Making a Murderer

Finished it just now.

 

Not sure what to say...the kid appears to definitely be innocent. The coerced confession was BS. Steven is fucked and hopefully this brings about some public awareness. The whole thing is insane and he deserves a Federal trial outside of Wiscuntston.

 

 

At the very least, the kid's attorney should be disbarred.

Finished it just now.

 

Not sure what to say...the kid appears to definitely be innocent. The coerced confession was BS. Steven is fucked and hopefully this brings about some public awareness. The whole thing is insane and he deserves a Federal trial outside of Wiscuntston.

The kid's confession and drawings came from scenes from "Kiss the Girls" book and movie, he's definitely innocent.

1st and foremost, I hope I never end up in Wisconsin for any reason at all.

2nd, WTF is up with every conversation starting with "Yeah?", "Yeah"

2nd, WTF is up with every conversation starting with "Yeah?", "Yeah"

 

 

I was just telling my family about this over Christmas! Some of my girlfriend's family is from Wisconsin and they said nobody they know does this.

 

 

 

As I watched Making a Murderer, I kept thinking about this YouTube video: Don't Talk to Police

 

If you have already seen it, watch it again, it's invaluable information.

 

If you have not already seen it, watch immediately!

The disgraced DA who prosecuted them interviewed below.

 

http://www.maxim.com/entertainment/making-...n-kratz-2015-12

 

It’s been over ten years since Ken Kratz helped put Steven Avery behind bars for a second time, in a mind-boggling murder trial that is the subject of the new Netflix documentary series, Making a Murderer. The series documents the trial of Avery and his 16-year-old nephew Brendan Dassey, who were both convicted of the October 31, 2005 murder of local Wisconsin photographer Teresa Halbach.

 

Making a Murderer exposed some serious flaws in the criminal justice system, along with unflattering personal details about Kratz that did not appear to be relevant to the case, but that have nonetheless help cast Kratz as the villain in a narrative audiences are eating up: That Avery was framed by the Manitoch County Sheriff Department as he was pursuing a $36 million dollar lawsuit against the state for his earlier wrongful conviction.

 

But Kratz believes the public outrage over Avery and Dassey’s convictions are misplaced, and instead has accused Netflix of presenting a skewed and incomplete picture of Avery’s trial and conviction. Kratz, who is now a criminal defense attorney, spoke to Maxim about his frustrations with Making a Murderer.

 

Are you surprised that Avery and Dassey’s ten-year-old convictions have become such a hot topic?

Not at all. If you pick and choose and edit clips over a ten-year span, you’re going to be able to spoon-feed a movie audience so they conclude what you want them to conclude. That the theory of planted evidence...is accepted by some people isn’t surprising at all. The piece is done very well, and I would have come to the same conclusion if that was the only material I was presented with.

 

Can you clarify exactly why you didn’t participate [via interviews] in Making a Murderer?

In February 2013, the filmmakers were negotiating on a project with Netflix that was an advocacy piece created by and for the Steven Avery defense. There’s nothing about it that looked like a documentary.

 

I had contact with [filmmaker] Laura Riccardi and I said I wanted to see [an earlier incarnation of the film that had previously been screened at a festival]. I said, “I’m agreeing to an interview, I want to know what you are alleging and what your angle is.” They refused. They said, “we’re not going to share anything with you,” from the film that I referenced. So I thought, well, this looks exactly like what I thought it was — I’m being set up. If I’m not being provided the same opportunity as the defense, if I’m not being shown a finished product that thousands of people had [already] seen. There’s no justification for not showing that to me unless you are trying to ambush me.

 

How did you feel about your portrayal in Making a Murderer?

I understand that my demeanor may have been very brash, even overconfident ... there was bit more bravado that I usually have, but this case kind of required that. All that notwithstanding, [the filmmakers] took lots of opportunities to mention things that happened to me three years after the case. [Ed note: this included a sexting scandal in which he sent lewd messages to a victim of domestic violence, admission of sexual addiction and a substance abuse problem.] If they aren’t casting me as a villain, you’ve got to ask, why would you include those things about me? They don't even tell you 80 percent of the evidence that the jury saw. They purposely kept all of that evidence that I showed the jury that absolutely discounted this evidence-planting theory.

 

What was some of the evidence that was excluded from Making a Murderer?

Avery’s DNA was found under [Teresa’s car’s] trunk. [Later, and in a separate correspondence, Kratz said this DNA evidence was found under the hood, suggesting that Kratz misspoke at one point in the interview.] It wasn’t blood. It was from his sweaty hands. Do the cops also have a file of his sweat that they are carrying around? The evidence conclusively shows that Steven Avery’s hand was under the hood when he insists he never touched her car.

 

Teresa’s phone, camera and [other contents of her purse] were found 20 feet from Avery's door, burned in his barrel...Two people saw him putting that stuff in there. This isn’t contested. It was all presented as evidence at the jury trial, and the documentary people don’t tell you that.

 

One thing Making a Murderer doesn’t address is motive. Why would Steven Avery want to kill Teresa Halbach?

Avery said he left his anger in prison -- thats not true at all. [in prison,] he created diagram of a torture chamber, [telling other inmates] "I intend to torture and rape and murder young women" after his release. The judge decided not to allow that evidence; he said it was too prejudicial.

 

Steven’s got a legitimate claim to being upset and angry that he was unlawfully convicted. There isn’t anybody who disagreed he was legitimately wronged. He was poised to have a much better life from that point forward. But his hatred and this desire to hang onto it was so prevalent in Mr. Avery that it came out.

 

Ten years later, are you still convinced that Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey are responsible for the death of Teresa Halbach?

I am convinced that Avery murdered and mutilated Halbach, and I believe that Brendan Dassey raped her and participated in the murder and helped dispose of the body. I also believe that without Steven, Brendan would not have murdered her.

 

My sympathy was with the 16-year-old kid. He’s probably a good-hearted kid who was just curious and made some bad choices. It’s so incredibly sad, not so much in my opinion that [Dassey] did it, but that his uncle made him do it; made him cut her throat. His uncle sealed his fate, to ensure his silence.

 

The above interview has been condensed and edited, and includes content from both a phone conversation and an email correspondence.

But stilll, where was all the blood then? Two 70 IQ people got rid of it? I expect KATZ to try and defend himself though

But stilll, where was all the blood then? Two 70 IQ people got rid of it? I expect KATZ to try and defend himself though

 

I am not defending him, purely putting it out there. I agree, I think it is impossible to rape and murder somebody in the manner the prosecution claim and have no DNA evidence at the "scene" of the crime.

I am not defending him, purely putting it out there. I agree, I think it is impossible to rape and murder somebody in the manner the prosecution claim and have no DNA evidence at the "scene" of the crime.

 

Oh I know what you mean. I didn't mean that directed at you

 

My gf just started watching it after I was rambling on and on about it.

 

Edit: And another thought...she had been to his place to photograph other vehicles before, I don't see how it's not plausible that he looked under her hood at her request some other time and that is the source of the sweat DNA?

If Kratz had an ethical bone in his body, he would have seen that the entire confession proffered by Len Kachinsky and his scumbag investigator was thrown out. Furthermore, Kachinsky should have been referred to the state bar for that kind of behavior. His actions and the "confession" alone should be sufficient to get the kid a new trial.

 

As far as Steve's concerned, where's the girl's blood? His bodily fluids from the rape? Also, what's the plausible explanation for his previous blood sample vial having a needle size penetration in its cap? Why were the seals on the box containing the blood sample cut and then scotch taped back together?

 

Explain all this away Mr fcuking piece of shit power hungry motherfucker former prosecutor, then tell us about his dna under the hood.

Poor kid. Look at who was defending him...

 

I started watching this weekend, WOW. I am not reading the thread because I see some spoilers but like with any documentary, I think, after you watch it you should also do some of your own research on the topic. I think I'm up to episode 5, just got to the opening statements. Turned it off at 2-4am the last 2 nights. I am watching it with my sister and her boyfriend who is a lawyer and he cannot believe how LE went about this process..

 

At least some people are trying to help them out

 

http://www.bustle.com/articles/132433-anon...source=FBOnsite

A bit more evidence not presented.

http://www.pajiba.com/netflix_movies_and_t...dnt-present.php

 

 

A bit more evidence not presented.

http://www.pajiba.com/netflix_movies_and_t...dnt-present.php

 

 

It is disturbing, initially I thought he was framed and probably innocent, reviewing this and other stuff I have come across, I now think he is probably guilty, coerced Dassey into helping knowing he was mentally challenged, however I do believe the police were involved in planting evidence. That said there were so many holes in the prosecution's case and obvious police misconduct, I do not believe the evidence presented rises to "beyond a reasonable doubt". There is no way they could have killed her in the manner presented and not leave any DNA evidence.

 

Just imagine spending 18 years in prison for a crime you did not commit, I'm sure that could only stoke any antisocial tendencies that were pre-existing.

It is disturbing, initially I thought he was framed and probably innocent, reviewing this and other stuff I have come across, I now think he is probably guilty, coerced Dassey into helping knowing he was mentally challenged, however I do believe the police were involved in planting evidence. That said there were so many holes in the prosecution's case and obvious police misconduct, I do not believe the evidence presented rises to "beyond a reasonable doubt".

Completely agree.

After seeing some of the evidence that was left out, I am so confused after watching all 10 episodes. Crazy documentary.

After seeing some of the evidence that was left out, I am so confused after watching all 10 episodes. Crazy documentary.

The cynical side of me says that is the purpose of such a documentary, the furore would not be as great if they did not present the information in the way they. It would not sell netflix as well as it has. I think the fact they had such a close proximity to the family will paint a bias toward innocence as well.

 

I am interested to see how Netflix follows this up.

I still find it hard to believe that two near retarded IQ people come up with that plan. They did discuss the cat in the series and he said that they tried to throw it over the fire. Why would he do it if he was about to possibly get a huge sum of money. I don't disagree he was fcuked up, but from a legal standpoint there is just too much reasonable doubt for me. And Brendan is like a 5 year old and says whatever he thinks the person he is talking to wants to hear. There were other phone calls the played where he admits to it and then takes it back too.

 

That being said, I definitely don't feel 100% sure either way.

Poor kid. Look at who was defending him...

 

 

 

Lol!

 

Just finished the series. I'm speechless and furious!

Innocent or guilty if that's the way the system works we're all guilty.

Innocent or guilty if that's the way the system works we're all guilty.

 

 

Well put.

I lose even more faith in humanity that people watch a documentary....on Netflix...and then join up to sign a pardon to let the guy out.....based on a documentary....on Netflix.....

I lose even more faith in humanity that people watch a documentary....on Netflix...and then join up to sign a pardon to let the guy out.....based on a documentary....on Netflix.....

 

 

Have you watched the documentary?

I started it. Doesn't change the fact that I wouldn't get behind a movement from a documentary created for entertainment....