Making a Murderer Documentary on Netflix

Status
Not open for further replies.
Watched the first 2 episode's last night, I can't imagine what 18 years wrongfully jailed would do to you.

Something definitely dodgy with the local police department in that town.
 
Fell asleep during the fourth episode due to sleep deprivation, not because I was bored. Can't believe the corruption from the officials and how the obvious is ignored. Avery, to me, comes across as an honest simpleton, Dassey, easily manipulated by the intelligent corrupt. I've not read any of this thread yet as I fear there are spoilers and I've not looked anything up on the net, but I'm convinced Avery is innocent. Not sure about Dassey, can't make my mind up if he's actually done it or if he's somehow been dragged into it as a way to convict Avery.

Either way, it's a hell of a series and is actually quite upsetting to watch. Can't begin to imagine the pain and suffering all the families involved have been through.
 
quasi modo said:
Watched the first 2 episode's last night, I can't imagine what 18 years wrongfully jailed would do to you.

Something definitely dodgy with the local police department in that town.
Click to expand...

If I am correct i think his compensation was about $400,000.00 in the end, he had to kinda accept it in order to afford his defence lawyers for the murder charge. I presume all that money has now been blown on legal fees.

#farce
 
RomanReigns said:
If I am correct i think his compensation was about $400,000.00 in the end, he had to kinda accept it in order to afford his defence lawyers for the murder charge. I presume all that money has now been blown on legal fees.

#farce
Click to expand...
To be honest, whether he got convicted or not this investigation forced him to settle on a civil suit worth potentially $36 million for him. If he hadn't settled that law suit he could have ended up getting railroaded by a shyster like Brendan's public defense attorney. Whether he actually got convicted or not that Sherriff's department has saved potentially millions as a result. What really undid the defense was not being allowed to argue the frame up job with named suspects such as the two cops Lenk and Colbourn because the judge ruled that they could only suggest Brendan as an alternative suspect.
 
Layne said:
where our legal people here and their thoughts?
@Hellerad i know is one for sure.
Click to expand...

Haven't watched it, but I know the general premise.

The first conviction is a common problem with verdicts awarded in the 70s-90s. DNA evidence didn't exist or was primitive but the media was already in the business of stirring up civil unrest over unsolved crimes. I worked on the West Memphis Three case, which involved the conviction of 3 teenagers for the murder of 3 boys. The 3 men were incarcerated for 17 years before being released because new DNA tech was about to clear their names.

The second charge appears to be better supported, even if the admissibility of the confession is questionable. I got the impression that the title "Making a Murderer" is really a nod to the fact that the first, wrongful conviction placed a man in prison for enough time that he became a murder as shown by his alleged actions after release.

But there are enough things handled poorly in the second investigation and a serious conflict of interest is present which creates a perfect storm for theories.

Crazy stuff.
 
Hellerad said:
Haven't watched it, but I know the general premise.

The first conviction is a common problem with verdicts awarded in the 70s-90s. DNA evidence didn't exist or was primitive but the media was already in the business of stirring up civil unrest over unsolved crimes. I worked on the West Memphis Three case, which involved the conviction of 3 teenagers for the murder of 3 boys. The 3 men were incarcerated for 17 years before being released because new DNA tech was about to clear their names.

The second charge appears to be better supported, even if the admissibility of the confession is questionable. I got the impression that the title "Making a Murderer" is really a nod to the fact that the first, wrongful conviction placed a man in prison for enough time that he became a murder as shown by his alleged actions after release.

But there are enough things handled poorly in the second investigation and a serious conflict of interest is present which creates a perfect storm for theories.

Crazy stuff.
Click to expand...
I've watched enough real life docus of law enforcement to get a general idea of procedure but to never question the ex-boyfriend or brothers at all and then let them be part of search parties seemed really poor police work.
Then there's the whole letting Manitowoc Sheriffs anywhere near the crime scene after they said they'd be nothing but support and supplying equipment. And they have two Manitowoc Sheriffs one babysitter from another county which clearly one person cannot keep eyes on two people especially when he's filling out paperwork.
Regardless of guilt to me it looks a complete cluster...
 
This programme, is it gruesome/brutal at all, or is it more of a legal examination? I'm def going to watch it but the Mrs is a bit of a fanny when it comes to grizzly murder dramas, so just wondered whether she'd be cool with this?
 
The Cowboy said:
This programme, is it gruesome/brutal at all, or is it more of a legal examination? I'm def going to watch it but the Mrs is a bit of a fanny when it comes to grizzly murder dramas, so just wondered whether she'd be cool with this?
Click to expand...

Not really brutal at all, in terms of things that you see.

Some of the descriptions used are graphic but you don't see anything.

No recreations or dramatisations if that's what you're thinking?
 
Hellerad said:
Haven't watched it, but I know the general premise.

The first conviction is a common problem with verdicts awarded in the 70s-90s. DNA evidence didn't exist or was primitive but the media was already in the business of stirring up civil unrest over unsolved crimes. I worked on the West Memphis Three case, which involved the conviction of 3 teenagers for the murder of 3 boys. The 3 men were incarcerated for 17 years before being released because new DNA tech was about to clear their names.

The second charge appears to be better supported, even if the admissibility of the confession is questionable. I got the impression that the title "Making a Murderer" is really a nod to the fact that the first, wrongful conviction placed a man in prison for enough time that he became a murder as shown by his alleged actions after release.

But there are enough things handled poorly in the second investigation and a serious conflict of interest is present which creates a perfect storm for theories.

Crazy stuff.
Click to expand...

So do you believe he killed the girl
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top