evil8 Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Did he do it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BStowers023 Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 Based on the documentaries perspective, no. You have to assume that documentary was filmed with bias, but it's really hard to know for sure. Regardless, that police department/sheriffs department is pretty sketchy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidBaustert Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 Did the prosecution prove he did it? That is the better question... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patterson Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 On episode 6 now,I'm stunned by all of the buffoonery on the part of the Police. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodus Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 SHH just started episode 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShoMeSomeFun Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 I think he did, especially after all the evidence the doc. omitted. However, while I was watching it with my girlfriend I mentioned that the prosecutor looked/sounded like a pedophile. Turns out the prosecutor is up on charges for sexting a domestic violence victim in one of his cases. (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ex-da-ken-kratzs-law-license-suspended-in-sexting-scandal/) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cruizin01 Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 As others mentioned, the docu makes him out to be innocent imo. I feel like it was drawn out more than necessary. Could have cut the episodes in half, roughly. I read today that some of the jurors have come out and said they felt pressured/scared into finding a guilty verdict. They felt worst case if they only found him guilty on some counts he would get a new trail, which obviously didn't happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShoMeSomeFun Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 Spoiler Alert: Also the documentary mentions his IQ of being 70. However Avery's lawyers mention many times, "He had access to destroy such and such evidence. Why didnt he use it?" Then go on to discredit his nephew with an IQ of 70. Um idk your client his not close to comprehending on how to cover up a crime. However, I do agree that the Manitowoc PD is an incompetent department. Which still makes me think that Avery is guilty as the PD would be incapable of designing this "conspiracy". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2 Sweet Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 I think he did, especially after all the evidence the doc. omitted. Cliffs? I'm curious to know the major points they omitted Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evil8 Posted January 7, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 The most important fact is that Defense attorney Strang sounds exactly like Saul Goodman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrs.cos Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 Saul Goodman. Im ready for season 2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
verse Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 I think the biggest question mark was whether or not his nephew was actually involved. He definitely isn't the brightest bulb and I didn't really hear much of a confession, he even said to his mom on the phone that he guessed what they wanted to hear. It does seem suspect that he did this during a trial where he was going to get paid. It makes no sense at all. The car in the yard makes no sense when there is a crusher right next to it. The blood vile makes no sense. The police involved in the search makes no sense, especially the key. The plate check 2 days before being reported missing makes no sense. The ex and roommate not ever being suspects makes no sense. I think the entire investigation was focused on Avery, probably for good reason, but I know I couldn't sit in that courtroom and say without a reasonable doubt that he did it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 I think the entire investigation was focused on Avery, probably for good reason, but I know I couldn't sit in that courtroom and say without a reasonable doubt that he did it. Agreed. If this was a Civil trial I would say yes, he did it, as the standard there is "probably". For criminal though, I just would not be able to say, without a reasonable doubt, he did it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattKatz Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 Ill Flat out say I don't think he did it...Or more importantly that they didn't "PROVE without a reasonable doubt" that he did. The stories don't match.....How can a woman be tied up in a bed, be supposedly murdered in the house and/or garage and there be no trace of DNA in either....With the way they say whe was killed....GTFO of here with that nonsense. THen for the Manitowoc Dept. to be involved in the way they were when it was said and known upfront that there was a conflict of interest....Nope....Another dead fuck up IMO. Then the Car and the Key....Key wasn't there for three days when they searched the house then ended up in plain sight...NOPE....Doesn't happen. And why was previous evidence that could easily be accessed tampered with....The Blood Vile is what I am speaking about. Theres a TON that doesn't add up to me, but once again I am presuming him innocent and wanting them to produce something that proves his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt....and IMO they didn't do that from what this documentary shows. No reason this guy should be locked up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oh8sti Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 I think he should get a re trial at the very least. Pretty amazing the way this docu has blown up. It will be interesting to see the final outcome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2 Sweet Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 Ill Flat out say I don't think he did it...Or more importantly that they didn't "PROVE without a reasonable doubt" that he did. The stories don't match.....How can a woman be tied up in a bed, be supposedly murdered in the house and/or garage and there be no trace of DNA in either....With the way they say whe was killed....GTFO of here with that nonsense. THen for the Manitowoc Dept. to be involved in the way they were when it was said and known upfront that there was a conflict of interest....Nope....Another dead fuck up IMO. Then the Car and the Key....Key wasn't there for three days when they searched the house then ended up in plain sight...NOPE....Doesn't happen. And why was previous evidence that could easily be accessed tampered with....The Blood Vile is what I am speaking about. Theres a TON that doesn't add up to me, but once again I am presuming him innocent and wanting them to produce something that proves his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt....and IMO they didn't do that from what this documentary shows. No reason this guy should be locked up. I agree 100% Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sully Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 Cliffs? I'm curious to know the major points they omitted A couple things I read is that there was sweat under the hood latch that belonged to Steven Avery. There was also DNA from that girl on the bullet fragments found in the garage. I think there was mention that her DNA was in the bedroom. IIRC, none of this was mentioned in the docu. A person is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, but what they are showing with this Steven is, guilty until proven innocent...twice. I'm on the fence as to whether he is guilty or not. Part of me says he is. Part of me says he isn't. I would like to know though, why wasn't Brendan's brother questioned more about him supposedly "bow hunting" that afternoon? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg1647545532 Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 Cliffs? I'm curious to know the major points they omitted IMO, they didn't leave anything that damning out. Here's the cliffs: - Avery didn't use his own name when he requested the photographer, instead he used the name of the car's owner. - Avery called Halbach's cell phone 3 times that day, twice using *67 - A receptionist at Autotrader recounted a day that Halbach complained about Avery being a creeper, including one time when he opened the door in a towel (this wasn't allowed to be admitted at the trial because it was too vague) - Avery had shackles and leg irons in his house that he'd bought a few weeks prior - Avery's sweat DNA was on the hood latch of the RAV4 The first 4 bullet points impugn Avery's character but, again my opinion, don't rise to the level of physical evidence that times him to the murder. So he was creepy and he may or may not have a good explanation for why he did some of those things. I think those minor details that were omitted pale in comparison to the most damning evidence against him, which was that A) he was the last known person to see Halbach alive, and B) her bones were found in his back yard. It seems pretty self evident to me that the key was planted, and in all likelihood the bullet; I also believe that the DNA on both the key and the bullet were added by the MCPD and/or the crime lab. The RAV4 seems sketchy as hell and I'm willing to give Avery the benefit of the doubt on that. But the bones, the bones weren't found by anyone associated with Manitowac county, and they wouldn't have had any time to plant them there. The defense argued rather well that they were most likely moved there from another burn site, but it's still pretty damning that they ended up in Steven Avery's burn pit on the night that Steven Avery was burning a bunch of stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg1647545532 Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 A couple things I read is that there was sweat under the hood latch that belonged to Steven Avery. There was also DNA from that girl on the bullet fragments found in the garage. I think there was mention that her DNA was in the bedroom. IIRC, none of this was mentioned in the docu. The sweat on the hood latch wasn't mentioned, but the DNA on the bullet fragment was covered extensively. The crime lab had to make an exception to its own policy to include it as evidence because the control sample was tainted, and the defense submitted evidence that the crime lab was given explicit instructions to "put Teresa Halbach in the house or the garage." Granted, that was months before the bullet was found, but this is the sort of small-scale corruption that happens all the time in crime labs. A case is stalled for months, a new piece of evidence comes in... like the defense attorneys said, when police departments plant or fabricate evidence, they don't do it to frame people they think are innocent. Everyone justifies it by saying, "Well, we all know he's guilty but if we can't put the case together he might walk!" And a bunch of little white lies can stack up. I think this is one of those. AFAIK, none of Halbach's DNA was found in the trailer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BStowers023 Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 Whether he did it or not, do you think if Avery was a multi-millionaire that he would be convicted? I think some of what this documentary is trying to show is how the poor get completely fucked by the justice system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattKatz Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 My wife just started a book written on this case from an objective view I believe....Itll be interesting to hear what is in there that may change my mind as far as evidence. If they have him on something....With DNA or something to directly link him...then by all means....HEs guilty...but if they don't have anything more than what was shown in the Doc....This dude shouldn't be in jail.....It completely goes against our rights as American Citizens....Creepy ones or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farkas Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 I couldn't get past the third episode. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 I couldn't get past the third episode. Ive forced myself through it. The story is interesting but the series is way too drawn out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lauren Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 I'm through episode 4. Brenden is an idiot. He should have kept his mouth shut. Also being 16 shouldn't he have had parental consent to all those interviews? Why would a parent allow that without any type of representation present? I think Avery is innocent. after being released for the first crime dude should have left that area before starting a civil suit. Living there just opened himself to all this drama. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RC K9 Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 On episode 6 now,I'm stunned by all of the buffoonery on the part of the Police. ***SPOILERS*** This. Even if he did do it...all of law enforcement in there is so fkd up, it's insane. I mean, the lady from the dna lab tainted the fkn sample, and didn't follow protocol by calling the test inconclusive. And her notes from her call with the cop said she needed to place that chic in the house or garage. Right there it should have been thrown out. On top of the fact...how does one tie her to a bed, slit her throat, take her to the garage...shoot her...and they can't find ANY blood anywhere. I mean, these are simpletons. No was they could clean a crime scene, especially a bloody one like that, in Dexter-style. How did that cop know what that license plate belonged to if he wasn't looking at the vehicle? How is ONLY his DNA found on the key when that chic had been using that key for years? I just finished episode 6, and I get more and more frustrated every episode. I personally think the defense is doing an excellent job. Those guys are sharp. (At least up to ep 6 IMHO.) Also, even if the documentary is biased, they didn't modify to the video of the courtroom scenes, which clearly shows the state in all aspects to be a bunch of retards. Best "justice" system in the world though. I can NOT Netflix & Chill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.