So, are you saying that you have to remind yourself that it’s ok he was railroaded twice because he was not a nice guy? I mean, I don’t think his background matters if he didn’t commit the crimes he was accused of.
It’s also important because it provides a believable motive why the police may have framed him. They didn’t just wake up one day and decide, “Let’s fuck over this one guy in particular for no good reason” then laugh maniacally while stroking white cats. Assuming they did frame Avery, they probably convinced themselves it was okay because the guy was a bit of a shit. That doesn’t make the alleged actions of the Sheriff’s Department right, but it does help them make more sense.
No. Nobody remotely said that. In any way. One would have to intentionally misread it this way. Instead of what Blackknight says above.
Yes, this. I found myself thinking, “What a nice guy” etc. I don’t think he did what he was accused of, but at the same time, he clearly had his faults. But again, that being said, it doesn’t mean he deserved to go to jail.
This isn’t what Blackknight is saying at all and what I was asking if it is what was meant. If it doesn’t go to police motive then why does it matter that he had his faults? That’s what I don’t get. I get that in the end you don’t think he deserved to go to jail but why does his having his faults matter at all in this case?
I’ll accept that this is what you meant but it’s clear that this is not the only way to interpret what you said without Blackknight explaining what you meant.
Too many people think like the cops:
Without explicitly stating the “assuming they did frame Avery” which was not mentioned prior to Blackknight then it reads horribly and that is not clear that this is what was meant at all. I mean, you had to remind yourself he’s not a great guy.
I’m not talking about from a police POV. I just mean from a film/documentary POV and getting a sense of his character and who he was. I found myself at times thinking how unfair it was and even what a great guy he was. What a great guy he was is neither here nor there, but I did find myself going there. And then had to remind myself that he may not have been and also that, as you say, it doesn’t matter in the end.
Fair enough. I approach cases like this in regards to the procedure not the person involved. I really don’t think about the character of the person involved mainly because it would tend to prejudice my view of said procedure and the system is supposed to work no matter the character of the participants. So often it doesn’t.
Yes, I think you’re right to do that. I think for me it was harder because of how much we saw of his family. It felt like we were being introduced to Steven Avery the person, not Steven Avery the defendant. And it was hard, seeing his mom and dad and how this was really tearing them apart. I guess I wanted to believe that not only was Steven railroaded but he and his family were ultimately really good people.
This is the the most sickening miscarriage of justice I’ve ever seen. If it was a movie plot I’d detract points from a review from lack of believability. It could have used a 20% edit but is riveting nevertheless. I really hope this ends up in prosecution of a couple officers.
Just finished it and I believe the convictions were good. I just cannot credit that officers, some of whose involvement in the first incident consisted of nothing more than taking a phone call, would conspire to plant evidence in a murder trial simply because their department was facing a law suit. (None of the officers the defense accused were personally being sued). These were all police officers of impeccable records. It makes no sense at all for them to take such a risk for so little a gain.
On the other hand it makes a whole lot of sense that the person who last saw the victim, in whose lot her car was found, outside whose house her bones were found, would be the likely murderer. (And, constitution or no constitution, I always mistrust people who won’t testify under oath and face cross-examination. This from a guy who can’t stop talking at other times.) The case against the nephew certainly wasn’t as strong but the jury sat through his trial and I didn’t. The verdict has also survived appeal so I have a feeling that, as many reports have suggested, the program-makers loaded the story in favor of the defense, leaving out many crucial prosecution points.
The show seemed to state that some of these guys were personally on the hook for the money they were being sued for as insurance wouldn’t cover it, didn’t it?
Do we actually know this? I mean, I understand giving them the benefit of the doubt unless we have evidence to the contrary, but you’re stating it as if it’s a demonstrated fact.
In addition to the lawsuit, they also had a history with Avery. I think it’s safe to say that the Sherrif’s Department didn’t much care for the guy. (And I also think it’s safe to say that they had some good reasons for that.) They also had been embarrassed by having him exonerated after being imprisoned for such a long time. So a guy they know to be a shitheel proves very publicly that they made a huge mistake, then sues them for millions of dollars (with a good chance of winning), and then a woman goes missing shortly after having visited him. That’s a very strong set of potential motives towards sweetening whatever evidence they find in order to ensure a conviction.
This is true regardless of whether Avery is guilty of the murder. Avery being guilty of murder is not inconsistent with police misconduct.
So the cops conspired to keep a vicious killer out on the streets of their community, being so eager to get this guy and knowing that the investigation would be under the most glaring of spotlights. I think it far more likely that this guy (not the sharpest knife in the drawer) figured he could get away with murder, maybe even had a free murder coming seeing as he’d already served 18 years for a crime he didn’t commit.
There’s only one victim in this case. The poor woman who stopped to photograph a car at the Avery car yard and found herself face to face with Mr Avery. God rest her soul.
I just have a hard time believing he’s supposedly so daft and yet he’s able to sanitize his house so perfectly of any and all trace of Teresa.
I also find it hard to believe that Avery would be so stupid as to park the easily identifiable vehicle of his murder victim in the junkyard that his family owns, intact, and not at least partially dismantle it. Hell, the license plates were still on it. You’d think this guy would have the means to part this thing out (remember, it was about five days between when she was last seen alive and anyone reported her missing.). :dubious:
OTOH, the guy does have a room-temperature IQ. Smarter people than him have done some pretty dumb things and gotten caught. YMMV.
Not only that, but it was right near an honest to god car crusher. Who in the world who needs to get rid of a car to avoid a murder rap, and happens to own a car crusher, wouldn’t think to use it?
Agreed that he isn’t too bright, which makes it impossible that he cleaned that room where the murder took place to such a degree that there was no trace of the victim. Not difficult to believe, but impossible to believe. Hell, if he was a forensics expert, I still have a hard time believing that he could clean it in such a way that got rid of the evidence of a gruesome and bloody murder without any signs of said cleanup. Which means that either he murdered her elsewhere (which is possible) but that would mean admitting that the nephew’s testimony is BS, or he didn’t murder her at all.
And, again, did I misunderstand, or were those cops on the hook, personally, for the court case against them? I thought they mentioned that insurance wasn’t going to pay out. That seems to give them millions of dollars worth of motive.
But the thing is, these same cops left a violent rapist out on the streets to rape again. So yeah, I know it doesn’t mean it happened twice, but the police in this county have done some horrible things that cast everything they do related to Avery into suspicious territory.
You’re misunderstanding. I’ve not suggested that the police decided to frame him even though they knew it wasn’t him. I’m suggesting that they may have framed him because they already believed him to be guilty. They may even have been correct in this assumption. If there was a conspiracy, it existed specifically to keep someone they believed to be a vicious killer off the streets.
By the way, the following fact may be of interest to those reading this thread: One of the jurors in Steven Avery’s trial was the father of a Sheriff’s Department officer.
I finished the final episode last night, and this is my take as well. I think they “knew” he did the first crime and helped that along by ignoring anything that didn’t fit the hypothesis. I think they figured out at some point that he didn’t do it, and did nothing to fix the problem. I think that to hide this they had to do the same thing again.
The second murder gets murkier. I don’t know how or where she got murdered, but it definitely did not go down the way prosecutors say it did. The lack of any evidence that she was at the scene of a gruesome murder is telling; absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but still, there should be some sign of her.
The fact that this woman’s car key had no DNA from the owner of the car. The fact that the bullet evidence was, by admission, contaminated. The fact that both the key and the bullet were found only after multiple searches, and only with the aid of interested parties who should not have been there. The fact that we have a vial of the suspect’s blood which was clearly accessed at some point. The fact that the confession was from a coerced teenager who appears to be mentally handicapped and his own lawyer was conspiring against him (and the fact that this confession doesn’t even match the crime scene). I’ve never understood (or frankly believed in) false confessions before I saw this poor kid.
I’m not a conspiracy theory guy, but Jesus, this looks bad.
It’s possible that the one or more of the Avery’s were involved, and the police helped make it look more likely by planting some of the evidence, but I think it’s equally possible they were not involved at all and the entire thing was a frame up from the beginning.
Either way, there is no way I’d vote to convict this guy. Unlike Adnan in Serial, who I do think did it, but I probably would have voted not guilty due to reasonable doubt, I think it’s more than 50% that we have one or more innocent men in prison for this one. Unless this documentary is being extremely dishonest, which I admittedly haven’t explored.