This website has nearly run out of funding and may shut down

Author Topic: Making A Murderer  (Read 8520 times)

Offline Griffin (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Aug 2015
  • Location:
  • Posts: 948
  • Reputation Power: 34
  • Griffin is working their way up.Griffin is working their way up.Griffin is working their way up.
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:February 29, 2020, 09:21:12 PM
  • Welcome to our community forum ...
Making A Murderer
« on: January 05, 2016, 09:55:06 PM »
Has anyone seen this Netflix documentary series? It is about Steven Avery who was wrongfully accused and released from prison after overturning a conviction with new dna testing after serving 18 years. After he is released he sues the county for 60 million dollars and right before it was supposed to goto court he is charged with the murder of a photographer Theresa Halbach.

If anyone has seen it what are you thoughts on it? Do you think he is innocent or guilty? I think he is innocent and if he isn't I think that his rights were completely violated so he should be freed or at the very least be granted an appeal for a new trial. They people in the documentary bring up a lot of good points and are pretty objective about it, it is so sad to see him and his nephew get completely screwed by a corrupt police force. I think there is just to much shady shit that went on to uphold his conviction.

Offline Illadelph215

  • Whiskey bent and hellbound
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • SA_Chat+
  • **
  • Join Date: Sep 2015
  • Location: Philly
  • Posts: 573
  • Reputation Power: 37
  • Illadelph215 is working their way up.Illadelph215 is working their way up.Illadelph215 is working their way up.
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:June 03, 2020, 11:49:19 AM
  • Our Community
Re: Making A Murderer
« Reply #1 on: January 05, 2016, 10:41:01 PM »
I caught the first episode on YouTube as I don't have Netflix atm, my best friend has been keeping up on it and so he filled me in as well. I think it was sick they put him back in jail after cleared and freed on DNA evidence. Seems like the powers at be in that town had/have it against him and royally screwed him. I'm excited to watch more and I know there's a public outpour already to free him with a petition and such so hopefully that man gets his freedom back.
There is no future, there is no past. In the present, nothing lasts.

Offline Dhedmo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • SA_Chat+
  • **
  • Join Date: Jul 2015
  • Location: OC
  • Posts: 272
  • Reputation Power: 35
  • Dhedmo is working their way up.Dhedmo is working their way up.Dhedmo is working their way up.
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:February 07, 2019, 02:55:15 PM
  • Be the flame, not the moth --Giacomo Casanova
Re: Making A Murderer
« Reply #2 on: January 05, 2016, 11:57:14 PM »
I have not seen the documentary. This did prompt me to the Source of All Knowledge (Wikipedia), which cites the Netflix series and a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel article for this (bold mine):

Quote
At age 18, Avery pleaded guilty to burglary of a bar and was sentenced to 10 months in prison. When he was 20, Avery and another man pleaded guilty to animal cruelty after pouring gasoline and oil on Avery's cat and throwing it, alive, into a fire; Avery was sentenced to prison again for that crime. In 1985, Avery was charged with assaulting his cousin, the wife of a part-time Manitowoc County sheriff's deputy, possessing a firearm as a felon, and the rape of a Manitowoc woman, Penny Beernsten, for which he was later exonerated. He served six years for assaulting his cousin and illegally possessing firearms, and 18 years for the assault, sexual assault, and attempted rape he did not commit.

More citations are requested for the following:

Quote
On October 31, 2005, photographer Teresa Halbach was scheduled to meet with Steven Avery at his home on the grounds of Avery's Auto Salvage, to photograph a minivan for Auto Trader Magazine. Halbach was last seen that day.
On November 11, 2005, Avery was charged with the murder of Halbach. He protested that authorities were attempting to frame him for Halbach's disappearance to make it harder for him to win his pending civil case regarding the false rape conviction. To avoid a conflict of interest, Mark R. Rohrer, the Manitowoc County district attorney, requested that neighboring Calumet County authorities lead the investigation. Manitowoc County authorities remained involved in the case, leading to accusations of tampering with evidence. Ken Kratz was assigned special prosecutor in the case. Manitowoc County Circuit Court Judge Patrick Willis presided over the trial.

Citations at bottom with original numbering for the following:
Quote
On March 2, 2006, Brendan Dassey, Avery's nephew, was charged with being a party to first-degree intentional homicide, mutilation of a corpse and first-degree sexual assault.[7] However, Dassey's attorneys have since asked for him to be released, or given another trial, on the basis that his constitutional rights were violated due to ineffective assistance of counsel and an involuntary confession.[8]
On March 18, 2007, Avery was found guilty of murdering Halbach, not guilty of mutilating a corpse, and guilty of illegally possessing a firearm. On June 1, 2007, he was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole for the murder of Halbach. He was also sentenced to 10 years for felony possession of a firearm, to run concurrent with the murder sentence. He is housed at the Waupun Correctional Institution in Waupun, Wisconsin.[9] In August 2011, a state appeals court denied Avery's appeal for a new trial.

It seems to me, that this guy was an asshole of the first water who was unjustly imprisoned for rape.
However, the case against him for murder is something different. The sensationalized "allegations of police and prosecutorial misconduct, evidence tampering and witness coercion" seems to be based primarily on jurisdictional issues.

OnMilwaukee.com poses the question: If Steve Avery didn't kill Teresa Halbach, who did?
http://onmilwaukee.com/movies/articles/makingamurdereralternativesuspects.html

Quote
When binge-watching Netflix's fascinating series "Making a Murderer," it became clear that there was one glaring angle left out: If Steven Avery (and Brendan Dassey) didn't do it, who did? The documentary barely mentions alternative suspects.

A review of court records shows that Avery's defense attorneys tried to raise details about four other possible suspects at trial, but the judge – and later the appellate court – wouldn't let them.

The court documents show other people with unsavory criminal histories – including against women – had easy access to the salvage yard property where Teresa Halbach disappeared. But the defense wasn't allowed to tell the jury about them.

The filmmakers largely dodged this point, only making the most subtle of allusions to it. Of course, they needed the cooperation of the Avery family in order to run all of that inside footage and some alternative suspects had ties to the family itself. The details wreck the rosy narrative of the homespun, salt-of-the-earth clan, but it makes the actual story far more interesting.

Although the defense attorneys claimed at trial that Manitowoc County law enforcement officers planted evidence (which the officers and prosecution deny), they stated that they didn't think the officers murdered photographer Teresa Halbach. Rather, they alleged that the law enforcement officers planted evidence to strengthen a case against a guy they thought was already guilty: Steven Avery, who had served 18 years in prison for a previous sexual assault he didn't commit, a case in which some of those same officers were involved. Yet the documentary focuses mostly on the law enforcement officers, not delving deeply into the backgrounds of others whom the defense wanted to argue might have done it.

The cops were not among the four alternative murder suspects presented by the defense in the motion denied by the judge. The only alternative suspect the judge would allow the jury to hear about was his 16-year-old nephew Brendan Dassey, who had confessed – and then repeatedly unconfessed – but Avery did not choose to blame Dassey at trial. He also was not among the four.

As I wrote in a previous column, the 10-part series – built on a mountain of video, audio and documentary evidence – raises deeply troubling questions about the actions of law enforcement officers and the earlier defense team of Dassey all the same. I became convinced the cognitively challenged Brendan Dassey deserves a new trial (there is a motion pending in federal court to get him one). I remain less certain about Avery. Did he do it, as a jury concluded? He might have. However, I am less sure than I was before. If you don't agree, at least watch the series first.

I am even less sure that Avery did it after reading the court documents on other potential suspects. Curious as to the lack of alternative suspect theories in the documentary, I looked up court documents from the appeal. It's a rogue's gallery, and while Internet sleuths on sites like Reddit are making a lot of other angles, such as the defense contention that some of Halbach's voicemails were deleted and authorities didn't look closely enough at some of those close to her, the court documents show the defense wanted to point the finger at people around Avery.

Here are summaries of the four alternative suspects raised most thoroughly by the defense. The details are allegations that come directly from court documents, including the appellate decision and a 2009 post-conviction motion filed in court by the defense.

Person 1

According to the defense motion, Person 1 had a violent and volatile personality. His co-workers allegedly described him as a short-tempered angry person capable of murder. He was allegedly described as a chronic liar who blows up at people, "screams a lot" and is a "psycho." He had been previously charged in 1994 with criminal trespass and battery. The criminal complaint alleged he went to a woman's home at 3 a.m. and knocked on her bedroom window. Then he allegedly walked into her home and stated, "You will die for this, b-tch." He then allegedly knocked a man with the woman unconscious.

Three years later, he was charged with recklessly causing bodily harm to another male, as well as disorderly conduct and damage to property. He allegedly swung at a woman, pushed her down basement stairs, pulled her hair and punched an 11-year-old and then damaged property.

In 1998, he was charged with trespass and disorderly conduct for allegedly entering his mother's home without permission. He allegedly shoved her and called her vile names. In 2001, a woman filed a petition for a temporary restraining order against the man, alleging he threatened her repeatedly, spit on her car and pushed his way into her home. In 2001, he allegedly assaulted the woman again, shoving her and punching her. This man had easy access to the salvage yard property, and admitted he was on it twice on the day that Halbach disappeared. His alibi in the case was one of the other people on the alternative suspect list.

He claimed he left the property to go hunting. A co-worker allegedly reported the man approached him to sell a .22 rifle. A .22 rifle was believed to be the murder weapon in the case. A co-worker allegedly stated the man left work on the day Steven Avery was arrested and was a "nervous wreck" and had commented that one of the other people had blood on his clothes and that the clothes had "gotten mixed up with his laundry."

I looked this man up on CCAP, the state's court website. His last criminal case was a conviction in 2002 for disorderly conduct. He was also convicted of the following cases, per CCAP: 1998 of criminal trespass to dwelling; 1997 for disorderly conduct; battery in 1997; and battery in 1995.

Person 2

According to the defense motion, the second person had allegedly "assaulted his former wife and had an aggressive history with women who came to the Avery Salvage Yard." In 1999, this man was charged with sexual assault with use of force for a case involving his then wife. The criminal complaint stated that she also reported he had tried to strangle her with a phone cord and told her that, "If she did not shut up he would end it all." In another criminal complaint filed the same day, she alleged he had violated a domestic abuse injunction, entering her residence without permission, ripping the phone from her hands when she tried to call the police and blocking the door.

The defense motion says that the Sheriff's Department interviewed a woman who had business on the property and who allegedly said the man had started to send her flowers and repeatedly asked her to go on dates, "which she found disturbing." He allegedly sent candy to her home. She allegedly told her co-workers she was afraid of him. Another woman allegedly said she had a similar experience. The defense alleged there was jealousy between this man and Steven Avery.

Avery's girlfriend had allegedly stated that she was afraid of this man because he had allegedly come to Avery's home with a shotgun because he was angry they were dating. She allegedly said she awoke once to find him in her residence.

He was on the property regularly. He had allegedly asked Steven Avery if "the photographer" had come to the yard the day she disappeared, according to another man. He allegedly told law enforcement that he recalled Steven may have left work to "go and meet with a girl to take some pictures." He allegedly had no alibi for the night. He is a hunter with access to guns.

According to CCAP, this man was found guilty in the following cases: violating a domestic abuse injunction in 1999; of bail jumping in 1999; and of disorderly conduct in 1998. He also entered into a deferred prosecution agreement for a third-degree sexual assault charge that resulted in it being dismissed. In 1999, a restraining order was issued against him.

Person 3

According to the defense motion, Person 3 had been charged in 1995 with sexually assaulting two relatives. He was allegedly hunting rabbits with a gun the day Halbach disappeared, had been riding around the property on a golf cart, and had easy and regular access to the property. The defense claimed that a cadaver dog alerted on part of a golf cart on the property. According to the defense, this man allegedly knew Halbach was coming to the property. When police came to take a DNA sample of this man, he allegedly hid in an upstairs bedroom under clothes.

According to CCAP and news reports, this man was later charged criminally with setting up hidden cameras in his house to photograph women (several years after the defense post-conviction motion and well after Avery's conviction). According to a news report from 2012, he was "accused of videotaping people in various stages of nudity" at his home, including a teenage girl and adult women and small children, both boys and girls – including two girls as young as 3. According to a news account, the criminal complaint said he tried to burn the tapes.

According to CCAP, he was convicted of two misdemeanor counts of invading privacy by using a surveillance device. He was sentenced to six months in jail and two years of probation. According to CCAP, he was also previously convicted of battery and fourth degree sexual assault in 1995.

Person 4

According to the defense motion, the final alternative suspect the defense was focusing on allegedly admitted to being on the property at the time Halbach showed up. His alibi was Person 1, as they both stated they saw the other leave the property to go hunting at that time. He allegedly admitted he saw Halbach on the property before he went hunting. He allegedly told police the first person would be able to "verify precisely what time he had seen" him. "He did not explain why that time would be so important" that the first man would remember it so precisely, the motion says. Also, Person 4 allegedly stated he had taken a shower both before and after returning from hunting. "A physical examination of (Person 4) allegedly showed that he had scratches on his back. He told law enforcement that the scratches were from a puppy." A doctor stated it was unlikely they were over a week old. CCAP shows no entries for this man.

The trial judge refused to allow the defense attorneys to present the evidence of other suspects during trial. This was a key argument made by Avery's appellate attorneys, who argued it was unfair and that the case should be overturned on appeal. The state called some of the above people to offer evidence against Avery. The defense argued Avery's attorneys should have been allowed to question whether they were offering it to hide their own possible culpability.

Without viable alternative suspects presented in the documentary narrative, viewers were left to wonder: If Avery didn't do it, why would Halbach's bones have ended up in a burn pit on the salvage yard property where he lived? After all, he was the last known person to see her alive, because she was photographing a van on the property.

Who else could have done it?

Implausibly, none of Halbach's blood or fingerprints was found in Avery's house or garage (where the prosecution claimed she was killed). Her DNA was found on a bullet discovered in the garage months later by a member of the sheriff's agency that had said it'd handed the case over to others (and only after other searchers had not seen it). There were also burnt bones that might have been Halbach's found a ways away from the property in addition to in the burn pit.

The Wisconsin Court of Appeals ruled that the trial judge was right to not allow the alternative suspect theories, using a 1984 case called State v. Denny. The legal terminology is called third-party liability. According to the Court of Appeals, to meet the Denny standard for admittance of such third-party liability, the defense would have had to establish that the alternative suspects had motive, opportunity and a direct connection to the crime.

The court basically found that Avery could show a variety of others had opportunity but did not establish motive or any direct link to the crime by the people above.

"The parties identified by Avery may have had the opportunity to commit the crime; however, Avery was unable to demonstrate that any of the named individuals had a motive to commit the alleged offenses against Halbach," the appeals court said in denying Avery's bid for a new trial.

The court noted that the trial judge had found that, "Avery offered no physical or other evidence connecting any of the individuals to the crime, other than their presence in the general vicinity. One can only imagine how much longer this six-week trial would have lasted had the court granted (Avery's) request to introduce third-party liability evidence … "

And of course, the prosecution alleged it had found physical evidence linking Steven Avery to the crime: his blood in Halbach's car, found on the property; his DNA on Halbach's key, found in his bedroom; and Halbach's DNA found on a bullet in his garage. This is the evidence the defense attacked as planted.

The defense points out that Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department officers found the key and bullet only after repeated searches by others did not turn them up. The officer who found the key had just been deposed in Avery's wrongful conviction civil suit. That agency had supposedly handed the case over to others. They also showed that a vial of Avery's blood from his previous wrongful conviction case was retained as evidence, that the seal on the evidence packet was broken, and that a small hole was pierced in the top of the blood vial.

Frankly, it's hard to see what motive Avery himself had other than perhaps impulsive sexual deviancy. His life was going well at that point in time; he was poised to possibly win a multi-million-dollar civil lawsuit, he had become a cause celebre of Wisconsin politicians and he had a girlfriend.

It's clear the defense wanted to argue someone else on the property at least could have done it, and that the cops – thinking Steven Avery was the guilty party or wanting others to do so – planted the evidence pointing instead at him. Instead, they only got to argue half of that to the jury.

All very curious.

Wiki citations:
7. "Teen sticks to story in interview from Manitowoc jail". gmtoday. April 30, 2007. Retrieved 20 December 2015.
8. Andy Thompson (December 21, 2015). "Dassey seeks release in Halbach murder". Appleton Post-Crescent. Retrieved December 21, 2015.
9. "Wisconsin Department of Corrections Offender Locator". 2 January 2016. Retrieved 2 January 2016.
10. "Steven Avery's appeal denied". 24 August 2011. Retrieved 27 February 2013.
11. "State v. Avery, 2011 WI App 124". Retrieved 19 December 2015.

Offline Illadelph215

  • Whiskey bent and hellbound
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • SA_Chat+
  • **
  • Join Date: Sep 2015
  • Location: Philly
  • Posts: 573
  • Reputation Power: 37
  • Illadelph215 is working their way up.Illadelph215 is working their way up.Illadelph215 is working their way up.
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:June 03, 2020, 11:49:19 AM
  • Our Community
Re: Making A Murderer
« Reply #3 on: January 06, 2016, 12:08:39 AM »
I think he was 19 when he killed the cat? That's horrible. He did have a past. Did a lot of fucked up shit it seems. Saint by no means. But he did have a family. Deserves justice and his rights. Making for an interesting series for sure. I need to schedule Netflix time pronto.
There is no future, there is no past. In the present, nothing lasts.

Offline puppy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • SA_Chat+
  • **
  • Join Date: May 2015
  • Location: Virginia
  • Posts: 213
  • Reputation Power: 18
  • puppy is new on the scene.
  • Gender: Female
  • Last Login:December 06, 2019, 07:10:37 AM
  • Miss you Chem...
Re: Making A Murderer
« Reply #4 on: January 06, 2016, 12:11:04 AM »
Having watched and read many many true crime cases...you should Griffin read and  research more than just one series before you decide....they tend to be slanted one way or another...now having said that I'm not familiar with this case and will look into it....

Offline Guts

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Oct 2015
  • Location:
  • Posts: 1034
  • Reputation Power: 36
  • Guts is working their way up.Guts is working their way up.Guts is working their way up.
  • Last Login:April 25, 2019, 10:04:31 PM
  • Our Community Board
Re: Making A Murderer
« Reply #5 on: January 07, 2016, 09:29:29 PM »
I'm watching this now and I just need to say the following:

FUCK THE POLICE.

What they did to that 16 year old kid was probably worse than Steven Avery. Kid was 16 and in special ed classes... had an IQ of 70. Cops coerced a confession. His punk ass public defender, Len, knowingly allowed the police to question him outside of his presence. You should've seen the way that dick sucker was smiling... I haven't wanted to beat the shit out of the TV like that in a while...

If these podunk hill billies do shit like this to another white person, just imagine what they would do to a black person.

Offline nick

  • Founder
  • Founders
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2014
  • Location:
  • Posts: 732
  • Reputation Power: 0
  • nick has hidden their reputation power
  • Last Login:July 22, 2019, 05:49:59 AM
Re: Making A Murderer
« Reply #6 on: January 07, 2016, 10:40:44 PM »
I think it's not in the same league as "serial".

Offline Guts

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Oct 2015
  • Location:
  • Posts: 1034
  • Reputation Power: 36
  • Guts is working their way up.Guts is working their way up.Guts is working their way up.
  • Last Login:April 25, 2019, 10:04:31 PM
  • Our Community Board
Re: Making A Murderer
« Reply #7 on: January 07, 2016, 11:29:23 PM »
I think it's not in the same league as "serial".

I'm not sure what you mean by this...

Griffin: I'm not quite done with the series yet but they are supposed to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt...

It's too bad the reporters weren't the jury. They seem to get it. You can tell just by the way they dress that they weren't from that town. It's a town of quote simple folk... In onr scene, Steve's nephew, the 16 year old coerced into confessing, asks his mom what the word inconsistent meant. She said she didn't know.

Offline jdub

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • SA_Chat+
  • **
  • Join Date: Jul 2015
  • Location:
  • Posts: 282
  • Reputation Power: 0
  • jdub has hidden their reputation power
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:April 25, 2018, 03:39:20 AM
  • Welcome to our community forum ...
Re: Making A Murderer
« Reply #8 on: January 08, 2016, 12:59:10 AM »
Yeah I saw it.

I'm not sure he's innocent of the murder, but he definitely deserves a new trial far away from that town imo.

So shady that the blood evidence from the rape trial was broken into and that the cops from the town he was suing found the key (in plain sight on the 6th or 7th search) when they shouldn't have even been at the crime scene. Also there should have been her blood in his trailer and the garage if it went down like the cops/da said it did. Definitely reasonable doubt imo.

Z

  • Guest
Re: Making A Murderer
« Reply #9 on: January 08, 2016, 01:08:48 AM »
The real misscarriage of justice was Brendan Dassey.  Horrible.  I read there is a petition with 200k signatures on change.org for a new trial or outright pardon for both of them.


Fuck the public defender who set his mentally disabled client up in a lawyer free interview for the purpose of scaring him into being a good witness against his uncle.  Fucck theprosecuttor who was hrrassing domestic assault victims with sexts saying she might b cute, but he was the real catch with the 350k house.  So much corruption and self centred public 'servants.'  So sickening.

Offline Narkotikon

  • Honest
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • SA_Chat+
  • **
  • Join Date: Jun 2015
  • Location: USA
  • Posts: 1193
  • Reputation Power: 50
  • Narkotikon has got loads of potential.Narkotikon has got loads of potential.Narkotikon has got loads of potential.Narkotikon has got loads of potential.Narkotikon has got loads of potential.
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:March 28, 2016, 11:31:11 PM
  • Keeping Them Honest
Re: Making A Murderer
« Reply #10 on: January 08, 2016, 04:00:28 AM »
Not familiar with the case, or the show, but based on what you all posted...

1. That podunk town is majorly corrupt, not unlike too many other places.

2. His rights were obviously violated and he deserves a new trial.

3.  Even if, in the new trial, he's found guilty, he should be given credit for the 18 years he served for the crime he didn't commit. (If that's already happened with the previous trial, and he has been given credit, or even if they do that at all, you'll have to excuse my ignorance.)

4. The prosecutor and the cops who questioned that mentally challenged kid need to be fired and barred from being public servants. They've proven they can't hold that kind of power and be trustworthy or honest. All of their previous cases should be reopened and reexamined too.

5. That public defender should be disbarred for lack of ethics.

6. That mother should take a remedial English course and learn basic vocabulary. And she should be made to have the common sense that if she's going to be a parent, she needs to demand a competent advocate for her child if she can't explain something to him in such situations. 

7. All public servants, anywhere, and in any position, need to be fired and held accountable for lying and unethical behavior. No place, no thing, and no one can improve when those types of people aren't purged from their positions, held accountable, publicly reprimanded, and barred from being trusted again, especially in positions of authority.
Transparency is necessary to ensure decent staff members get elected. Members need to know when staff are misbehaving, so members can be informed voters.

Offline DeadCat

  • Deceased
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Jul 2015
  • Location:
  • Posts: 704
  • Reputation Power: 41
  • DeadCat is now getting very popular.DeadCat is now getting very popular.DeadCat is now getting very popular.DeadCat is now getting very popular.
  • Last Login:June 07, 2017, 04:01:37 PM
  • Welcome to our community forum ...
Re: Making A Murderer
« Reply #11 on: January 08, 2016, 10:11:29 AM »
I binged watched this on Netflix about a week ago. There is alos a lot of talk about it on sites like reddit. Most of the discussion expresseses amazment at how corrupt and incompetent most of the officials invoved were, and fairly so. The rest of the talk debates the innocence or guilt of the two . I thunk it is fairly clear that even if they wee both guilty they were framed to ensure convction.

I doubt Brendan the kid with the IQ of 70 is guilty and am not convinved  that the uncle (Avery) is likely guilty. Howeve, rall that type of debate misses the impotant point; Any justice system is going to make some mistakes. The important thing is that it be weighted to make mistakes that let the guilty go free more than the innoent be wrongly convicted.

Back when you could get a jury of 12 thinking people I think this sid happen more Now that everyone is dubed down and tend to ust accept wat anyone in authrity tells thm to be true just being accused swithces the burden of proof from the state having to prove your guilt to the defendant having to proove innocence.

When I was in high school, back in the Stone Age we had Civics teachers explain to us  that it was better to have a system that let 10 guilty men go free rather than jail one who was innocent. Losing that principle tilts the society toward becoming a polie state, someting many generations of people have fought and died to prevent.

So the REAL outrage is not that those two hicks are incarcerated (athought it is an outrage) it is that we have warped our ssystem to make it happen so easily and dumbed down our populace to so wiling to accept their guilt on blind faith.

BTW: There is a WHite House petittion to have the President pardon Brendan and Steven. Here is one of many articles: http://www.bustle.com/articles/133974-a-white-house-petition-to-pardon-steven-avery-has-just-reached-a-momentous-milestone

There was also a White House petition to build a Death Star so I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it to force  their pardon.

Offline Guts

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Oct 2015
  • Location:
  • Posts: 1034
  • Reputation Power: 36
  • Guts is working their way up.Guts is working their way up.Guts is working their way up.
  • Last Login:April 25, 2019, 10:04:31 PM
  • Our Community Board
Re: Making A Murderer
« Reply #12 on: January 08, 2016, 10:37:47 AM »
When the jury first got together to deliberate on the verdict, they took an initial vote to see where people stood. 7 voted not guilty. Something changed throughout the deliberation...

If Steven did do it, would he have done it had he not spent 18 years in prison? It's hard to believe that someone in that town was smart enough to frame him in such a way but it's also hard to believe that Steve did it based on the evidence presented. Where's the blood? While Branden's second attorney (also a public defender?) was certainly better than his first, he wasn't all that great. Not nearly as good as Steve's attorneys.

Also, the dick head self righteous prosecutor in the case was forced to resign because he was caught sexting defendants in cases he was trying. I believe he also beat one up.

Oh and for the key that they supposedly found on like the 8th search, the family could've given it to Lenk to plant. Both my mom and my pops have a spare key to my car. Teresa's brother was super suspect the whole time.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2016, 10:51:25 AM by Guts »

Offline Griffin (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Aug 2015
  • Location:
  • Posts: 948
  • Reputation Power: 34
  • Griffin is working their way up.Griffin is working their way up.Griffin is working their way up.
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:February 29, 2020, 09:21:12 PM
  • Welcome to our community forum ...
Re: Making A Murderer
« Reply #13 on: January 08, 2016, 11:01:46 AM »
As far as wrongful conviction goes, I don't think anyone got as bad a deal as Vincent Simmons, the documentary about him is called Shadow of a doubt and I recommend everyone to watch that, and share his story because their is absolutely no way he is guilty there is no question about it like with Adnen Syed, or Steven Averys case. The only reason he was charged, convicted, and hasn't been granted his appeals or released is because he is black.

He was accused of raping 2 16 year old white girls, and there is a ton of evidence saying he didn't. He has been fighting for his freedom for the last 38 years. A guy saw him and heard his story on the documentary The Farm: Life in Angola State prison, and decided to do a documentary on him. When he was convicted he was illiterate and didn't know that his lawyer was completely screwing him. The d.a. who convicted him is the presiding judge who has been denying his appeals for the last 20 years.

He got enough attn and support from Shadow of a Doubt, and was able to get a lawyer to help him with his appeals. The judge hadn't let him get any of the evidence that was used in trial and the stuff that was barred. When he got a lawyer he got all of his evidence for the first time, and found out that the judge didn't allow the doctor or his statement into the trial. His statement said that the girls who were raped were still virgins, and they had no signs of being raped at all such as no dna or bruises, cuts, scratches, or semen was found.

The judge also didn't allow any of his witnesses that could testify that he was at a bar they were at, when the rapes were happening. He denied them because of their credibility because one had a littering ticket, one had a speeding ticket, and the other had a disturbing the peace charge. His lawyer also didn't object to anything like the all white jury, or none of the evidence exonerating him in.

 They also found him guilty of 2 charges of attempted rape because the charge for rape had just been capped at 10 years. So even though he supposedly raped them and it wasn't an attempt because their statements say that their was penetration and all of that. So they charged him with rape but they found him guilty of to 2 counts of attempted rape and gave him 100 years. I haven't watched the documentary in a few years so I might be off on some of this but this is what I remember.

The only evidence that said he was guilty was the girls statements and they are completely different then what they said in trial. In the statement they said they couldn't identify him because all black people look the same, and then in trial they said they had known Vincent Simmons before the rape and he introduced himself by name when they gave him a ride when the rapes supposedly happened. The whole case is full of corruption and he has a ton of evidence proving that he isn't guilty.

He was also shot by the cops after they arrested him when he was handcuffed to the table for his interview, the cop said that he got the gun away from him while he was handcuffed to the table but wasnt able to shoot him because the safety was on. The cop said he got the gun back and was in fear of his life and shot him even though there is no way he could of gotten the gun while cuffed to the table and their is no way that the cop was scared for his life after he had gotten his gun back from the him. It is horrible I hope someone checks the story out.

I have heard a little bit about Serial everyone said it was great, from just wikipedia their isn't much evidence that he is innocent but idk much about the case. The main thing which is why he got his appeal approved is that the statement about his phone records that was made in trial by an expert stated that from the cell tower pings from an incoming call puts him close to where she was buried instead of where he said he was in his alibi, he just recently recanted his statement because you can't accurately determine location from incoming calls only outgoing.

I did read a lot about it after watching the series last month, and I still have the same position that he should be freed either way. Even if he had a video of himself doing it, admitted it, told everyone it was the best thing he ever did the way our justice system works he should be released due to all of his rights that were violated. I don't agree with that and personally think he is innocent but that is why they take a few years investigating people before charging them even as they are committing more crime(or murder) and have proof.

There are so many legalities and little things that you can mess up and be acquitted because of it, there were so many violations, and corruption, and reasonable doubt on top of not enough evidence to actually convict him. They shouldn't of let the kids confession in the trial, and none of the evidence that the monotowac county sheriffs found should of been admitted either.

The other county had searched the premises for weeks or months and didn't find anything linking him to that murder, and then all of a sudden the county who was barred from the investigation and not supposed to even be on the property show up and they are 2 people most culpable of wrong doing in his other case and they just happen to be the ones who find her key in plain sight, photographed, and bagged it themselves.
None of that sounds right at all, plus it had averys dna but not Theresa halbachs on it and it was her key that doesn't make any sense.

Especially since it was the 2 guys who knew that he was innocent 6 years before he was released and knew that the other guy admitted to the crime steven avery was in prison for but didn't say anything to anyone and didn't file a report until the day after he got out. And if they were the ones who found it they should of had the county doing the investigation inventory and photograph it. Also there were multiple statements from the other county sheriff's that said that key was not their before the 2 corrupt dudes found it.

They were also the ones who had found the .22 bullet that was shot from avery's gun and had theresa halbachs dna but not stevens on it almost 7 months after the murder. The other county had been searching that whole time and they didn't find anything that linked steven to the murder the shackles that had none of the girls dna, the bullet, the key, the blood in the car, and the bone fragments were all found by the county who was barred from the investigation, none of it should of been let in to the trial.

Also none of the evidence matches up with the confession at all, and there are so many discrepancies in his different statements it is ridiculous they kept asking him if he was lying now or if he was lying the first time and just told them what they wanted to hear. If she was raped by dassy on averys bed in his trailer, while shackled, and then stabbed, taken out to the barn, stabbed by both avery and dassey, then shot 4 times in the head, there was no way possible that there would be blood and dna all over the house bed, and barn.

They didn't find a drop of blood or any dna in the house, ground, barn, or bedroom, Even though she had her throat slit and was stabbed in the chest before being shot 4 times, dexter couldn't even pull that off. The barn hadn't been cleaned you could tell from the footage but he supposedly just wiped the blood up with her clothes and then burned it. They also say she would of had to be dismembered and burned in 3 different places for them to find bones at the burn site at his house and a few miles away.

They said the bones were to small to have been burned whole, so that doesn't match up with either confession either the whole story doesn't make sense because of the complete lack of dna or blood. There were a few things that I thought should of been in the docuseries that weren't or that I might of missed. That is one of reasons I like louis theroux little bbc documentaries is because he is completely objective and neutral he doesn't let his agenda, or views skew the story, even on the one he did on pedophiles and you could see he was pissed but he let both sides have equal opportunity.

The main thing that I thought should of been in the documentary if it is true which I think it is because it was on his 2nd confession transcript and later in the transcript to his mom which i don't think were faked as it was like 107 pages. The kid had told them on his second confession after telling his mom that steven grabbed his dick through his pants a few times while wrestling, that it made him super uncomfortable. He said he thought his mom knew because it happened quite a few times, he said there wasn't anything else sexual that steven did.

Also they should of talked about the bullet being found by monotowac county as well as the shackles even though their was no dna on the shackles from her and no dna on the bullet from his i think it should of been left in to be more believable. They didn't portray him as a saint at all but they did make him seem like he was completely innocent and I think they were scared that it would skew the viewers beliefs and make them think that he shouldn't be free even with the corruption if he didn't murder her because he did that to the kid.

Which I think they were right if that is why they left it out. I don't think as many people would of gotten behind it and believed him if they would of showed that. I assume that they thought he was innocent, been screwed over, plus they had been with his family for the last few years and wanted to bring as much attention to it as possible to give him a chance at being released. I think adding that would of made people think he is a pedophile and less people would of cared that he got screwed and was innocent or believed that he was.

The other thing I didn't see was them saying that they found her palm pilot and phone in the burn pile at his property. I think that would of added less reasonable doubt but there is a ton of it. I think there was to many errors in the investigation to truly solve this crime to actually prove that he did or didn't do it. I wouldn't be super surprised if he had but from all of the corruption and shady dealings I don't think he was and if they thought he was guilty they should of let the other county handle it instead of going for the homerun with planted evidence.


Offline Griffin (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Aug 2015
  • Location:
  • Posts: 948
  • Reputation Power: 34
  • Griffin is working their way up.Griffin is working their way up.Griffin is working their way up.
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:February 29, 2020, 09:21:12 PM
  • Welcome to our community forum ...
Re: Making A Murderer
« Reply #14 on: January 08, 2016, 11:22:09 AM »
Unfortunately I don't think the white house or obama can pardon him because it is a state issue, but i could be wrong about that. I do agree with a lot you had to say about our justice system. We have all of these things in place to prove guilt beyond any reasonable doubt, which I think there was reasonable doubt in his case. It really does seem like now the burden of proof is alway the defendent now which is not how it is supposed to be at all.

He was convicted by the media before he went to trial and he was never presumed innocent, and I am pretty sure that ken krantz the corrupt asshole prosecutor who got in trouble for sexting clients of his that were victims of domestic violence violated the gag order. He had so many rights violated it was ridiculous and you see people guilty of a lot of violence get acquitted over something minor he should of never been convicted.

I also think that there was some jury tampering going on for their to be such a dramatic shift, I think 2 or 3 people said that after seeing all the shit that happened with his case that they would of voted him innocent. One person from the jury said that he was threatened after he tried to vote innocent but they didn't come out with his name so I have no idea if it is true.

There are also a few things that he has now that should be mandatory that he gets an appeal. I don't know how they can deny after some of the stuff brought up there are so many things that could of changed the outcome of the case. I think he wont get his appeal approved until it changes jurisdictions or gets a new presiding judge and prosecution team, unless someone else turns them self in and admits guilt.

The biggest reason I think that he is innocent is because of all of the corruption and shadyness that went on. I think if he really did it that they wouldn't of done so much to make it a sure win, from what I remember and have read the county that was actually supposed to be the ones investigating didn't really find much of anything that they could of won the case with. I think it would of been a completely different story if they wouldn't of let manitowac counties evidence into the trial. I don't think they should of seeing huge conflict of interest but I'm no lawyer.


Tags:
 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
12 Replies
1824 Views
Last post January 15, 2016, 02:17:39 PM
by Guts
9 Replies
1764 Views
Last post January 26, 2016, 11:35:39 PM
by Griffin
4 Replies
3353 Views
Last post March 23, 2016, 10:17:49 PM
by MoeMentim
2 Replies
2286 Views
Last post November 24, 2016, 02:55:48 PM
by Lolleedee
0 Replies
1542 Views
Last post May 01, 2020, 10:45:34 AM
by Chip





TERMS AND CONDITIONS

In no event will d&u or any person involved in creating, producing, or distributing site information be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, punitive, special or consequential damages arising out of the use of or inability to use d&u. You agree to indemnify and hold harmless d&u, its domain founders, sponsors, maintainers, server administrators, volunteers and contributors from and against all liability, claims, damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from the use of any part of the d&u site.


TO USE THIS WEBSITE YOU MUST AGREE TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS ABOVE



Founded December 2014
SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal