In.
Americans are the dumbest bunch of fuckers on the plant.
Iâve just finished it.
Itâs a tough one because you only see snippets but there was enough for reasonable doubt for me and it would seem the jury thought similar initially.
Why wouldnât he crush the car? Why if he bleached everything wouldnât he bleach the car? Why leave the car out on the edge instead of burying it in the yard? Why would you leave the bones out the back? Why wouldnât you bury them? What was he doing in the car at all if he invited her to the house? The defence didnât really raise these questions enough for me in what I saw.
The whole thing was sketchy as fuck. I wouldnât be suprised if he did it but the cops planted the car and the keys and the blood to make sure he was convicted. That whole family is weird as fuck and any of them could be killers. They never really followed up on the others properly youâd have to think.
Why the fuck was the brother lying about not deleting messages? I thought they should have pressed him on that a bit more. The ex boyfriend as well having her password. All very sketchy. If she was getting nuisance calls from a number couldnât they have figured out who it was that was ringing her?
Is it like the Simpsons where they found Simpson DNA, could it be Avery DNA they found 
Waterford Whispers is good these days.
2 Likes
Ridiculous article. Heâs clearly a cunt, but a Halbech murdering cunt? So she has no further evidence, but she just knows he did it
Finally signing in. Great documentary.
Not sure why @anon7035031 is repeatedly pointing out that there is bias in the documentary. Obviously there is. But itâs not supposed to be held to the same standards as the law. And then following that up with wider stories about the Avery family. The more violent his family, the more likely Steven Avery is to be innocent. Having violent relatives is not a crime, is irrelevant to the miscarriage of justice and was way beyond the scope of what is already a very comprehensive documentary.
There doesnât appear to be much in the evidence that didnât make the series. The *67 phone calls is about the height of it but not to long ago we had lads at a coursing tournament ringing Kev from a private number. Thatâs a long way from being murder suspects. The DNA under the hood seems curiously out of place and the defence stated at the trial that there was no DNA evidence as far as I recall so that seems odd. The other stuff about the burn site just reinforces what we already do know, which is that she was likely burned there or very close by. Itâs still an awful long way short of proving Steven Avery did it.
Smashing series.
2 Likes
One would hope though that a documentary would have the same goals as the legal system i.e. seek the truth. The problem with this (excellent) series is it starts from the premise that Steve Avery is innocent and was wrongly convicted. Although itâs cleverly done, everything that is presented is biased towards their Avery was framed cause. I have no doubt some evidence is suspect, possibly even planted, but the makers of the series were negligent by not presenting or at least mentioning some of the more incriminating evidence introduced at trial.
Why did Avery specifically ask for the victim as the photographer? Who gives a fuck who takes a photo of a car? Why did he buy handcuffs and leg irons a few weeks before (hardly for the gf who is now outing him as a crazy bastard), the DNA on the car latch is from skin cells (not so easy to plant), why were her phone and other personal effects found in the burn barrel outside his trailer? Why were the metal remnants of her jeans found in his bonfire? Why were there deep knife slashes on his hands?
The evidence points to him, I agree not necessarily enough to convict but a lot of people get convicted for less. The relevance of the family is all the males are crazy violent fuckers with a history of sexual abuse toward women. Itâs sort of relevant, although you wouldnât think it the way itâs glossed over in the series.
This is the same lady with some of her own demons. Itâs not beyond the realms of reason that she has been coerced or indeed threatened into her latest position.
One thing is for certain, we are talking about a family with severe learning disabilities. Their ability to process situations and react appropriately is severely compromised. I mean, how many posters here found themselves getting frustrated or even shouting at the screen during the Barb-Brendan conversations. Jesus Christ, I still get angry thinking about it! âHuh?â âWhat?â âHuh?â. Fucking hell - this minor was thrown to the wolves his own mother wasnât bright enough to spot it.
2 Likes
I donât think thereâs anything compelling in those questions. Certainly not anything to remove the reasonable doubt which existed.
I think heâd dealt with her before so maybe he thought she was a decent sort and requested her again. Some people like to go to the same barber, the same coffee vendor, same place to get keys cut etc. Maybe he was suspicious of people after being locked up for 18 years so liked the familiarity of dealing with people he trusted.
Why would the handcuffs hardly be for his girlfriend? There was none of Halbachâs DNA found on them in any case.
The stuff found in the burn barrel could have been planted there. At least I recall the defence expert witness testifying that she was likely killed elsewhere before bones and other items were moved to the burn barrel.
The documentary showed a cut on his hand, did it not? He did work in auto salvage so itâs not inconceivable that heâd get cuts and scrapes.
Iâm not saying this is what I think - just that additional questions can by and large be explained away while the evidence that he was convicted on was flimsy/dodgy under any kind of examination.
3 Likes
The documentary is unashamedly about how the makers believe he was framed. Thereâs even a rather large clue in the title. I think itâs more than reasonable to concentrate on the obvious failings and inconsistencies of the case against him.
The other evidence isnât all that important and doesnât really do anything to hold the narrative of the stateâs story together. There is no real narrative. The burn site, the car, the lack of evidence in the trailer and the garage - itâs frankly ridiculous. Adding more evidence about the car, when the existing evidence makes no sense at all, does nothing more than throw more mud in the air. It doesnât make the story stronger. It remains disjointed, inconsistent and extremely dubious.
More than creating a case for avery what the documentary really did was put police and prosecutorial practices under scrutiny. No doubt the same perversion of justice goes on to some extent in every part of america. Is it the downside to having publicly elected sheriffs and DAâs, who are under massive pressure to solve crimes to get re elected? What the documentary also does is throw huge doubt on the reliability of DNA evidence going forward.
2 Likes
No to mention Public Defense lawyers who wish to someday be elected to the position of judge.
Brilliant work Bandage. When you are finished taking over the business worl maybe you could retire and study Law for a hobby.
It isnât according to themselves (the makers). They are on record as saying they were not trying to portray Avery as innocent, but rather highlight issues with the legal system. In this regard they certainly succeeded as the documentary demonstrates how a jury can be convinced of guilt when the evidence may not pass the reasonable doubt hurdle. This is especially true obviously for poor defendands, you are basically fucked unless you can hire a top notch defense team like OJ, and then no amount of evidence is enough to convict.
On the title I would say itâs ambiguous and perhaps deliberately so. The obvious interpretation is that he was framed, but it could also be interpreted as the system (his prior conviction and 18 years incarceration) could have turned him into a murderer.
In fairness the documentary is only leveling things up in its approach compared to the cops pressers.
1 Like
Its purpose is to raise questions, not provide the answers. The questions it raises leaves us in little doubt that the cops case is eager thin and the conviction relies an awful lot on highly suspicious evidence.
1 Like
The cops over there are mental. One lad actually said at one stage âWhy would we frame him when we could have killed him?â
2 Likes
I think his performance on the stand was actually good when you consider his mental age. The prosecutor continuously tried to catch him out and Brendan made a cunt of him