Jump to content

"Making a Murderer" (Netflix Documentary)

Do you think Steven Avery is guilty or innocent  

135 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you think Steven Avery is guilty or innocent

    • Guilty
      27
    • Innocent
      65
    • undecided
      43


Recommended Posts

It's painting a picture of this guy's lifestyle, the norm around there, what was considered okay. He fondled half the compound ffs, or did the cops force brendan to say that too? If you're still wondering why Teresa was scared to visit this place you're fucking dense.

Do you have a link to him fondling half the compound?

Or is brendan saying so your perry mason moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest   

Guest

The transcript has been posted ITT. A private convo with his mom and it being completely unrelated to what's going on and he mentions it fairly nonchalantly and acted as if the mom knew all along. He talked about it like it was the norm...and it's not hard to believe. Am I 100% convinced? no. I'm not acting like a juror tho, I'm just going with gut and common sense. I already said the jury prob should or could have voted not guilty, that's besides the point though. I don't see any reason to not believe Brendan in that convo, do you? It certainly goes in line with everything else we keep learning about this family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AmSlim22    1

i think one mistake that people continue to make is regarding the blood being cleaned up. i made the same mistake as well.

the whole story of rape, throat slitting, tying to a bed, etc came from BD and was encourage and egged on by the investigators. There is no other evidence that any of this happened. So you can't really use the idea that there is no way SA cleaned up the crime scene as a way to give doubt about his guilt.

if by chance (not saying i think this) he did kill her, it is most likely that he did so in a way completely different than anything BD has ever said regarding it. I still don't think there is evidence to suggest he did it. The only evidence would point to shooting her in the head in the garage. there would be some blood to clean, but not the amt that most people are assuming based on a throat slit or stabbing. Also he would have had to get her in garage and shoot her at a time when school bus was arriving, gas delivery was happening in daylight. then driver her car off property in daylight. also havent confirmed but wondering who else was on property at time. brothers and parents? seems like a risky move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

watson5j    0

It's painting a picture of this guy's lifestyle, the norm around there, what was considered okay. He fondled half the compound ffs, or did the cops force brendan to say that too? If you're still wondering why Teresa was scared to visit this place you're fucking dense.

So you're saying hearsay is admissible and legit. Cool.

She was so scared to go there that she had been how many times? Can't imagine her boss making up that she was scared to go there when the cops said "we need to get this guy".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest   

Guest

No, I'm not. I'm not a juror, neither are you. I'm just saying what I think actually happened based on everything I've heard. If I was a juror, I prob would have voted not guilty.

And your 2nd line, you just aren't getting it. Tunnel vision on one case, the cops have been involved with this family for DECADES, probably hundreds of calls. Think of the big picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AmSlim22    1

The transcript has been posted ITT. A private convo with his mom and it being completely unrelated to what's going on and he mentions it fairly nonchalantly and acted as if the mom knew all along. He talked about it like it was the norm...and it's not hard to believe. Am I 100% convinced? no. I'm not acting like a juror tho, I'm just going with gut and common sense. I already said the jury prob should or could have voted not guilty, that's besides the point though. I don't see any reason to not believe Brendan in that convo, do you? It certainly goes in line with everything else we keep learning about this family.

the convo isn't unrelated. the investigators told him he had to call his mom and tell her what he just told them or they were going to do it and that it would be better if BD made the call instead of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hockeywonk    9

Voorh33s is making some good points in this thread. One thing that tilts the shit out of me is when people get so wrapped up in wanting to believe this guy is innocent they don't want to hear contradictory facts.

I don't hear people screaming injustice about OJ being basically sent to prison for life on an Armed Robbery charge even though everybody with common sense realizes it was a makeup call. And even funnier if he (OJ) would have been convicted the first time for murder I guarantee pitchfork nation would have been out and about because of the glove and shady detective work Mark Furman and on and on....

Carry on Sleuths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

watson5j    0

No, I'm not. I'm not a juror, neither are you. I'm just saying what I think actually happened based on everything I've heard. If I was a juror, I prob would have voted not guilty.

And your 2nd line, you just aren't getting it. Tunnel vision on one case, the cops have been involved with this family for DECADES, probably hundreds of calls. Think of the big picture.

Maybe you aren't thinking about the big picture...this sheriff's dept CLEARLY had a problem with this family and would do anything to put ANY of them in jail. Not sure how you don't see this.

And you "prob would have voted not guilty..."

Wow. There's sooooooo much reasonable doubt that any person with half a brain would vote not guilty. I mean, I guess if you have never been a juror and don't understand what reasonable doubt is then you would be confused by all the "this family is a bunch of degenerates" and not deal in the evidence in the case and how it was gathered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zeppelin    0

Don't know that have screamed it but pretty sure have posted and have definitely spoken about my disagreement with the sentencing on OJ's armed robbery charge. Think it's a joke. I also don't have a problem with OJ being found not guilty even though I believe he did it.

Unless you have facts to show how it took 7 searches to find a key in plain site then I'm not overly interested in them. I don't care much about Avery on an individual level. I do, it is awful he spent 18 years in prison for a crime he did not commit but why? is what is important. I care about a corrupt system. I care about Slizza having a fair trial and adequate defense regardless of guilt. Why was he coerced into a confession without a lawyer present? That is what is more important and at the heart of the issue. Why can't the integrity of the police be questioned? It is not about the individuals, it is about the failures of the system. If a video surfaces showing the crime happening as explained it doesn't mean it was ok for police to plant evidence to secure the conviction etc. It doesn't make it of for the prosecution to think they shouldn't have to "swim upstream" to convict somebody of murder. The case has fundamental flaws--and it certainly isn't the only one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hockeywonk    9

Maybe you aren't thinking about the big picture...this sheriff's dept CLEARLY had a problem with this family and would do anything to put ANY of them in jail. Not sure how you don't see this.

And you "prob would have voted not guilty..."

Wow. There's sooooooo much reasonable doubt that any person with half a brain would vote not guilty. I mean, I guess if you have never been a juror and don't understand what reasonable doubt is then you would be confused by all the "this family is a bunch of degenerates" and not deal in the evidence in the case and how it was gathered.

based on what we saw on the documentary it would seem that way. But if we would have seen the entirety of evidence and trial the "there's soooooo much reasonable doubt" becomes way easier to overcome.

Read this http://jenniferjslate.com/2016/01/04/what-did-netflixs-making-a-murderer-leave-out/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

80lballz    191

Steven Avery: My Brothers Might Have Done It

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2016/01/06/avery-my-brothers-might-have-done-it.html

"Avery said his siblings—Earl and Charles Avery—have a history of sexually assaulting women and one of them had a history of harassing women in the area where Halbach was last spotted."

Newsflash Steven: SO DO YOU.

This whole family is clearly some backwoods rednecks to the 10th degree. One of the most ridiculous things about the doc was the PI in episode 10 who was hired by the defense to investigate and what he said about the family. It was a family of "one branch" (lol), a family "pure evil, straight from hell", having a long history of sexual misconduct, incest, etc.

They are MUCH closer to the Wild and Wonderful Whites of WEst Virginia than some innocent happy go lucky tards that the doc would have you believe. JFC and LOL at signing that fucking petition.

If his brother did it, then that would explain everything. I don't like the rest of your post, or your attitude tho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest   

Guest
Maybe you aren't thinking about the big picture...this sheriff's dept CLEARLY had a problem with this family and would do anything to put ANY of them in jail. Not sure how you don't see this.

And you "prob would have voted not guilty..."

Wow. There's sooooooo much reasonable doubt that any person with half a brain would vote not guilty. I mean, I guess if you have never been a juror and don't understand what reasonable doubt is then you would be confused by all the "this family is a bunch of degenerates" and not deal in the evidence in the case and how it was gathered.

Of course they had a problem with the family and of course they wanted to put them away, they had been committing crimes, most of which they couldn't get a conviction on because they don't talk, for years. WTF. What do you think the reason is? Cuz Steven Avery smells bad? Get it together, ffs.

And lol at it being a slam dunk not guilty case. You obviously only watched the documentary. Jesus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

watson5j    0

based on what we saw on the documentary it would seem that way. But if we would have seen the entirety of evidence and trial the "there's soooooo much reasonable doubt" becomes way easier to overcome.

Read this http://jenniferjslate.com/2016/01/04/what-did-netflixs-making-a-murderer-leave-out/

I have read all that before and its mostly hearsay and wouldn't be evidence in a trial so why would it be included in the doc? You really think the judge (nevermind prob so) would say "well he told his cell mate that you wanted to rape/torture women" so lets go ahead and put that into the case...

Sorry but most of this is hearsay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest   

Guest
I have read all that before and its mostly hearsay and wouldn't be evidence in a trial so why would it be included in the doc? You really think the judge (nevermind prob so) would say "well he told his cell mate that you wanted to rape/torture women" so lets go ahead and put that into the case...

Sorry but most of this is hearsay.

uhhh so is most of the documentary for Steven's side. God forbid we listen to both sides of the story lol. You've been had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

watson5j    0

And lol at it being a slam dunk not guilty case. You obviously only watched the documentary. Jesus.

Where did I say it was a slam dunk not guilty case? Reasonable doubt. That's all. There's a ton of it. Jesus is right. Would hate for you to be on a jury of mine and not be able to put 2 and 2 together...

I have read most every link that has been posted. Multiple repeating items that don't do much to sway me (especially if they come out of Kratz's mouth)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

80lballz    191

voorh33s , while we are judging steven, based on reputation and not facts. Lets not forget that this man could've got out earlier on the first charge, but he wouldn't admit guilt.

Lets not forget about his demeanor during the entire documentary, that showed me innocence.

And don't forget about those 2 phone calls with his jailed girlfriend, when he should've been rape/murdering/burning

That clip in the doc where the news was interviewing him right after they found her body. And the news lady asks if he'll take a lie detector test. Look at him there , he's confident he didn't do nothing, and fearful he's getting framed.

Then he goes on Nancy Grace. Look at that interview. Tell me he's guilty .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hockeywonk    9

Where did I say it was a slam dunk not guilty case? Reasonable doubt. That's all. There's a ton of it. Jesus is right. Would hate for you to be on a jury of mine and not be able to put 2 and 2 together...

I have read most every link that has been posted. Multiple repeating items that don't do much to sway me (especially if they come out of Kratz's mouth)

"Wow. There's sooooooo much reasonable doubt that any person with half a brain would vote not guilty."

sounds to me you're saying slam dunk not guilty case

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

80lballz    191

Steven Avery claims his own two brothers may have killed Teresa Halbach -- especially one who he says had a history of harassing women at the exact location where Teresa was last seen.

Avery filed legal docs -- obtained by TMZ -- in which he claims brothers Earl and Charles may have done the deed for which he's serving a life sentence. He says both have a history of sexually assaulting women. Earl once pled no contest to sexually assaulting his 2 daughters.

According to the docs, which Steven filed in 2009 after his conviction, brother Charles' criminal conduct and actions are even more problematic. He was charged with sexually assaulting his wife by holding her down and trying to strangle her with a phone cord before having intercourse with her.

The docs say Charles also had a history of aggression toward women who visited the family's junkyard. One woman, who was there to retrieve her car that had been towed, complained to cops she was afraid of Charles because he was aggressively pursuing her ... sending flowers and money to her home, calling her incessantly and showing up at her doorstep.

According to docs there was another incident in which a woman who bought a car part from the junkyard was harassed by Charles, who asked her on dates and showed up at her house.

Another woman claimed Charles had repeatedly driven by her house and would tell her on the phone he had seen her in her bathing suit as he drove by.

And this is interesting ... according to the docs, all of these women were allegedly harassed by Charles within a month of the time Teresa Halbach went missing.

Steven also says his 2 brothers had a motive to frame him because they were fighting over the family business and were jealous he was on the verge of a multi-million dollar settlement for being wrongfully convicted of sexual assault.

Read more: http://www.tmz.com/2016/01/06/steven-avery-brothers-murder-teresa-halbach/#ixzz3wUlU9BqP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest   

Guest

Yep, done with him. I've clarified like 19 times now that I'm not acting like I'm on the jury, cuz I'm not and I'm not sitting here at home dismissing evidence simply because it's not admissible in court, LOL. I'm speaking as a dweeb in front of my laptop just like everyone else, not pretending that I'm reliving the case sitting on the jury lol. If I was, then I would agree with a lot of what he is saying, but I don't understand the point of playing pretend juror. Let's get down to the reality of what happened and not worry about playing teen court: OT Style. 100% done with this tangent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Blonde    152

charged with sexually assaulting his wife by holding her down and trying to strangle her with a phone cord before having intercourse with her.

wait...this is wrong? Leftymark does this routinely
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

acp    683

Brother(s) scenario makes sense to me.

One or both brothers follow Theresa after she leaves Steve's house, they rape and kill her, throw her in the back of the truck, drive back to the lot, burn the body and personal items in the fire.. none of which happened in Steve's trailer, garage or his backyard fire pit.

Colborn discovers the truck on the lot and call in plates to confirm, remove the plates realizing that was a mistake, calls Lenk to get DNA (quick planning resulted in ripped up packaging of blood vial), go back to truck and plant DNA, find bones and burned items in the barrel, move all of that to Steven's fire pit (not realizing they missed some bones), find spare key in truck and wait for the opportunity to plant it... major holes but I can see this being a possibility, I'm not sure where bullet casing was found, maybe they found it in the back of the truck.

The main premise of all this is either the brother(s) were super careless or ran out of opportunities to further hide the car. The cops just got very lucky and seized the opportunity to frame Steven who judging by the 18 year false imprisonment is one unlucky motherfucker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest   

Guest
voorh33s , while we are judging steven, based on reputation and not facts. Lets not forget that this man could've got out earlier on the first charge, but he wouldn't admit guilt.

Lets not forget about his demeanor during the entire documentary, that showed me innocence.

And don't forget about those 2 phone calls with his jailed girlfriend, when he should've been rape/murdering/burning

That clip in the doc where the news was interviewing him right after they found her body. And the news lady asks if he'll take a lie detector test. Look at him there , he's confident he didn't do nothing, and fearful he's getting framed.

Then he goes on Nancy Grace. Look at that interview. Tell me he's guilty .

Yeah, I mean I get it. There's a chance he didn't do it. There's a 0% chance the family has nothing to do with it. There's also an almost 0% chance that Steven doesn't know something. While Jodi might be a total smoke show, her phone calls mean pretty much nothing. I do agree that Steven has always had the demeanor and actions of an innocent man, but that is just something to note, not to hang your hat on. Just think about how that documentary made you feel about Steven. It made you sympathize, feel sorry for, etc. It made you think he was a good guy lol. That couldn't be further from the truth, this is not a good guy. Is he a murderer? idk, but he's definitely a 100% confirmed peice of hillbilly shit and it's funny to see all these people who've been had by the doc come out and defend him but would be the first person at city hall demanding action if he moved in next to them. The point is theirs views on him based on the doc are polar opposites of their views on him if they actually knew him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

80lballz    191

Ok , I think we are getting somewhere.

Now we just have to get you to stop hating on the film makers. Because what they made was perfection, and you are all about good film making right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TiltinShoes    0

Yeah, I mean I get it. There's a chance he didn't do it. There's a 0% chance the family has nothing to do with it. There's also an almost 0% chance that Steven doesn't know something. While Jodi might be a total smoke show, her phone calls mean pretty much nothing. I do agree that Steven has always had the demeanor and actions of an innocent man, but that is just something to note, not to hang your hat on. Just think about how that documentary made you feel about Steven. It made you sympathize, feel sorry for, etc. It made you think he was a good guy lol. That couldn't be further from the truth, this is not a good guy. Is he a murderer? idk, but he's definitely a 100% confirmed peice of hillbilly shit and it's funny to see all these people who've been had by the doc come out and defend him but would be the first person at city hall demanding action if he moved in next to them. The point is theirs views on him based on the doc are polar opposites of their views on him if they actually knew him.

I asked everyone I watched with basically this question. If I should feel like a piece of shit for thinking basically this. I mean based one what the doc showed (which was clearly slanted) I would have tried to acquit if I were on the jury, but that doesn't mean I look at him and think, "Good guy Steven, getting railroaded again." I admit I don't know much about the guy, and that may be a poor judgement, and maybe I should be ashamed of myself.

Geez, I just can't find the right words to convey my thoughts on this case. He clearly did get railroaded in both cases, and it is a terrible shame that he did so many years for a crime he absolutely didn't do, and it might be happening again. I'm just not ready to believe he or his family didn't have anything to do with it, even though I know the State played a rigged game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

watson5j    0

damn, vorhees is all over the place today and loves him some hearsay evidence. strange performance.

Just bc its hearsay doesn't mean you shouldnt believe every word of it...at least thats what he wants us to do.

I think he may be Halbach's brother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thrash    0

Yeah, I mean I get it. There's a chance he didn't do it. There's a 0% chance the family has nothing to do with it. There's also an almost 0% chance that Steven doesn't know something. While Jodi might be a total smoke show, her phone calls mean pretty much nothing. I do agree that Steven has always had the demeanor and actions of an innocent man, but that is just something to note, not to hang your hat on. Just think about how that documentary made you feel about Steven. It made you sympathize, feel sorry for, etc. It made you think he was a good guy lol. That couldn't be further from the truth, this is not a good guy. Is he a murderer? idk, but he's definitely a 100% confirmed peice of hillbilly shit and it's funny to see all these people who've been had by the doc come out and defend him but would be the first person at city hall demanding action if he moved in next to them. The point is theirs views on him based on the doc are polar opposites of their views on him if they actually knew him.

Did I miss something in the doc?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Blonde    152

i dont think i've seen anyone mention the little girl they made take the stand, only to have her change her story. I felt bad for her for like 2 seconds before i realized she attentioned whored to the cops to begin with. But i def think that part didnt help the prosecution

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest   

Guest
damn, vorhees is all over the place today and loves him some hearsay evidence. strange performance.

There's plenty of hearsay on the other side too that people are gobbling up. I'm just trying to open people's eyes on what this family and SA were like in real life, not the dreamworld the doc presented. Do you really strongly disagree with anything I've said? I am just speculating on a lot of things like the arrest record but cmon, the odds that it isn't a mile long have gotta be like 50/1. Factor in all the other morons in the family and you can see why the cops fucking hated these people. Very hard to get any convictions when no one talks. Almost everything "non-doc" that's been revealed has made him look TERRIBLE. I think there's a lot of people still ITT that are only commenting with knowledge from only the doc.

My fav part so far are these petition signers that dismiss absolutely every anti-avery thing they hear (no matter how many things pile up) that can be considered "hearsay" or non admissible in court yet gobble up the dozens and DOZENS of things in the documentary that favor SA that are essentially the same thing...def my fav part and that's when you know someone has been had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.