Making a Murderer (Netflix) - New info

Can't keep up with this anymore, but keep up the good fight man

<-------- Websleuths is that way Falxy.

OU Ariakas said:

He is innocent until proven guilty; the state must bring the plausible story and it has to be 99% plausible. That is why I asked if you think his first trial was fair. I am actually with you and Noodle in thinking the most likely killer IS Avery; but that is not the point of the documentary. The point is to show just how badly the state railroaded him at every turn and used unethical and sometimes illegal tactics that were then approved by a sitting judge.

So yes, now it is hard for someone to prove that he is innocent but they never adequately proved his guilt in the first place. Noodleface All of this applies to the Michael Peterson case also. He is the most likely killer, but that is not the point. You cannot just be the most likely you have to be the killer without a shadow of a doubt.

Click to expand...

Shadow of a Doubt =/= Reasonable Doubt. Two completely different standards.

Haven't watched second season and have nothing of value to add.

Falxy-US said:

100% relevant. The county was insured, and the insurance paid. How would they go bankrupt if they are insured?

Click to expand...

Haven't finished catching up on the thread yet, but insurance already said they wouldn't cover the 30+ million dollars. This isn't hard. The blood came from the vial that was tampered with.

Falxy-US said:

I'm amazed at the vitriol here. I was hoping for reasonably intelligent conversation. But instead I'm met with a retard who thinks blood clots like a shell, which is so fucking stupid that I can't even believe someone would think that, and his entire basis for SA being innocent is that someone magically stole his blood and used a qtip to plant evidence. And besides that I'm met with people who just cuss you out because you challenge their absolutely ridiculous conspiracy theories, meanwhile not one of you can provide a reasonable and biologically plausible explanation for how SA's blood magically showed up in the car. Not one of you. I'm sorry, but you retards are the fucking idiots. Your beliefs are so god damn ridiculous and you're brainwashed by a shitty documentary. It's so sad, I'm embarrassed for you.

Click to expand...

This is the last reply I'm giving to you since you seem hellbent on refusing to look at the whole thing rationally and admit that smart people who care about the issue could come to a different opinion than you about the subject.

First, I absolutely see your point of view and readily admit that Steven Avery could certainly be guilty, Brendan Dassey too. I'll go even further and say that it is very likely that Avery murdered her and burned the body as described. My personal belief is that Avery committed the murder, but the pending legal issues for the county prompted a still unknown number of officers to help it along by planting evidence such as the key and the bullet.

As I posted before, though, the standard for killing someone, either through the death penalty or by locking them up for the rest of their natural life, is beyond a reasonable doubt and the thing this documentary has proven through its two seasons is that there is more than enough reasonable doubt to go around. The Dassey case seems self-evident. With no physical evidence available to tie him to the crime and only his coerced testimony used to convict him, it shouldn't seem reasonable to any thinking person that he be refused a re-trial. This rings doubly true given that the state used two wildly different accounts of the night of the murder to separately convict Avery and Dassy. At best the evidence suggests that he witnessed the burning of the body and helped clean blood in the garage, but given his low IQ and fear of Avery this only suggests that he was bullied into helping dispose of the body and not of murder.

I will also readily admit that your point about Avery's blood in the Rav4 is the stickiest one against him and that it is the reason why, ultimately, I believe he is the likely killer. That doesn't absolve the state in their mishandling of any part of the case, though, and is ultimately the reason I believe he should receive a new trial. Contrary to your stance on the issue, it certainly matters that the state crafted a story about how the murder occurred and used it to convict him of the crime. If the evidence doesn't concur with that story, then we have a major issue. That is why all of the breakdowns in chain of custody with evidence, the extensive mishandling of evidence compared to a normal murder case, and the conflict of interest with the Mantiwoc County officers is such a big deal. Let's break it down a bit further to clarify why most of us here believe there is reasonable doubt about the way the state says the murder occurred.

1. There is no physical evidence, aside from the bullet, linking Halbach to the garage where they said she was murdered. This is covered extensively in the documentary, but it seems completely unreasonable for the murder to have occurred in the garage, as told by the prosecution, and come up with no actual evidence for it. Additionally, as covered by the second season of the documentary, the bullet found in the garage doesn't display the forensic properties necessary to match the prosecution's story with the bullet as evidence.

2. By all accounts, the key appears to be planted. You keep insisting that Avery's trailer was never thoroughly searched prior to the key being found on Nov 8, so I went back and checked and you are wrong. There was a 2.5 hour extensive, non-targeted search conducted of the trailer on Nov 5. So a very long search of the trailer produced nothing, but several days later a search looking explicitly for pornography led to a table being shaken with a small bit of force and then a Mantiwoc County officer, one who had already been deposed in the false conviction lawsuit, finds a the key to the Rav4. Not just any key, though, a key that is completely clean except for only Avery's DNA. No fingerprints from him or other people, no DNA from anyone else who had used the key previously or even from the owner herself. I'm not concerned that it was a valet key in the slightest as there are a long list of plausible explanations on why that would be the primary key used to operate your vehicle.

3. The story about the discovery of the Rav4 is a goddamn mess. It has all been covered in the documentary, but the most egregious things are that there was damage to the car that was never reported and, most damning, that the search party found the thing within minutes of starting to search the Avery property. Keep in mind that the search party that found it was comprised of two women that were virtually pointed directly at the vehicle by the search leaders. Could it all be a very lucky coincidence? Absolutely. Stranger things have occurred in life, but given the tainted involvement of the Mantiwoc County officers in the search and discovery of the vehicle it is a giant red flag.

4. In addition to the crazy discovery of the Rav4, the blood in the back also doesn't make any sense given the prosecution's story. If we are to accept their claims that the blood in the front of the car is all Avery's, why is there none in the back? Why is there no mixing of the blood anywhere. Sure, he could have killed her with no wound on his hand, only to injure it prior to moving the Rav4 to its final location. That doesn't explain the blood spatters on the inside of the rear door, though. The documentary pretty clearly shows that the actions the prosecution alleges occurred could not have produced the patterns that are present.

This is just a handful of places that provide sufficient reasonable doubt about the story the state presented. This doesn't go into the myriad of prosecutorial and judicial decisions that were entirely out of line or mishandled, the most egregious being Kratz's murder-porn story told to TV reporters that undoubtedly tainted the trials against Avery and Dassey.

The biggest takeaway, though, and one I hope you can agree on is that it was a shitshow from start to finish and it is a stain on our judicial system. The vast majority of posters in this thread are concerned about one thing and one thing only, that if this can happen so brazenly to Avery and Dassey then there is nothing stopping it from happening to anyone else. It goes beyond the individual guilt of either man involved and into the heart of the purpose of our system of laws. If the state is allowed to deprive you of you life and liberty through the justice system, then it must be held to the highest possible standard.

Honestly, I also believe that if they retried Avery using only the most solid evidence against him (his blood in the front of the Rav4, bones in the burn pit, changing story before and after Rav4 was found) while being honest about what they don't know (location or exact method of death) that he would still be found guilty of first degree murder. Until that is done, though, this remains a disgusting example of prosecutorial overreach, judicial malfeasance, and an overall malaise with which the state treats important issues of the limits that must be placed on law enforcement from top to bottom to ensure we live in a fair and just society.

The problem comes from where do you draw the line. The cops say the key randomly fell out, everyone else says it was planted. Who do you believe? If the key really did fall out then what? Whose word do you take as the truth ?

You look at the circumstances surrounding how the key was found and who found it and decide if that is suspicious or not. Then you decide if that raises reasonable doubt.

There is no "line" to be drawn. Nobody is infallible or beyond reproach, and the argument that a cop wouldn't do this or wouldn't do that is flimsy and suspicious in itself.