MAKING A MURDERER | Season 2 on October 19th!

[PatRiley]

I don't disagree with this at all. I feel there was more evidence than others though. Just not all was mentioned in doc.

Can you show us where it mentions the other evidence not mentioned? Thank you

 

[deleted]

So the confession that was coerced from an LD teenager is legitimate?

 

[Mark Antony]

Huh? Oh ok. I'll just leave you alone then, bless your heart .

I feel for the lawyers having to try and use logic in that town.

Lol ok. Il, leave you alone. We get it the town is full of dumb people. Doesn't mean your dope hero is innocent.

I don't think all are dumb at all, but when you say things like they didn't have enough evidence to convict, but you think he's guilty, and your biggest points to that were disproved from the first case,(which again led to a rapist running free and raping more women) you have to question that thought process, and pray for anyone who's life is in your hands. Saying "dope hero" over and over does absolutely sound dumb though.

 

[mac2008]

Can you show us where it mentions the other evidence not mentioned? Thank you

My best suggestion would be checking out Reddit sub topic honestly. They have done a lot of research ( my research is reading all the stuff they find lol). But they find the info in court records, police reports, and full interviews. It's a lot to read on your own. If your interested I can maybe link threads where some ppl show what they find.

 

[mac2008]

I don't think all are dumb at all, but when you say things like they didn't have enough evidence to convict, but you think he's guilty, and your biggest points to that were disproved from the first case,(which again led to a rapist running free and raping more women) you have to question that thought process, and pray for anyone who's life is in your hands. Saying "dope hero" over and over does absolutely sound dumb though.

I think saying there was a case for reasonable doubt, and saying I think he did it seems logical to me. Maybe others don't understand what I mean though. And I agree the first conviction and even stuff in this one seem shady from police and da. Im with you. I still think he did it though. I feel the same with the Oj case, which I have read more about. And the dope thing wasn't necessarily at you, someone said he was a "dope" guy or something earlier. Which is crazy to me, but if I only saw the info In the doc I would understand.

 

[Benny Hinn]

So after watching I felt the same way a lot of you seem to, at least about the kid. I wasn't sure about Steve . I went to reddit to get more info. I have been reading everything last couple of days. How do you all feel about the stuff the doc left out ?

- watch full interview with the kid. IMO seems he had a lot of info on his own and would even keep denying some things the cops tried to get him to say. He even answers question about why blood was in the RAV4. To me, when I watch the full thing, unedited, I think he probably was involved.
- all the phone calls Avery made to the girl the day of the murder. I forget the number but he called, a lot and even used *67. Also, read he requested that she specifically come to take pictures when he called autotrader
- was being accused of having sex with under aged cousin right before the murder happen. DA said he was going to be charged with that if no murder
- the lady's phone/camera found in burn barrel, where the kid said he saw them in interview.
-when Brendan got home that evening , his mom noticed bleach on his pants.
- Kid mentioned Avery unhooking battery of car. Avery Dna was found on hood latch


There are probably more I am missing. What do you all think about this info. I think both killed her now.

Fassbender used the REID technique to coerce a confession and it's well known this is not the way you should interrogate children/teens. Let a alone a mentally impaired one. The way questions are asked is very confusing. Which is probably why Brendan asked if he can make it on time to finish his project after just confessing to be implicit in a murder. It really should only be used on hardened criminals.

Could SA have done this? I guess it's possible. But Brendan? There is no way this kid should be spending the rest of his life in prison based off literally his own confession which was just nonsensical to begin with.

 

[mac2008]

So the confession that was coerced from an LD teenager is legitimate?

Only he knows that. But the full interview IMO seems more Legit than the edited parts of it shown in doc.

 

[mac2008]

Fassbender used the REID technique to coerce a confession and it's well known this is not the way you should interrogate children/teens. Let a alone a mentally impaired one. The way questions are asked is very confusing. Which is probably why Brendan asked if he can make it on time to finish his project after just confessing to be implicit in a murder. It really should only be used on hardened criminals.

Could SA have done this? I guess it's possible. But Brendan? There is no way this kid should be spending the rest of his life in prison based off literally his own confession which was just nonsensical to begin with.

I feel for the kid. Have you seen full interview though ? They def used techniques on him and he is not bright. But full interview isn't as bad as parts shown in doc. It's tough to tell man.

 

[PatRiley]

My best suggestion would be checking out Reddit sub topic honestly. They have done a lot of research ( my research is reading all the stuff they find lol). But they find the info in court records, police reports, and full interviews. It's a lot to read on your own. If your interested I can maybe link threads where some ppl show what they find.

Yes I'm interested in reading what they have found but I'm not familiar with Reddit

 

[mac2008]

Yes I'm interested in reading what they have found but I'm not familiar with Reddit

Ok I'll try to find the older ones I read days ago. Today someone emailed the DA and he sent a list of stuff not in doc too. I assume people would not trust just that ( understandable) so I'll include more.


Da email


Kids first interview at hs. I suggest watching the long ones tho.

Confession vids. These are long. One I watched was part two at the police station. ( where I got my opinion on not being fed)


https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/?count=50&after=t3_3yb4wd This is the sub

Anyone who is interested in the case should go here. These guys are committed. Most feel same as a lot of ppl here. I have come to my own conclusion. There are threads posted about him being innocent as well. Either way. There's a lot,of info

 

[gil23]

For the third time, I haven't said he was rightly convicted. I'm saying I think he did it. And he is likely a horrible person. But I guess you'd let him babysit your kids right ?

View media item 1813919

 

[a-friend]

And you're rolling with it as truth soooooo

You understand what hearsay is right?

Yes. That entire documentary was made to make you feel he is innocent. You understand that right ?

This is what has everyone (including myself) feeling like they need to back Avery.

This doc is designed to shed a positive light on Avery as opposed to a negative light, which is ok with me because at the end of the day, while he may be a bad person and guilty of many things, I don't think murdering Theresea is one he is guilty of.

And the prosecutors are to blame for that, not the Netflix doc makers.

When I say he's a dope dude, a strong dude, I mean it, in spite of all the bad things that may make him a bad person.

I'm speaking of his strength of being convicted not once but twice, for something he didn't do, and still having the way about him that he does.

If he did Kill Theresa then the prosecutors should have either proved it legitimately or let a guilty man go if they weren't able to prove it within the law.

If taking the law into their own hands to prove something they wouldn't have been able to prove otherwise is their best solution just know, they made me and a lot of other people believe he was innocent simply by their own shadiness

 

[IATT]

http://www.annrbrocklehurst.com/2015/12/who-killed-teresa-halbach-if-it-wasnt-steven-avery.html

 

[deeester]

You'd have to be a blind fool to think these

men aren't innocent. These dudes are blatantly

using their power to ruin this mans life...

There's just too many 

questionable moves made on the laws 

part alone.

1.  No blood

2.  How is it that her DNA wasn't on a key she regularly operated???? 

     Only his DNA comes up on a key he never used.

3.  They don't allow the Avery's on their property for 8 days while

     they perform a search.

4.  Multiple searches done to the property and find nothing....

     Months later find evidence....

You mean to tell me you gonna 

commit a murder, move the body

around multiple times and burn 

the body, but not burn the vehicle

you used to transport the body? 

Why would her blood even be 

in the SUV to begin with if all 

this took place in the home and 

they supposedly burned the victim

right next to the house? 

NONE OF THIS MAKES ANY SENSE! 

Swear some of ya'll have that annoying 

little brother complex where the lil bro 

always say the opposite just to annoy you.

How can you say the documentary was made

to make Avery look innocent?????

Man these ain't reenactments of what we think 

happened, these are actual visuals! We getting

the real thing,  Quit overthinking it and use 

common sense. 

 

[rillo561]

Just finished it.

 

[a-friend]

You'd have to be a blind fool to think these​

men aren't innocent. These dudes are blatantly​

using their power to ruin this mans life...​

There's just too many ​

questionable moves made on the laws ​

part alone.​

1.  No blood​

2.  How is it that her DNA wasn't on a key she regularly operated???? ​

     Only his DNA comes up on a key he never used.​

3.  They don't allow the Avery's on their property for 8 days while​

     they perform a search.​

4.  Multiple searches done to the property and find nothing....​

     Months later find evidence....​

You mean to tell me you gonna ​

commit a murder, move the body​

around multiple times and burn ​

the body, but not burn the vehicle​

you used to transport the body? ​

Why would her blood even be ​

in the SUV to begin with if all ​

this took place in the home and ​

they supposedly burned the victim​

right next to the house? ​

NONE OF THIS MAKES ANY SENSE! ​

Swear some of ya'll have that annoying ​

little brother complex where the lil bro ​

always say the opposite just to annoy you.​

How can you say the documentary was made​

to make Avery look innocent?????​

Man these ain't reenactments of what we think ​

happened, these are actual visuals! We getting​

the real thing,  Quit overthinking it and use ​

common sense. ​

I see what you mean and can read between the lines but, your closing statement came out all wrong.

 

[tay1]

Why are we talking about the cat as if it nullifies all the information given?

The fact that he may seem capable of doing this doesnt matter.

 

[Sinner]

Purposefully stayed out of this thread to avoid spoilers...

But now that I'm finished... 

I don't even know where to begin.  

 

[Mark Antony]

Why are we talking about the cat as if it nullifies all the information given?

The fact that he may seem capable of doing this doesnt matter.

It's doesn’t even matter because it was pointless to the first case, which again I'll remind the folks that keep bringing it up that were wrong on its impact because it lead to the guilty being free and raping more women. Personal opinions like that against the Avery family left the door open for more women to get raped. You allowed women to get raped because you 'felt', he did it besides the poor evidence created. More women from your area were raped. How is that not sinking in?


You're going to sit there and say "not enough to convict, but I think he's guilty" How's that not unethical to you? Imagine this guy on the jury for you and anyone related, then be afraid.

 

[mac2008]

I can say I think he did it because I have seen the doc, and the actually complete evidence it didn't include, and have came to that conclusion. It is my opinion. The documentary was made to show Avery in a good light. Would the documentary be as entertaining if it ended up with you thinking he did it ? I do not see how you can't understand thinking he did it but saying the jury might have made wrong decision. Even if I think he did it, prosecution has to prove without reasonable doubt that he did. All the shady stuff that happen leaves that open... Which is what the documentary is about.


Also, no one has said, he burned a cat Alive, that means he killed her. It does show he is a sick person, however. Him having a dead burned up girl in his backyard shows he killed her.... If your only knowledge of this case is from a Netflix documentary do not question why I think he did it.

 

[mac2008]

I see what you mean and can read between the lines but, your closing statement came out all wrong.

You'd have to be a blind fool to think these​

men aren't innocent. These dudes are blatantly​

using their power to ruin this mans life...​

There's just too many ​

questionable moves made on the laws ​

part alone.​

1.  No blood​

2.  How is it that her DNA wasn't on a key she regularly operated???? ​

     Only his DNA comes up on a key he never used.​

3.  They don't allow the Avery's on their property for 8 days while​

     they perform a search.​

4.  Multiple searches done to the property and find nothing....​

     Months later find evidence....​

You mean to tell me you gonna ​

commit a murder, move the body​

around multiple times and burn ​

the body, but not burn the vehicle​

you used to transport the body? ​

Why would her blood even be ​

in the SUV to begin with if all ​

this took place in the home and ​

they supposedly burned the victim​

right next to the house? ​

NONE OF THIS MAKES ANY SENSE! ​

Swear some of ya'll have that annoying ​

little brother complex where the lil bro ​

always say the opposite just to annoy you.​

How can you say the documentary was made​

to make Avery look innocent?????​

Man these ain't reenactments of what we think ​

happened, these are actual visuals! We getting​

the real thing,  Quit overthinking it and use ​

common sense. ​

If you saw Brendan's entire interview you would know exactly why there was blood in SUV and why they burned her. But I'm guessing you just watched the parts the doc edited into the movie, which is how it was made to make them look innocent. Yes it is not reenactments, but it is also edited pieces of the trial, not the whole thing. But your 1,2 questions are good questions. Though, Brendan did say he was there cleaning up blood with bleach after the murder, and his mom said he came home with bleach stains that night.

 

[Mark Antony]

I can say I think he did it because I have seen the doc, and the actually complete evidence it didn't include, and have came to that conclusion. It is my opinion. The documentary was made to show Avery in a good light. Would the documentary be as entertaining if it ended up with you thinking he did it ? I do not see how you can't understand thinking he did it but saying the jury might have made wrong decision. Even if I think he did it, prosecution has to prove without reasonable doubt that he did. All the shady stuff that happen leaves that open... Which is what the documentary is about.


Also, no one has said, he burned a cat Alive, that means he killed her. It does show he is a sick person, however. Him having a dead burned up girl in his backyard shows he killed her.... If your only knowledge of this case is from a Netflix documentary do not question why I think he did it.

What sources do you have that are more than what's available on the Internet, that every one doesn’t already have access to, but you're assuming haven't also read?

 

[mac2008]

What sources do you have that are more than what's available on the Internet, that every one doesn’t already have access to, but you're assuming haven't also read?

I have nothing that others don't have access too. But I'm assuming they haven't read anything more after the documentary because they leave out stuff it didn't include and some questions that do have answers. I posted a couple helpful things from Reddit. People can find more info on the case if they wanted ...

 

[Mark Antony]

What sources do you have that are more than what's available on the Internet, that every one doesn’t already have access to, but you're assuming haven't also read?

I have nothing that others don't have access too. But I'm assuming they haven't read anything more after the documentary because they leave out stuff it didn't include and some questions that do have answers. I posted a couple helpful things from Reddit. People can find more info on the case if they wanted ...

Like what? And please don't reference anything Brendan says.

 

[mac2008]

Like what? And please don't reference anything Brendan says.

What do you mean? Like where are people getting more info from ? Official court documents, full interviews, reports during the time of the trials. And I hear you about Brendan and I felt horrible after watching the doc and seeing him locked away. However, after watching his full interview I am no longer convinced he wasn't involved. ( not as sure as I am with Avery). I think you should at least watch those before you question how I feel about them.