Absolutely brilliant series, especially considering it was made on a shoestring budget. The timing is also perfect, latching onto the wave of anti-cop and anti-establishment sentiment sweeping the US.
However, anyone who things this is an unbiased documentary is sadly mistaken. To make this series, the directors needed 10 years access to the Avery family, so its naïve to think it could be critical or negative towards them. Just one fact alone should give skeptical viewers pause; Steve Avery’s crack defense team (that he spent his settlement money on), named several alternate suspects in court documents (not allowed to be presented to the jury due to Wisconsin law) and all of them were members of the extended Avery family. None of this was mentioned in the 10 hours of documentary, but instead they used clever editing to cast suspicion on the ex-boyfriend and even the victim’s brother. Realistically if there was the slightest bit of evidence against them, the defense team would have gone after it, but there wasn’t.
One of the alternate suspects they named was Brendan Dassey, so they were as willing to throw him under the bus as his own attorney was. The other suspects were his brothers Earl and Chuck, his brother in law Scott Tadych and nephew Bobby, all of whom are barely mentioned in the 10 hour series, although Tadych and Bobby claim each other as alibis and give suspicious timelines under oath (contradicted by the school bus driver, possibly the only believable witness).
This is a seriously fucked up bunch of cognitively challenged people with violent criminal records, again glossed over by the directors. Avery’s two brothers and (now) brother in law all did time for various violent / sexual crimes against women and/or children. The cat incident involved pouring petrol on a cat and throwing it into a fire, a common precursor for psychopaths. Apparently there was a shitload of evidence that never got a mention in the series; handcuffs and leg irons purchased in the week beforehand, a request specifically asking for the victim to come do the photographs, the bullet was matched to Avery’s gun, personal items of the victim found in his trailer, gallons of beach being bought in the 5 days before the police searched the place, etc.
No question the cops had it in for Steve, ever since he ran his female cousin off the road and threatened her with a gun (she was married to a cop). I also have little doubt they may have planted evidence to help get him convicted, sadly a not uncommon practice by law enforcement. In terms of probability, the victim was most likely raped, killed and cremated by a member or members of the extended Avery family. All other theories fall into the conspiracy theory category.
.
The brother of the Halbach girl is one for watching alright, unbelievable his unwavering support in the face of the inconsistencies and dubious circumstances of the DNA presented by the cops. It’s quite clear it was a stitch up by the cops but who killed the girl is as big an issue that there doesn’t seem to be any concrete link to. I would agree with @anon7035031 that it was likely one of the Averys or their extended family, a right bunch of inbred, red neck white trash and that the show was in likelihood only focusing on putting out one side of the story.
@caoimhaoin - what’s this about the prosecutor being a nonce?
You know they were not allowed go after anyone? They were specifically told they could not implicate anyone else, they could only defend Avery. Its the states job to go after suspects, the defense could only suggest.
I agree it is largely from the defences side but that is also largely because the state did not want involvement.
He has been accused of inappropriate behaviour by several female defendants and others he has come across thru his work. Sending them lewd texts and such like.
The defense can propose other suspects and build a case around it based on evidence. Wisconsin is a bit tricky in that they have a law where you have to meet certain criteria on motive, opportunity and direct connection to the crime. The judge didn’t allow the defense implicate anyone else in court, ruling that the criteria wasn’t met. Possibly an incorrect ruling as I would say that other family members had the same motive, opportunity and connection to the crime.
The point though is that the alternate suspects presented by Steve Avery’s defense team were other family members, including Brendan Dassey, and not anyone connected to the victim. It’s deeply suspicious that the documentary neglected to mention this but did try and cast those close to the victim in a poor light. Very often by clever editing techniques, like inserting quotes from Teresa’s brother at key points that may be completely out of context. A skeptic would say that the directors avoided any finger pointing at other family members to keep them onside for the 10 year long documentary.
It did indicate to me the uncle and brother were suspects.
However its very possible the group who now have taken over and indeed the trial layers for the defense may have told the film not to go into it as they are keeping stuff in the back oocket. I’m speculating there of course. Your theory is very plausable though.
The judge is the real issue here. What he allowed happen is nuts
Some series. It’s mental some of the stuff that went on. How they could convict both, but in particular Brendan on such flimsy evidence is mind boggling.
Go to the Anonymous Twitter account and you’ll see that they released a load of trial related material the other day.
It included a document prepared by Avery’s public defenders for the purposes of the hearing as to whether he should be allowed to appeal the murder conviction.
It listed out several other suspects - Chuck and Earl Avery, Scott Tadych and Bobby Dassey. His lawyers at the trial itself weren’t given permission to introduce any alternative suspects.
Thanks pal but I was looking for a link to @anon7035031’s additional information which wasn’t contained in the series. I finished it last night and I can’t stop thinking about it.
I’ve gone from being convinced he was innocent to suspecting he may have done it based on some additional reading.
What is clear is that he’s not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Can’t point to one thing in particular, my view has slightly altered from reading several things over the past 18 hours. There were a few things such as Avery the fact had been calling Halbach a few times that made me think they would have put a slightly different spin on things had they been included in the documentary.
I was reading the comments section on a New York Times article last night and did find it funny that a few cat ladies had no doubts about his guilt as he’d doused a cat in gas and tossed it on a bonfire. If killing cats was a sign of a murderer you’d have to lock up half of the farmers in Ireland.
one of the best things in the ten series were when this fox, Angenette Levy, was asking the prosecution questions in the press briefings. Here she is with a puzzled look on her face trying to understand that sex pest Kratzs bullshit
also, any of ye notice the hurling statue that the defence lawyer had on the cabinet in his office? surely more vindication that the gaago/joe.ie twitter shiteing from abroad works.
I noticed that too and also that Strang was sporting blessed ashes at one point which led me to remark to my housemate that he must be of Irish Catholic stock.
