article about the series, talks with the director
How We Made ‘Making a Murderer’: Filmmakers Moira Demos and Laura Ricciardi Pull Back the Curtain
Generally speaking, I agree…while admitting that I was 100% thrilled that the Nevada judge sentencing OJ for that robbery gave him up to 33 years for a crime which, absent the fact that OJ murdered Nicole and Ron, should have gotten him a few months plus probation.
Rot in hell, you entitled murdering motherfucker. (ooo…very unlike me…I was really gobsmacked by his being acquitted…)
I read that they now have over 120,000 signatures to re-open his case.
I missed a few parts, did the lawyers tell the kid not to take the stand? I would be surprised if they didn’t tell him that.
After reading up on the case on the Internet, I actually feel somewhat manipulated by the filmmakers. There is a lot of evidence against Avery that they didn’t show. Avery’s DNA from sweat on the inside of her car hood. Avery called her with *69 multiple times that day. Avery specifically requested her but used Barb’s name and phone number.
I also read that the hole in the test tube (in my mind, one of biggest clues that evidence was planted) is common and is how the blood gets into those types of tubes.
Sweat DNA
I’ve read similar stuff about “sweat DNA” (I’m not sure how they know it’s sweat as opposed to just skin cells?) being on the car, but I haven’t seen much detail. I don’t think it’s particularly meaningful even if true. After all, if we accept that the police planted blood evidence (and bone fragments, and a key) it’s hardly a leap that they would plant non-blood DNA as well. And if we don’t accept that they planted that other evidence, then Avery is clearly guilty and the additional DNA evidence doesn’t change that.
The police did have access to the Avery property and all of Steven’s personal items for several days. Getting some trace DNA would be trivial in those circumstances.
Multiple Calls
On its own this doesn’t really tell us anything. Were the *69 calls answered? How long were the calls? Did Avery have a habit of using *69 for other calls, or just for Halbach? Without knowing such contextual facts, the fact that Avery called Halbach multiple times with *69 is meaningless.
What do you think it means that Avery gave Barb’s name and number? How is this fact relevant to the case against him? It was apparently Barb’s car that was being sold - the same one that was photographed by Halbach.
The same question applies for the fact that he allegedly requested that Halbach be sent. What exactly does that mean to the case? I suppose the suggestion being made is that he was fixated on her somehow. But another possibility is that she had done good work in the past and he requested her for that reason. Do you know which it was? I don’t. We don’t know the nature of the request.
To be honest, I don’t think we don’t even know at this point whether that request was actually made. I completely understand being skeptical of the documentary. But we shouldn’t be less skeptical about random things we read on the Internet in general (or Ken Kratz’s twitter feed specifically).
Blood Tube
I’ve read similar things about the tube. Multiple people on Reddit have claimed to have relevant experience and have said that the hole in the end of the tube is normal. Avery’s lawyers claim they called the lab and were told otherwise. I’m not sure what to think about this, so I’ll reserve judgement for now. Note that even the people who say the hole is normal aren’t saying that the blood couldn’t have been tampered with, just that the hole is not itself evidence of such tampering.
Even if the tube isn’t the smoking gun the defense claims it is, the evidence tape was still broken. That doesn’t prove it was deliberately tampered with but it does make the chain of custody questionable at best.
Honestly, the response from people like Kratz has made me slightly more inclined to believe that Avery is innocent. (From 50/50 to about 55/45.) Sure, the documentary left some stuff out and glossed over some things. But if the best, most impressive evidence that was left out is only as bad as the above list, then the documentary probably wasn’t as biased as I feared. Maybe more will come out in the coming weeks that will change my mind.
Can you provide some links? I’m interested and haven’t found anything too compelling in a quick search…
Brendan is in prison for a crime that didn’t even happen.
The easiest place to start would be the Reddit subforum. There is enough there to make your head spin!
I tend to agree with this. If I had to guess, Avery tried to burn the body that night but realized that it was taking too long. He had Brendan come over and gather the tires and other burnables from around the yard to throw on the fire. He probably saw the toe that he kept mentioning.
That fact scarred him and made him act strange over the next few months. The cops thought he was up to something and spoon fed him all of the crap about the rape. The physical evidence proved that there was no stabbing and throat cutting inside the trailer.
As far as Avery, I’m certain he is guilty. His defense attorney’s were very good at attempting to cast doubt on the police version, but IMHO, it all added up to a whole lot of nothing. If I had to guess what happened there, Avery had a crush on her (she was a very pretty young lady). She was in sales, so she probably flirted a good bit. With his girlfriend in jail, Avery thought he had a chance with her. She probably rebuffed his advances and they fought.
Avery probably went too far, maybe punched her, maybe she fell and knocked herself out. Avery knew he was in big trouble and decided he had to kill her. Probably put her on a sheet, pillow, or other absorbent material and shot her through the head in the garage. Then he backed her SUV up to the garage door, loaded her in the back and drove her to his fire pit. He probably borrowed one of the burn barrels from next door (which would explain part of the remains in there) and he returned the burn barrel later.
I just cannot think of a realistic scenario where he was framed. Yes, there was a lot of smoke everywhere, but like all conspiracy theories, the opportunities and coincidences necessary to pull it off would have required a movie trope level of absurdity.
Actually, the physical evidence doesn’t show that anything happened in the trailer. It doesn’t show that Halbach was even in the trailer at all. For this reason, I can’t understand what the basis you have even entertaining the following:
What i find interesting is your explanation of how the absence of blood in the garage; that despite Avery’s success at managing to keep his garage clear of blood, the sheet or pillow or other absorbent material didn’t keep her hair from smearing blood all over the back of her car that he apparently loaded her into to move her to the barrel?
Why wouldn’t he have moved the barrel to the garage with one of the myriad pieces of equipment he had access to rather than risk leaving evidence of himself or her in the vehicle?
The narrative does not seem to fit the evidence, and lack thereof, at all.
Manitowoc PD had a lot to gain from “helping” Avery murder Teresa Halbech, the insurance companies had already advised them that they would not be covering the loss from their screw up of having incarcerating him and they would be responsible for paying out the potential $36 Million. As it was, he stood to gain about 425k to start, which they immediately rescinded the day after he was charged. That was the whole point of showing their deposition dates in the first two weeks of October leading up to the two weeks before the disappearance of Teresa.
Regarding Teresa, she had stated that she was getting harassing phone calls from someone she knew- I think it was the ex boyfriend, who had been with her for 5 years since High School, and hacked into her call logs! And they even asked him, are you a little upset about her breaking up with you and living with a mutual male friend, to which he too calmly replied that it didn’t bother him at all.
Weird also- that when they interviewed her brother the day she was reported missing, that his stated he and his family just wanted to start the grieving process?!? Also her flyers were changed from missing to endangered missing- indicating she may have had an illness- probably mental- those videos about her talking about dying were weird. Also weird that she said she loved her parents and her sisters, but never said anything about loving her brother.
In my opinion, I think that Scott Tydich ( Brendans step dad) and Bobby Dassey (Brendans older brother) had something to do with it. Their recollection of the timeline of when they saw Teresa if off by an hour and how convenient that they backed each other up as both leaving to go hunting. They both disliked Steven Avery and figured if he got his payday they weren’t getting anything.
I can confirm this, as can any medical/lab person. The tube contains a vacuum and a bit of EDTA. Blood is introduced into the tube by piercing the cap’s rubber diaphragm with a needle. It is common to see a small bead of blood on the outside of the diaphragm when the needle is removed.
I wonder if the “non-blood DNA” (on the key and under the hood) could have been blood plasma. The blood sample would have separated in the tube, so if someone drew a sample from the tube they would easily have red blood and a clear DNA sample that did not look like whole blood. I’m not sure if a drop of plasma would be easily distinguishable from a drop of sweat. Also regarding the DNA on the key, I wonder if it would have picked up Avery’s DNA simply by being on his floor. I doubt that spot was vacuumed often, so it seems the floor would have a fine layer of dandruff.
I’m all but 2 episodes through and I’m as appalled as the rest of you. Couple of things that I’m confused about:
The bones at the quarry. Who found them, under what context and how are they connected to the case, if they are? Are they human? Are they Halbach’s?
Don’t you need an extremely hot fire and a lot of time to burn a body that thoroughly? How does that fit into the prosecution’s timeline?
The bullet with Halbach’s DNA. How does it fit into the scenario? No evidence of blood or even that the garage was cleaned, no blood in the crack that the investigators jackhammered, but a bullet supposedly goes through a body leaving no evidence of having done so?
It kind of made me skeptical that all the evidence found was highly mobile.
The bullet.
No way to edit but what i meant to finish with was:
The bullet, the key, the bones, and the car are all mobile. No physical evidence that directly places Halbach in the trailer or the garage at all. No physical evidence that Steven had any contact with her after they did the Auto Trader photograph business. And the prosecutor kept insisting that the case was much more than circumstantial. I can’t see how.
The thing about every single show or article or anything about a trial like this is - they never really give you a real idea of what the jury actually heard.
Sorry, accidentally hit submit
Having been on a jury there are a ton of huge holes that you know have been negotiated or whatever that you aren’t allowed to ask about or know, and they’re the only things you want to know!
Plus, imagine what it’s like to be the sole holdout. Most people couldn’t do it.
I’m not saying Avery didn’t do it. The doc clearly has a point of view and he’s no saint.
But as a juror, the evidence where the cop clearly found the car days earlier? And lied? That’s reasonable doubt. Forget the blood and absence thereof. Forget everything. That right there is reasonable doubt. And that’s what it’s about. It isn’t about guilt, it’s about reasonable doubt.
I’ve just watched the first episode, so I have no opinion about the murder yet. But I’m really questioning the conclusions of the documentary. For the rape the sequence/facts are:
(1) Woman reports rape and gives description of rapist.
(2) Cop says, “Hey that sounds like a perv we know”.
(3) They make a sketch and the victim says “yeah that looks like him”
(4) Victim picks Avery out of a 9 person photo line up
(5) Victim picks Avery in a live line up
(6) Victim testifies that she focused on memorizing her assailants face during the attack and she is 100% sure it is Avery.
There’s no need for a conspiracy and the one the documentary attempts to build is rather flimsy. Especially considering how much Avery and Allen looked alike. It’s simply a classic case of eyewitness testimony being unreliable. Unfortunately, Avery’s alibi only made it improbable, but not impossible for him to have committed the crime.
Given their treatment of the rape case, I’m dubious that I am going to be getting a fair treatment of the murder case.
True, and sickening.
(1) the victim described the assailant as having brown eyes like the actual rapist but unlike Avery
(2) which should have immediately led them to the criminal with a history of sexual assault whom they had been aggressively surveilling at that time
(3) the sketch coincidentally looks more like an old booking photo of Avery than what Avery at that time or the actual rapist looks like
(4) victim picks the booking photo of Avery that looks just like the sketch
(5) victim picks the guy from the photo
(6) again, brown eyes and memories are notoriosly malleable under suggestion (see 3-5)
But you left out…
(7) victim described her assailant as wearing white underwear, but Avery didn’t
(8) Avery had multiple alibis which should have made the cops go, “Huh. D’ya suppose we should check into that rapey dude we’ve been watching like a hawk except for that day our vic was raped?”
I don’t think it was a conspiracy, just lazy police work coupled with a personal vendetta.