Making a Murderer

I too think he is guilty but the real story that comes out of this and the documentary is the sheer incompetence of the police and their investigation and the US justice system that is more interested in just securing a conviction than it is properly examining the evidence before it and reaching a just verdict.
 
Exeter Blue I am here said:
I think Avery had phoned Theresa Holbach's office the day before to specifically ask that she be the one sent to the car lot to take the pictures he wanted, hadn't he? And I seem to recall reading that he'd bought a set of manacles the day before as well. Neither of those bits of evidence was admissible for whatever reason. My own instinct is that he was guilty as charged, but the police almost certainly fitted him up into the bargain and it's that seemingly demonstrable corruption that is his best bet for release. Can't see it happening though
Click to expand...

There are ways of presenting that evidence. If you want to make him look bad, you present it as him asking specifically for her. If you want to make it look better, you say he asked for the usual girl to be sent over (as allegedly there was only one person - her, for the entire area, so asking for the usual need not look quite like a specific request for her - if you catch my drift).
He also phoned her three times on the day of the murder, but hid his number, then called her once after her presumed death without hiding his number which prosecutors claim was an attempt to make it look like he had no idea she was dead.

One thing is for sure though - somebody DID murder that young lady. Personally I think he probably did it, it's less clear what Dassey's role was.
 
blueinsa said:
I too think he is guilty but the real story that comes out of this and the documentary is the sheer incompetence of the police and their investigation and the US justice system that is more interested in just securing a conviction than it is properly examining the evidence before it and reaching a just verdict.
Click to expand...

I totally agree, but we must also be careful that a documentary like this is also capable of presenting a case in a biased manner too. It's very easy to buy into such a documentary and assume the documentary is revealing a hidden truth when it can also be be guilty of overstating the mistakes made by the police etc.

Similar documentaries about the Yorkshire Ripper make the police look totally incompetent, and whilst looking back in hindsight we can all see mistakes were made, it's very hard to put yourself in the position of the investigating team at the time. Whilst nobody claims the ripper was innocent, documentaries certainly make the police look very poor - possibly overly so.
 
Dubai Blue said:
Are you sure? My recollection of it is admittedly hazy 9 months on, but I thought they barely even mentioned Dassey's testimony in Avery's case (if at all) because they knew how flimsy it was and also because it detailed a completely different version of events to the one they levelled at Avery.
Click to expand...


What you are discounting is the impact of those press conferences held by DA with pretty graphic details and a tale of horrendous murder which was played over and over again for quiet some time through local media outlets before his trial started, so members of jury were already compromised with media polarization. I would compare it to an extent with ched evans case, where for months media used rapist as his first name, editorials after editorials were written on him, and now where do we stand with his case, his conviction was quashed and he is set for a retrial. Jury was exposed to similar sort of reporting in avery's case.

Moreover dassey claim of the batteries doesnt matters at all now since his conviction is overturned and considering how unethically they interviewed a child using coercive investigation techniques, a child with below average iq and low sense of understanding and in absence of his lawyers or mother. Moreover one shouldn't forget how dassey was sold down the river by his crooked lawyer.

As a lawyer i can confidently tell you that in criminal cases first thing that you look at is the motive, now ask yourself who had a stronger motive, steven avery, a guy about to be awarded 400k, a strong position in civil suit of 36 million or the police department, who were facing a multimillion lawsuit, public humilation, national spotlight for the wrong reasons? One more thing that should also be taken into account is the chief investigator in avery's wrongful conviction was the present sheriff at the time of murder case
 
Nobody else find the campaign and reaction for this utterly bizarre? Pressured or not, the guy confessed with his own detail some horrific things more than once and the TV series certainly showed no conclusive proof - I actually thought whilst the police dept. may have planted evidence to make a charge stick, Avery seemed guilty (or at least didn't do enough to justify his innocence). Guilty or not, this is celebrity culture at it's worse - because he was on a popular TV series and made an odd comment about missing Wrestlemania after confessing to such a thing, people en-masse supported a campaign to release him. The TV series left quite a bit of info out and skirted facts - e.g. describing Avery as throwing a cat "over" a fire when he was about 18 or older, when he actually doused it in oil and threw it onto the fire. Casual viewers shout about releasing him too. That TV series was conducted appallingly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.