@Mehrocco_Mole I will admit that while I've heard the "omg I can't stop crying" horror stories, I haven't been hit with that side of it more than a handful of moments. I have, however, been hit with the "utter lack of patience for anyone's bullshit" hormone train. It's interesting.
@Thumperchick hhehe I probably experienced the no bs train more the remember ..but I totally remember the "nope, I can't eat that" train, where it was just better to spit out whatever than to be polite and try to eat whatever it was.. My poor husband was so good about it. He would just make me something else to eat. It was soooo weird..it wasn't nausea, just a sure feeling it was a bad idea to proceed :)
I should make a video about what goes on on that... Not watching it... I'm thinking it's a secret training video for a government plot, where they teach you how to murder
Watched it recently and surprised at the blatant actions of a small town justice system. The people in power do what they want, one or another from big to little governments
@dashcloud there is a lot that the show left out. It was definitely biased. However, I don't think the intent was specifically to show they were innocent - but to highlight the abuses and misconduct involved in getting the convictions.
Q: Ken Kratz said that you intentionally left out pieces of evidence that support Steven Avery’s conviction for the rape and murder of Teresa Halbach. Did you intentionally exclude any evidence?
A: (Moira Demos): I guess I would ask Kratz what he would trade it for. We tried to choose what we thought was Kratz’s strongest evidence pointing toward Steven’s guilt, the things he talked about at his press conferences, the things that were really damning toward Steven. That’s what we put in. The things I’ve heard listed as things we’ve left out seem much less convincing of guilt than Teresa’s DNA on a bullet or her remains in his backyard.
[...]This is coming from a man who argued in closing arguments [at trial] that reasonable doubts are for innocent people. This is coming from a man who said, “So what if the key was planted?” This is coming from a man who was forced out of office for admittedly sending sexually suggestive text messages to a domestic-violence victimwhose case he was prosecuting.
@Pavlov There is no doubt that the prosecutor is absolute slime. He is not why I say there are issues with what was included by the show or how it did have bias.
Finished the series over the weekend. Scares the hell out of me.
So here are my two cents. To me the show is not about proving whether Steven and Brendan actually committed the crimes or not. It's purpose is to shine a light on the flaws in the judicial system, point out the short comings of the prosecutions case, and of course to expose the glaring issues in police corruption.
With that said, I don't think he did it. Is it possible he did? Of course it is but if he did do it, it certainly didn't happen the way the prosecution argued that it happened. Quite frankly I don't think Steven has the overall intelligence to cover it up and without one single iota of DNA evidence found in his home or in the garage there is no way the activities they described actually happened where they happened. It blows my mind that common sense didn't win out with the jury. By no means do I think that the police actually committed the crimes themselves but I have zero doubts that they planted the evidence.
I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall listening in on the jury's deliberations and even more so to have been a fly on the wall listening to Lenk, Fassbender, Kratz, and Colburn discussing how they'd weasel their way out of it.
@sammydog01 Yep I saw that. The filmmakers came out and defended their position by saying they showed what they believed to be the most damning evidence that was presented in the trial on the documentary. AKA the DNA evidence.
@MEHcus Regardless of their actual guilt, there are just way too many inconsistencies and shady circumstances in the whole investigation to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he did it. Certainly not enough to convict Brendan especially. I cannot believe that his appeal was denied after it came out that the defense was working against him. Scary as hell.
@lichme The thing that really got me in Brendan's trial actually came from Steven's. In his closing arguments, Kratz came out and said something along the lines of "all of this evidence points to one, and only one, murderer" referring to Steven. If that was the case, then he, as the prosecutor in Brendan's case, should have never gotten a guilty verdict simply based on that one statement alone.
@MEHcus Indeed, I am both fascinated and disgusted with both trials. Two people convicted, with the murder happening in two different locations, with 0 of her DNA being found at either with exception to the bullet that was found months after the fact, by a cop who wasn't supposed to be there. The same cop that happened to find the key to her vehicle after the room it was found in was searched several times....
None of the victims DNA was found on the key, only Avery's. I'm surprised Theresa's brother didn't question things.
@lichme I'm surprised Theresa's brother and ex boyfriend weren't questioned further in general.
That whole bit where he and the ex said they had access to her phone and cracked the passcode to listen to her voicemails only to have some of those messages deleted later was largely overlooked to me.
Whoever killed her may have left her a message. If they would have found VM's from Steven on that phone they would have turned those over to the police in a heart beat to prove his guilt but they deleted them instead. It was also brought up that she had some kind of stalker that was continuously calling her but she wouldn't tell her boss who it was yet we know now that she had indeed talked to her boss about her discomfort level with Steven in the past. That to me is glaring.
@MEHcus I've really gone back and forth on the whole situation. The thing that I've come to realize, from a filmmaking point of view, is that I don't think that they were trying to show guilt or innocence, rather just show inaccuracy and shady shit happening.
It you haven't I suggest digging into the court documents (I found them through Reddit) and read deeper into the actual case. Both cases seemed awful. It seemed to me that there were plenty of reasons for Brendan to get a mistrial.
The face I like is that the key found in his trailer was a valet key. Anybody drive daily with their valet key?
As for my actual opinions after watching, I'm still not convinced. There is a real chance in my mind that Steven Avery actually killed her. If he did, he would not have been able to clean it up the way he did.
I have real issues with Lenk and Colburn (why is Colburn escorting Brendan to and from his trial?? it's still a conflict of interest and should not be happening).
I'm inclined to believe he didn't kill her, and that maybe Dassey's brother and step-dad had something to do with it, or that maybe the boyfriend had something to do with it? I agree with Marcus that the phone messages seem important.
So, do you feel like murdering someone? You should probably tell us now . . .
@KDemo is... is that not a normal thing to feel like?
@Thumperchick Only when you're pregnant and the hormone fairy has just smacked you upside your head.
Actually, come to think of it I'm not so sure you have to be pregnant.
@Mehrocco_Mole I will admit that while I've heard the "omg I can't stop crying" horror stories, I haven't been hit with that side of it more than a handful of moments. I have, however, been hit with the "utter lack of patience for anyone's bullshit" hormone train. It's interesting.
@Thumperchick hhehe I probably experienced the no bs train more the remember ..but I totally remember the "nope, I can't eat that" train, where it was just better to spit out whatever than to be polite and try to eat whatever it was.. My poor husband was so good about it. He would just make me something else to eat. It was soooo weird..it wasn't nausea, just a sure feeling it was a bad idea to proceed :)
I should make a video about what goes on on that... Not watching it... I'm thinking it's a secret training video for a government plot, where they teach you how to murder
I just finished it, and it made me rage.
HE DID NOT OWN UNDERWEAR!
case closed
Watched it recently and surprised at the blatant actions of a small town justice system. The people in power do what they want, one or another from big to little governments
@Catdad Okay, that particular moment made me laugh. The absurdity of whether or not a man owns underwear being so absolutely pertinent is so odd.
Just finished it. I think the DA and Sheriff each should be put in prison for 18 years!
[edit] And the State Attorney General too! No wrong doing. BS! On to episode 2...
From the AV Club: The prosecutor says the show left out key evidence
@dashcloud there is a lot that the show left out. It was definitely biased. However, I don't think the intent was specifically to show they were innocent - but to highlight the abuses and misconduct involved in getting the convictions.
@Thumperchick I completely understand that, and I'm glad you pointed it out.
@dashcloud @tHumperChick - Read this: http://www.thewrap.com/making-a-murderer-filmmakers-fire-back-at-prosecutor-hes-not-entitled-to-his-own-facts/
Excerpt:
Q: Ken Kratz said that you intentionally left out pieces of evidence that support Steven Avery’s conviction for the rape and murder of Teresa Halbach. Did you intentionally exclude any evidence?
A: (Moira Demos): I guess I would ask Kratz what he would trade it for. We tried to choose what we thought was Kratz’s strongest evidence pointing toward Steven’s guilt, the things he talked about at his press conferences, the things that were really damning toward Steven. That’s what we put in. The things I’ve heard listed as things we’ve left out seem much less convincing of guilt than Teresa’s DNA on a bullet or her remains in his backyard.
[...]This is coming from a man who argued in closing arguments [at trial] that reasonable doubts are for innocent people. This is coming from a man who said, “So what if the key was planted?” This is coming from a man who was forced out of office for admittedly sending sexually suggestive text messages to a domestic-violence victim whose case he was prosecuting.
@Pavlov Thanks for this!
@Pavlov There is no doubt that the prosecutor is absolute slime. He is not why I say there are issues with what was included by the show or how it did have bias.
Finished the series over the weekend. Scares the hell out of me.
So here are my two cents. To me the show is not about proving whether Steven and Brendan actually committed the crimes or not. It's purpose is to shine a light on the flaws in the judicial system, point out the short comings of the prosecutions case, and of course to expose the glaring issues in police corruption.
With that said, I don't think he did it. Is it possible he did? Of course it is but if he did do it, it certainly didn't happen the way the prosecution argued that it happened. Quite frankly I don't think Steven has the overall intelligence to cover it up and without one single iota of DNA evidence found in his home or in the garage there is no way the activities they described actually happened where they happened. It blows my mind that common sense didn't win out with the jury. By no means do I think that the police actually committed the crimes themselves but I have zero doubts that they planted the evidence.
I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall listening in on the jury's deliberations and even more so to have been a fly on the wall listening to Lenk, Fassbender, Kratz, and Colburn discussing how they'd weasel their way out of it.
Giving this thread a little
Would love to hear what others thought about the show.
@MEHcus I don't get netflix (boo), but this has made the news. Did you see the response from the DA saying that the filmmakers left out a lot of evidence?
http://www.people.com/article/steven-avery-prosecutor-ken-kratz-says-netflix-series-forgot-key-evidence?xid=socialflow_twitter_peoplemag
@sammydog01 Yep I saw that. The filmmakers came out and defended their position by saying they showed what they believed to be the most damning evidence that was presented in the trial on the documentary. AKA the DNA evidence.
@MEHcus Regardless of their actual guilt, there are just way too many inconsistencies and shady circumstances in the whole investigation to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he did it. Certainly not enough to convict Brendan especially. I cannot believe that his appeal was denied after it came out that the defense was working against him. Scary as hell.
@lichme The thing that really got me in Brendan's trial actually came from Steven's. In his closing arguments, Kratz came out and said something along the lines of "all of this evidence points to one, and only one, murderer" referring to Steven. If that was the case, then he, as the prosecutor in Brendan's case, should have never gotten a guilty verdict simply based on that one statement alone.
@MEHcus Indeed, I am both fascinated and disgusted with both trials. Two people convicted, with the murder happening in two different locations, with 0 of her DNA being found at either with exception to the bullet that was found months after the fact, by a cop who wasn't supposed to be there. The same cop that happened to find the key to her vehicle after the room it was found in was searched several times....
None of the victims DNA was found on the key, only Avery's. I'm surprised Theresa's brother didn't question things.
@lichme I'm surprised Theresa's brother and ex boyfriend weren't questioned further in general.
That whole bit where he and the ex said they had access to her phone and cracked the passcode to listen to her voicemails only to have some of those messages deleted later was largely overlooked to me.
Whoever killed her may have left her a message. If they would have found VM's from Steven on that phone they would have turned those over to the police in a heart beat to prove his guilt but they deleted them instead. It was also brought up that she had some kind of stalker that was continuously calling her but she wouldn't tell her boss who it was yet we know now that she had indeed talked to her boss about her discomfort level with Steven in the past. That to me is glaring.
@MEHcus I've really gone back and forth on the whole situation. The thing that I've come to realize, from a filmmaking point of view, is that I don't think that they were trying to show guilt or innocence, rather just show inaccuracy and shady shit happening.
It you haven't I suggest digging into the court documents (I found them through Reddit) and read deeper into the actual case. Both cases seemed awful. It seemed to me that there were plenty of reasons for Brendan to get a mistrial.
The face I like is that the key found in his trailer was a valet key. Anybody drive daily with their valet key?
As for my actual opinions after watching, I'm still not convinced. There is a real chance in my mind that Steven Avery actually killed her. If he did, he would not have been able to clean it up the way he did.
I have real issues with Lenk and Colburn (why is Colburn escorting Brendan to and from his trial?? it's still a conflict of interest and should not be happening).
I'm inclined to believe he didn't kill her, and that maybe Dassey's brother and step-dad had something to do with it, or that maybe the boyfriend had something to do with it? I agree with Marcus that the phone messages seem important.
More later.