[TV] Making a Murderer Netflix - Page 3
Forum Index > Media & Entertainment |
Glacierz
United States1239 Posts
| ||
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
When the evidence does not hold up, then why say "He is guilty", thats what they said in the closure. Death threats and shit is always wrong, but are people at wrong to look at the law enforcement with suspicious and negativity? I dont know. So many things just looks super terrible from their side in the documentary. And its still nothing compared to the accused on, steven avery in this case. He is the one that suffers the most and the law enforcement dont really care. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
giftdgecko
United States2126 Posts
On January 21 2016 01:29 Glacierz wrote: I think we can all agree that there's probably not enough evidence to convict, but it's a very different from concluding the person is innocent (probably a very common conclusion a lot of viewers reached after watching this). [...] If the police integrity wasn't brought in question with the wrongful conviction that happened 20 years ago, this isn't even a case worth arguing over. When he was wrongfully convicted and it was clear there was a police preconception of him in the rape trial (small town politics definitely extends to the police force), the evidence better be air tight in the murder trial and it was anything but. The names being thrown around aren't random ones, they are the police who are known to have had evidence pointing to him being innocent and intentionally filed it away without so much as a second glance. They haven't shown a desire to get the truth but rather put a skeezy guy behind bars. Also the prosecutor whose name gets thrown into the mud deserves to be there. He's a scummy guy and was protected by the state for something like a year after he was known to be trying to get sexual favors from domestic abuse victims... www.huffingtonpost.com Should he be getting hate mail? No, but it's not like the guys has a reputation to protect. Also a blood stain from the quarry burn pit assumed to be containing part of TH's pelvic bone by both the prosecution and defense does not match SA or BD. This makes it easy enough to create alternate suspects if that's what someone really needs to have reasonable doubt. Bobby Dassey and Scott Tadych (both of whose statements consistently change but are adamant SA did it), have seen TH before at SA's property, decide to rape her (Tadych has a history of violence against women). While she shoots the photos of the van (which Scott's wife owned meaning they could know she was coming) with SA, one gets in the back of her SUV with the .22 that Scott later attempted to sell. The propane truck driver tesitified that he saw the vehicle leaving the property sometime between 330-4. They semi-alibi each other around this time, saying they passed each other on the highway. The other shows up for the fun with a vehicle. She is taken to a secluded spot (possibly the quarry), raped and shot. The body and car are left hidden until the next day, Scott is home in time for his wife.They then can burn the body the next day (leading to there being more than the 3 normal burn barrels Brendan was used to being found at the scene), stash the car at SA's, wipe it down and put the ashes in his burn pit. Knowing how the police and most of the community feel about SA he's the obvious suspect and an easy target. Perhaps they even hold onto the key and bullet until the police start searching and then plant it in SA's house after he goes on a vacation, explaining why they didn't find it the first 6 times. | ||
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/making-a-murderer-lawyers-react-to-brendan-dassey-decision-w434365 Its about the lawyers that defended steven avery. They say they are relived dassey is now free pretty much. So happy about this. They will try and do the same thing with steven avery, it was planned to go to court in july i believe or perhaps august but it got postponed two months. This is what i have read on links i cant find now. An unbiased court they say, they feel they have big chance of getting steve free as well with all the proofs they have. | ||
Hider
Denmark9240 Posts
While she was angry and convinced of their innocence, I grew increasingly suspicious/skeptical of the supposedly "neutral" stance the documentary makers were suppose to take. This was indeed an extremely biased docmentary. There isn't reasonable doubt that Steven Avery was guilty. However, I do find it problematic that a mentally handicapped person that is "pushed" into a crime can get lifetime. | ||
N.geNuity
United States5111 Posts
| ||
| ||