

Maybe the people tweeting about it actually watched the whole thing, & paid attention as they weren't bored? Rather than just having an 'authority are scum' attitute. I'm honestly surprised that's what you took away from it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Slapnut Veteran

Slapnut

Posted
Posted

It's more of a case of Twitter folk not even considering any option other than 100% innocence.  I've read quite a lot about the case since which is why I've come to my conclusion, but a lot of people on Twitter have watched the series, not done anymore research on the case, and aren't willing to consider that the documentary may have been slightly one-sided.

 

I'll end up watching the remaining episodes soon, mainly to get a perspective on why so many people are so sure in their verdict.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Paid Members
Chilly McFreeze Rising Star

Chilly McFreeze

Posted
  • Paid Members
Posted

It really isn't about whether he did it or not. Really. Not to say you can't speculate, but the documentary wasn't a fucking whodunnit. Maybe if you had watched the whole thing you might realise that.

 

And if you've been doing your own research online, no doubt you are aware of all the defense's evidence left out of the documentary too?

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/40dquo/prodefense_information_that_was_left_out_of_mam/

 

This isn't me trying to prove he didn't do it, but it shows that if they really wanted to be pro Avery, they left a hell of a lot of stuff out on both sides of the case in the edit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Slapnut Veteran

Slapnut

Posted
Posted

It really isn't about whether he did it or not. Really. Not to say you can't speculate, but the documentary wasn't a fucking whodunnit. Maybe if you had watched the whole thing you might realise that.

 

And if you've been doing your own research online, no doubt you are aware of all the defense's evidence left out of the documentary too?

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/40dquo/prodefense_information_that_was_left_out_of_mam/

 

This isn't me trying to prove he didn't do it, but it shows that if they really wanted to be pro Avery, they left a hell of a lot of stuff out on both sides of the case in the edit.

 

The whole premise of the documentary is whether or not he received a fair trial and the possibility that he may not have actually committed the murder.  I'm not suggesting it's a whodunnit, and I'm struggling to see how you've come to that conclusion from what I've said.  Of course we're going to discuss whether or not we think he did it, it's a relevant discussion.

 

I read that post on Reddit last night actually, along with about a hundred other threads on that Subreddit over the past few weeks, and it's indeed very compelling.  Again, I have to stress that I'm not 100% sure either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...