Making a Murderer

[65fastback2plus2]

Excuse me, where did you see me not giving Steve Avery the benefit of the doubt? You are making assumptions that you can not back up. I never expressed any opinion about Mr. Avery one way or the other. I have not expressed a contrary opinion to the one you have expressed yourself about the man.

My own blood, sweat and yes, tears has been shed in defense of this country so if you have a problem with the country owing me more than it gives you then you need to ante up by signing up. By making a blanket statement about military members as you did, you have revealed your own preconceived bias. You do not know me and other than my military serves you know nothing about me. Back off!

you called it one-sided propaganda when it explicitly showed all the evidence...esp with other studies showing factual evidence that his has happened countless times in other cases

 

[65fastback2plus2]

The trouble with basing one's decision of guilt/innocence on this one docu-drama is that not all evidence was presented.

Supposedly a different take on the case is going to be presented shortly.

Both sides have already said evidence was left out due to time but that the evidence that was left out was not significant to the case.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Both sides have already said evidence was left out due to time but that the evidence that was left out was not significant to the case.

That's not the story the prosecution side is telling...

 

[Tabascocat]

you called it one-sided propaganda when it explicitly showed all the evidence...esp with other studies showing factual evidence that his has happened countless times in other cases

To be fair, some substantial evidence was left out. One example:

Avery called her phone twice using *67. He admitted that she was at his place between 2-2:30 on the 31st. Well, he called her phone that evening without using *67 asking why she never showed up that day.

Sounds like he was setting up an alibi, to me anyways and this is an alarming piece of information.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

To be fair, some substantial evidence was left out. One example:

Avery called her phone twice using *67. He admitted that she was at his place between 2-2:30 on the 31st. Well, he called her phone that evening without using *67 asking why she never showed up that day.

Sounds like he was setting up an alibi, to me anyways and this is an alarming piece of information.

Very alarming at the least... damn at the most, piece of evidence.

 

[JoeKing]

you called it one-sided propaganda when it explicitly showed all the evidence...esp with other studies showing factual evidence that his has happened countless times in other cases

Right, I commented on the "documentary" not how I felt about Mr. Avery. I don't have to like the movie to like the man.

 

[speedkilz88]

Fox News special is on with Judge Jenine Piero.

 

[65fastback2plus2]

That's not the story the prosecution side is telling...

The prosecution isn't even the prosecution anymore because kratz got fired for sexually harassing and sexting a client, being diagnosed with mental disorders and admitting himself to rehab for drug abuse.

I'd not listen to a single word that liar says. Period.

 

[65fastback2plus2]

To be fair, some substantial evidence was left out. One example:

Avery called her phone twice using *67. He admitted that she was at his place between 2-2:30 on the 31st. Well, he called her phone that evening without using *67 asking why she never showed up that day.

Sounds like he was setting up an alibi, to me anyways and this is an alarming piece of information.

He actually called her 3 times and only 2 were via *67. He had also been know to be fearful of the police (rightly so) and had called others via *67 before. Wasn't out of the norm.

Anonymous posted TH's phone bill...I've yet to see the explanation for the phone calls the phone made on 11/1 in Chicago...

 

[Seven]

The trouble with basing one's decision of guilt/innocence on this one docu-drama is that not all evidence was presented.

Supposedly a different take on the case is going to be presented shortly.

True enough. Read thru the transcripts and appeals.

SCOTUS nailed this one, IMO. He slipped thru the cracks.

 

[BAZ]

That family is messed up. In fact the majority of the people from that area are a special breed.

I found it strange the brother was interviewed every day like a coach after a game.

The ten hour running time was arduous.

 

[Tabascocat]

He actually called her 3 times and only 2 were via *67. He had also been know to be fearful of the police (rightly so) and had called others via *67 before. Wasn't out of the norm.

Anonymous posted TH's phone bill...I've yet to see the explanation for the phone calls the phone made on 11/1 in Chicago...

Yea, I did say three times. Twice using *67 and another that night without using it.

First that I have heard of those phone calls on 11/1.......................

 

[65fastback2plus2]

Yea, I did say three times. Twice using *67 and another that night without using it.

First that I have heard of those phone calls on 11/1.......................

 

[DogFace]

The sweat DNA is a problem as are multiple other facts in the case, not the least of which the lady's body was found in his fire pit. Unless you feel the police put it there, then that's a tough fact to make an excuse for. He had a motive. He was obsessed with her. He tried to cover up calling her the day she disappeared. He bought hand cuffs and he had the rifle.

And this idea of the police thinking they had "enough" blood is really stupid. I'm sorry, but it is. Because if they found out they didn't have enough, why not go back and get more? Your answer is they'd have to steal it....so what? They had to steal it to begin with.

There could very well be issues here with police misconduct. If so and they give this guy another trial, so be it. But every case has question marks and unless you were there you have to speculate some to put the pieces together and some of the evidence will be circumstantial. The burden is not beyond all doubt, but beyond a reasonable doubt. That fact that there were multiple agencies involved in this case, including the FBI, also adds to my doubt about this conspiracy to frame Avery.

I believe he gets a new trial and will be acquitted. We both have different opinions and not likely to change them. I feel there was doubt and I believe the jury did as well. As evident by the dismissed juror saying there were 7 innocent and 2 guilty after the first day of deliberation. The new jury will find him not guilty I believe.

 

[65fastback2plus2]

I believe he gets a new trial and will be acquitted. We both have different opinions and not likely to change them. I feel there was doubt and I believe the jury did as well. As evident by the dismissed juror saying there were 7 innocent and 2 guilty after the first day of deliberation. The new jury will find him not guilty I believe.

IF they relocate the trial. I think while Dean and Jerry had the best reason to keep it in Manitowac county, some jurors have admitted they were threatened by the sheriffs office if they didnt vote guilty.

Moving the trial, will allow manitowac county to not be able to threaten anyone on the jury.

 

[DogFace]

IF they relocate the trial. I think while Dean and Jerry had the best reason to keep it in Manitowac county, some jurors have admitted they were threatened by the sheriffs office if they didnt vote guilty.

Moving the trial, will allow manitowac county to not be able to threaten anyone on the jury.

Yes. The jurors have started to talk and some did say they felt threatened. Wonder why?

 

[DogFace]

What is this saying exactly?

 

[MichaelWinicki]

I believe he gets a new trial and will be acquitted. We both have different opinions and not likely to change them. I feel there was doubt and I believe the jury did as well. As evident by the dismissed juror saying there were 7 innocent and 2 guilty after the first day of deliberation. The new jury will find him not guilty I believe.

There's going to have to be a "mechanism" in place that gets him a new trial.

A TV show doesn't necessarily do it.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Yes. The jurors have started to talk and some did say they felt threatened. Wonder why?

Unless we get jurors to show their names/faces and admit that... I'm going to count it as urban legend.

 

[DogFace]

There's going to have to be a "mechanism" in place that gets him a new trial.

A TV show doesn't necessarily do it.

The innocence project has taken the case. They say there is the possibility of juror misconduct. One of the two juror that has come forward said they were intimidated.