Making a Murderer on Netflix

[rothdawg]

Unless you've been living under a box the last 2 weeks, I'm sure you've heard of it by now. All I can say is, it's well worth the hype.

[Bardy]

Unless you've been living under a box the last 2 weeks, I'm sure you've heard of it by now. All I can say is, it's well worth the hype.

I'm an episode and a half in so far. Looks like a good one. I went on a binge-watching binge over the holidays:

Enjoyed:

Narcos, Bloodline, Masters of None, Red Oaks (Amazon), Catastrophe (Amazon)

[tjl88]

Unless you've been living under a box the last 2 weeks, I'm sure you've heard of it by now. All I can say is, it's well worth the hype.

It's really, really great. Sickening too.

[rothdawg]

I'm an episode and a half in so far. Looks like a good one. I went on a binge-watching binge over the holidays:

Enjoyed:

Narcos, Bloodline, Masters of None, Red Oaks (Amazon), Catastrophe (Amazon)

You'll love it. I look forward to you and some of the other lawyers on the board's opinion.

[JuTMSY4]

So:

*SPOILER ALERT*

I actually had a major beef with it - they never really showed the prosecution's case. Also, they left out some facts which I think were put into evidence:
-Avery doused a cat in oil and threw it on a fire
-Avery threatened a female family member at gunpoint
-It is alleged that Avery sort of stalked Halbach
-Avery regularly asked for Halbach to come out as the photographer (she photographed cars for Autotrader). Avery once greeted her in a towel and Avery then asked her boss not to send her anymore (this was apparently the subject of a motion and excluded)
-Avery's DNA (non-blood) was also found found on the hood-latch of the RAV4 and Brendan Dassey was the reason that DNA was found.

There's a lot more here: http://www.pajiba.com/netflix_movies...nt-present.php

I'm not saying that he did it or that there wasn't reasonable doubt. I just think that this docu-series was unforgivably one-sided.

Pushing through the conspiracy theory in light of this evidence was probably much more difficult for his legal team. Also, those guys were really good.

*END SPOILERS*

[Riccardo]

NHOI

[rothdawg]

SPOILERS

So:

*SPOILER ALERT*

I actually had a major beef with it - they never really showed the prosecution's case. Also, they left out some facts which I think were put into evidence:
-Avery doused a cat in oil and threw it on a fire
-Avery threatened a female family member at gunpoint
-It is alleged that Avery sort of stalked Halbach
-Avery regularly asked for Halbach to come out as the photographer (she photographed cars for Autotrader). Avery once greeted her in a towel and Avery then asked her boss not to send her anymore (this was apparently the subject of a motion and excluded)
-Avery's DNA (non-blood) was also found found on the hood-latch of the RAV4 and Brendan Dassey was the reason that DNA was found.

There's a lot more here: http://www.pajiba.com/netflix_movies...nt-present.php

I'm not saying that he did it or that there wasn't reasonable doubt. I just think that this docu-series was unforgivably one-sided.

Pushing through the conspiracy theory in light of this evidence was probably much more difficult for his legal team. Also, those guys were really good.

*END SPOILERS*

**************************SPOILERS**************** ***********




No doubt it was one sided as all documentaries are. But you're wrong, they definitely mentioned Avery's animal cruelty conviction as well as some of his other violent incidents prior to 1985. I'm not sure how you missed that, it was in the first 10 minutes of Episode 1. As far as the other evidence goes, according to the film makers they presented all of the key evidence that the DA was pushing in the press. (EDIT TO ADD, here are Dean Strang's rebuttals http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/05/ar...erer.html?_r=1)

There's just so much evidence that is either inconclusive or damning against the police that I don't see how he could've been convicted. Off the top of my head:
-The lack of Teresa Halbach's DNA found on the bullet
-Lack of blood found in the garage where the apparent shooting was
-The fact that her Rav 4 was found in pristine condition, when Avery could have easily crushed it.
-Avery's lab blood tube was punctured
-Inconclusive evidence on the blood test
-The cop lied about what time he called in about the license plate number (this was the most damning evidence IMO)

Also the fact that a poor town was on the hook for $36 million dollars can't be ignore. And given Mantiwoc and Ken Kratz's corrupt history it's really not far fetched to believe this conspiracy.

And the Brendan Dasey conviction was even more of an abomination.

[JuTMSY4]

**************************SPOILERS**************** ***********
No doubt it was one sided as all documentaries are. But you're wrong, they definitely mentioned Avery's animal cruelty conviction as well as some of his other violent incidents prior to 1985. I'm not sure how you missed that, it was in the first 10 minutes of Episode 1.

*Spoiler*

No, I knew they mentioned it, but they didn't actually mentioned what he did. I felt they glossed over it and didn't actually mention what he did according to the police report (which was much more cruel than throwing a cat over a fire).

I'm not disagreeing with you, but listening to a variety of my friends discuss the case I felt like we didn't really hear the prosecution's case at all. It's hard to get a read on a trial without really seeing the case put in by the party required to prove it.

As to Dassey - 100% agree.

[capitaleagle]

*Spoiler*

No, I knew they mentioned it, but they didn't actually mentioned what he did. I felt they glossed over it and didn't actually mention what he did according to the police report (which was much more cruel than throwing a cat over a fire).

I'm not disagreeing with you, but listening to a variety of my friends discuss the case I felt like we didn't really hear the prosecution's case at all. It's hard to get a read on a trial without really seeing the case put in by the party required to prove it.

As to Dassey - 100% agree.

I watched the first ep last night and I have to agree. No idea if he did or didn't do it, but so far it's one-sided to a problematic degree. All his lawyers are making his case over and over again -- I mean no s*** right, what else would you expect them to do?

I'll keep watching, it's definitely good, but it feels very different so far from, say, Serial season 1: you knew what the creator thought happened by the end of it, for sure, but the prosecution's case was presented in full.

[rothdawg]

I watched the first ep last night and I have to agree. No idea if he did or didn't do it, but so far it's one-sided to a problematic degree. All his lawyers are making his case over and over again -- I mean no s*** right, what else would you expect them to do?

I'll keep watching, it's definitely good, but it feels very different so far from, say, Serial season 1: you knew what the creator thought happened by the end of it, for sure, but the prosecution's case was presented in full.

I would watch the whole thing before commenting.

[rothdawg]

Reply

*Spoiler*

No, I knew they mentioned it, but they didn't actually mentioned what he did. I felt they glossed over it and didn't actually mention what he did according to the police report (which was much more cruel than throwing a cat over a fire).

I'm not disagreeing with you, but listening to a variety of my friends discuss the case I felt like we didn't really hear the prosecution's case at all. It's hard to get a read on a trial without really seeing the case put in by the party required to prove it.

As to Dassey - 100% agree.

It's definitely possible Avery was guilty. The sick things he wrote to his wife are another reason to believe he had the ability to kill. But to me he absolutely deserves a new trial.

[capitaleagle]

I would watch the whole thing before commenting.

I'll watch the whole thing. Just offering my two cents early on.

[JuTMSY4]

on another note

It's definitely possible Avery was guilty. The sick things he wrote to his wife are another reason to believe he had the ability to kill. But to me he absolutely deserves a new trial.

Adnan Syed definitely did it.

[rothdawg]

Moderators

Unless you've been living under a box the last 2 weeks, I'm sure you've heard of it by now. All I can say is, it's well worth the hype.

I was trying to edit the thread title to say (Includes Spoilers), but it doesn't look like I can do that.

[DJCon57]

So:

*SPOILER ALERT*

I actually had a major beef with it - they never really showed the prosecution's case. Also, they left out some facts which I think were put into evidence:
-Avery doused a cat in oil and threw it on a fire
-Avery threatened a female family member at gunpoint
-It is alleged that Avery sort of stalked Halbach
-Avery regularly asked for Halbach to come out as the photographer (she photographed cars for Autotrader). Avery once greeted her in a towel and Avery then asked her boss not to send her anymore (this was apparently the subject of a motion and excluded)
-Avery's DNA (non-blood) was also found found on the hood-latch of the RAV4 and Brendan Dassey was the reason that DNA was found.

There's a lot more here: http://www.pajiba.com/netflix_movies...nt-present.php

I'm not saying that he did it or that there wasn't reasonable doubt. I just think that this docu-series was unforgivably one-sided.

Pushing through the conspiracy theory in light of this evidence was probably much more difficult for his legal team. Also, those guys were really good.

*END SPOILERS*

These two were absolutely in the show:
-Avery doused a cat in oil and threw it on a fire
-Avery threatened a female family member at gunpoint

They talked about him threatening his cousin with a gun and running her off the road at length along with the whole backstory. It was basically the whole angle for the cops railroading him in the first case because the cousin was married to a cop.

If someone suggests that wasn't in the show, I question if they watched it.