Making a Murderer (w/ Spoilers)

#576
#576
bamawriter said:
While I don't expect her to make any new evidence public, nothing that she's hinting at sounds like it's terribly "new".
Click to expand...

Perhaps not to someone who's analyzed the transcripts of the trial :)
 
#577
#577
I haven't put any time or thought in this for a while, but I was wondering today:

Were any other Manitowoc County police officers, besides Lenk and Colborn, repeatedly found on the Avery property?
 
#578
#578
PotS said:
I haven't put any time or thought in this for a while, but I was wondering today:

Were any other Manitowoc County police officers, besides Lenk and Colborn, repeatedly found on the Avery property?
Click to expand...

Yes, there were a few others. I could dig up the names if you want them.

For the most part the defense just established where these guys were posted and what they were doing. The testimony wasn't that interesting (at least thru the portion of the transcripts I've read). As far as implying that evidence was planted, they zeroed in on Lenk and Colborn.

It does give further legitimacy to the notion that Manitowoc only paid lip service to the conflict of interest. They were every bit as involved in the investigation as Calumet.
 
#579
#579
trevols81 said:
First of all, I was not referring to Steven Avery. I mentioned his entire family. Specifically Brendan Dassey, who had absolutely nothing to due with Teresa Halbach's disappearance. If you cannot see this then I have some beachfront property in Nebraska to sell you.

Dassey "confessed" to a crime that he and his uncle committed under the guise that he would go home if he just said what the policeman wanted him to hear. There is no evidence that corroborates ANYTHING he "confessed". This kid was railroaded into a murder confession in order to secure a conviction of his uncle.
Click to expand...

If I confess to a murder and know specifics about it that only someone involved would know and then recant my confession, I hope you're on the jury.
 
#580
#580
I finished the series yesterday.

From my perspective, there wasn't a decisive case built for either Avery's innocence or his guilt.

One thing I think the documentary highlighted conclusively was that neither Avery or Dassey received a fair investigation. As such, there is no way I could have convicted either of them if I were on the jury.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#581
#581
PKT_VOL said:
I finished the series yesterday.

From my perspective, there wasn't a decisive case built for either Avery's innocence or his guilt.

One thing I think the documentary highlighted conclusively was that neither Avery or Dassey received a fair investigation. As such, there is no way I could have convicted either of them if I were on the jury.
Click to expand...

You need to read the transcripts of the case and not rely on the highly biased documentary.
 
#583
#583
PKT_VOL said:
What am I missing (summary)? I don't have the time or inclination to read through the transcripts.
Click to expand...

Way too much to cover and I don't have the time either. Go to websleuths.com, they have the complete trial transcripts. The state presented almost 20 days of evidence and witnesses and the defense presented essentially one day and then made a motion for a mistrial. So their case was to attack the police and state forensics examiners and FBI experts and had no defense for their case. This was a slam dunk case.
 
#584
#584
Sandvol said:
Way too much to cover and I don't have the time either. Go to websleuths.com, they have the complete trial transcripts. The state presented almost 20 days of evidence and witnesses and the defense presented essentially one day and then made a motion for a mistrial. So their case was to attack the police and state forensics examiners and FBI experts and had no defense for their case. This was a slam dunk case.
Click to expand...

First, I would like to note that I have read alternative sources from the documentary (as documentaries are inherently bias). Thus, I'm asking what specifically in the transcripts repudiates my post.

Secondly, the amount of evidence or witnesses (for either side) has no bearing on the truthfulness or persuasivness of said evidence/witnesses. In short, quantity of evidence =/= quality of evidence/witnesses. Not to mention the procedure of cross examination.
 
#585
#585
Sandvol said:
If I confess to a murder and know specifics about it that only someone involved would know and then recant my confession, I hope you're on the jury.
Click to expand...

What specifics did he know? Everything he said was either fed to him by the cops or had absolutely NO physical evidence corroborated by the scene(s) of the crime.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#586
#586
trevols81 said:
What specifics did he know? Everything he said was either fed to him by the cops or had absolutely NO physical evidence corroborated by the scene(s) of the crime.
Click to expand...

For certain, SV's going to tell you that Brendan told the investigators she was shot in the head...

(What else Brendan, something with the head. We cut her hair. No, something else. I dunno. Ok, I'm going to say it, who shot her in the head? He did.)

...and then they found the bullet to back up the story (4 months later, by the MC police, after multiple searches of the garage).

Good luck with this argument, gentlemen. It's like trying to justify to your wife why you need a kegerator in your house.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#589
#589
PotS said:
For certain, SV's going to tell you that Brendan told the investigators she was shot in the head...

(What else Brendan, something with the head. We cut her hair. No, something else. I dunno. Ok, I'm going to say it, who shot her in the head? He did.)

...and then they found the bullet to back up the story (4 months later, by the MC police, after multiple searches of the garage).

Good luck with this argument, gentlemen. It's like trying to justify to your wife why you need a kegerator in your house.
Click to expand...

Agreed. While I still have some reservations about Steven Avery's role in regards to her death, I have absolutely no doubt that Brendan is completely innocent.
 
#596
#596
Notorious B.E.N said:
Because it wasn't there until it was planted there....and there was nothing on the bullet....and there was no blood or anything anywhere in there? It's not hard to understand.
Click to expand...

Really? It is for me. How do you know it was planted? Yes, her DNA was on the bullet. Why focus on all the evidence that wasn't there? Why not focus on the evidence that was there?
 
#597
#597
Sandvol said:
Really? It is for me. How do you know it was planted? Yes, her DNA was on the bullet. Why focus on all the evidence that wasn't there? Why not focus on the evidence that was there?
Click to expand...

When the evidence that wasn't there is blood and brains on a bullet that supposedly passed through a human skull, it is kind of relevant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#599
#599
Sandvol said:
Culhane works in Wisconsin.
Click to expand...

Culhane is a shill for the state. Don't care what state that happens to be in. She was instructed by investigators to place TH in the garage. Magically, she did... With a bullet that didn't have a microliter of blood on it despite having supposedly passed through a skull and brain.
 
#600
#600
Sandvol said:
Already been discussed ad infinitum.
Click to expand...

And everything you cited as truth has been either: (1)highly questionable, (2)borderline illogical/impossible, (3)open for interpretation, or (4)the cops had plenty of time to plant evidence.

Did I miss anything?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top