Making a Murderer S01E10 "Fighting for Their Lives"

Discussion in 'Now Playing - TV Show Talk' started by teknikel, Dec 23, 2015.

  1. Jan 5, 2016 #61 of 253
    Cainebj

    Cainebj Well-Known Member

    4,763
    358
    Nov 10, 2006
    New York

    Advertisements

    Having just finished the series - reading the evidence that was left out here in this thread does leave me scratching my head. Even the prosecutor is not coming across as evil as he did in the series, I found his comment that he declined to participate because he thought he was going to be ambushed very interesting.

    I thought that too - not even from internet research - just because of their testimony.

    That is mentioned in the series early on.
     
  2. Jan 5, 2016 #62 of 253
    DevdogAZ

    DevdogAZ Give 'em Hell, Devils

    59,031
    4,492
    Apr 16, 2003
    Arizona
    I clicked on the link within that article to access a copy of the confession transcript but it took me to a Dropbox page that said it had been disabled due to high traffic or something like that. So I haven't actually read the confession and will defer to you if you have. However, here's what that page says about it:

     
  3. Jan 5, 2016 #63 of 253
    nataylor

    nataylor Curiously Strong TCF Club

    39,877
    7,083
    Apr 26, 2000
    Houston, TX
    Here are the transcripts, from my Dropbox account:

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/due5yiiyf...y 27, 2006 (at Mishicot High School).pdf?dl=1

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/mzq4qlks0...uary 27, 2006 (at Police Department).pdf?dl=1

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/ss4oiyl9fn2mwkj/Transcript - March 1, 2006.pdf?dl=1

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/rfil7igzzjb75j4/Transcript - May 13, 2006.pdf?dl=1

    I'd read them in that order (they're listed chronologically, oldest first), so you can get an idea of how the story develops and changes over time. If the article was based on reading only the final interview, I can see how it might seem that Brendan was volunteering details.

    Edit: Here's the interview with Michael O'Kelly, the defense investigator. It takes place the day before the final interview listed above: https://www.dropbox.com/s/6rshsqdxlfuedyz/Transcript - 05-12-2006 - Dassey and O'Kelly.pdf?dl=1
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2016
  4. Jan 6, 2016 #64 of 253
    TAsunder

    TAsunder Debates Ghee vs Gi

    25,048
    2,959
    Aug 6, 2003
    Madison, WI
    The cat thing is way underplayed in the show. They made it sound like he grabbed a cat and tossed it over a fire, not into it. And didn't mention dousing it in oil. And he made it sound like it was just a goofy prank. Umm, no.
     
  5. Jan 6, 2016 #65 of 253
    BrettStah

    BrettStah Well-Known Member

    33,693
    6,520
    Nov 12, 2000
    San Antonio

    Advertisements

    I remember hearing that he set a cat on fire, and so does my wife. We were both disturbed by that news, so it stuck with us.
     
  6. Jan 7, 2016 #66 of 253
    TeddS

    TeddS Obfuscator

    17,514
    1,862
    Sep 21, 2000
    NYC
    From things I've read before, cat (and other animal) torture and burning has been a fairly common thing among people looking for entertainment for a long time. A one-time occurrence, while disturbing, doesn't make me think that proves he's anything other than a very dumb, bored, uneducated, insensitive person.

    People who torture lots of animals, over time and with increasing severity are the ones you need to look out for.

    Very disturbing documentary overall. I'm pretty sure both guys were innocent and set up. They were exceptionally unintelligent, next were the jurors, with the police slightly more intelligent, the prosecutors slightly more intelligent and the judges a smidge more intelligent. Lots of dumb people behaving very badly at all levels. If it were a fictional movie it would have been hard to believe that so many characters are so dumb.


    Moral of the story - never, ever, ever speak with police without a lawyer present.
     
  7. Jan 7, 2016 #67 of 253
    DevdogAZ

    DevdogAZ Give 'em Hell, Devils

    59,031
    4,492
    Apr 16, 2003
    Arizona
    And even then, if your lawyer is court appointed, s/he might not be acting in your best interest.
     
  8. Jan 7, 2016 #68 of 253
    TeddS

    TeddS Obfuscator

    17,514
    1,862
    Sep 21, 2000
    NYC
    Absolutely. Very scary stuff.
     
  9. Jan 7, 2016 #69 of 253
    DevdogAZ

    DevdogAZ Give 'em Hell, Devils

    59,031
    4,492
    Apr 16, 2003
    Arizona
    Quoting this post from the episode 5 thread so we can further discuss the linked map without having to remember which pieces of evidence were presented in which episodes.

    Looking at the map and looking at the same area in Google Earth, I see that the school bus dropoff point is approximately 330 yards from where the for-sale minivan was parked. So I'm curious how/why the school bus driver and any kids on the bus would have noticed someone 300+ yards down the road taking pictures of the minivan.
     
  10. Jan 7, 2016 #70 of 253
    TeddS

    TeddS Obfuscator

    17,514
    1,862
    Sep 21, 2000
    NYC
    I assumed that was a lie told by the investigators to Brendan in order to get him to repeat back to them what they wanted to hear.
     
  11. Jan 7, 2016 #71 of 253
    nataylor

    nataylor Curiously Strong TCF Club

    39,877
    7,083
    Apr 26, 2000
    Houston, TX
    I'm assuming the bus has to turn around. Maybe it drives down to the circular area in front of the Dassey house to do so.
     
  12. Jan 7, 2016 #72 of 253
    DevdogAZ

    DevdogAZ Give 'em Hell, Devils

    59,031
    4,492
    Apr 16, 2003
    Arizona
    Except that didn't they reference during the trial that the bus driver and kids on the bus testified that they saw her out there taking pictures and that this was at around 3:30-3:40 on that day? I thought this was used to refute the timeline of Brendan's brother who claimed to see Teresa walking toward Steven's trailer before 3 pm.

    I thought that as well, but if that's the case, why would the bus drop Brendan off 330 yards down the road rather than in front of his house?
     
  13. Jan 7, 2016 #73 of 253
    nataylor

    nataylor Curiously Strong TCF Club

    39,877
    7,083
    Apr 26, 2000
    Houston, TX
    I don't know. Avery Road looks relatively narrow, and turning around a bus there looks like it would be a pain.
     
  14. Jan 7, 2016 #74 of 253
    DevdogAZ

    DevdogAZ Give 'em Hell, Devils

    59,031
    4,492
    Apr 16, 2003
    Arizona
    I agree that seems reasonable, but there must be some reason why the map maker decided to indicate the approximate bus drop off point as being near the entrance to the salvage yard. According to that link, the map went through several iterations, so I'm guessing if there's reason to believe the bus got closer than that point, it would be corrected on the map.

    Edit: In fact, the school bus stop info was added in v1.4 of the map based on information provided in a Reddit thread.
     
  15. Jan 7, 2016 #75 of 253
    nataylor

    nataylor Curiously Strong TCF Club

    39,877
    7,083
    Apr 26, 2000
    Houston, TX
    I think it's based on Brendan's brother's testimony. He says the bus drops them off about half a mile away, and it takes 3-4 minutes to walk to the house. His distance estimate is probably off.
     
  16. Jan 7, 2016 #76 of 253
    DevdogAZ

    DevdogAZ Give 'em Hell, Devils

    59,031
    4,492
    Apr 16, 2003
    Arizona
    There are three logical drop off points:

    1. Out on the highway where Avery Road intersects it.
    2. In front of the entrance to the salvage yard as indicated on the map.
    3. In front of Brendan's house, if the bus drove down that way to turn around.

    Brendan's brother testifies that they don't get dropped off in front of the house, and nobody disputes that, so #3 is out. #1 is over 600 yards away from where the minivan was parked across a field, so that seems a little too far for anyone to be able to testify to what they saw. So #2 is the most logical place.
     
  17. Jan 10, 2016 #77 of 253
    Dan203

    Dan203 Super Moderator Staff Member TCF Club

    54,518
    7,530
    Apr 17, 2000
    Nevada
    I'm not so sure they're innocent, but the account told by the DA to the media was obviously false. The fact that they were unable to find a single bit of her DNA in the house or the garage, except for on a single bullet found under strange circumstances, but did find her blood/hair in the back of the SUV pretty much proves to me that it didn't go down the way they said it did. The tampered with blood vial was also a huge red flag.

    However I'm not quite sure how deep the conspiracy went. Did the police come across the crime scene in a completely different location and move the SUV and the bones onto the Avery property in a complete effort to frame an innocent man? Or did they find the car, on the property, perhaps during an illegal search, and then decided to help the case along by planting the blood, key and bullet? In either case some seriously shady sh*t was going on there and it's pretty clear that the way the prosecution said it occurred is not really possible.
     
  18. Jan 12, 2016 #78 of 253
    KRS

    KRS Mmm...invisible cola

    7,035
    285
    Jan 30, 2002
    Franklin, MA
    Some of the lines the police used to explain why they didn't do something were pretty suspect themselves.

    Paraphrasing:

    "We couldn't have used Steven's gun to fire a bullet because it was in the evidence room." - this proved nothing in my mind

    "What, are the police carrying around vials of sweat to plant?" - perhaps, and it almost gave more credibility of the police using vials of blood for that same purpose

    "It would have been easier to kill Steven" - the cop who said this really didn't think it through before speaking!


    Personally, I think Steven was framed. Not just by the cops, but also by the actual murderer.
    Yes, his actions showed a fixation on the photographer, but not that he killed her. His other actions on that day (normal phone calls with his girlfriend, inviting Brendan and others to the fire pit, his demeanor during interviews shortly after the investigation began) lead me to think he did not do it. While he has done some bad things in the past, it seemed like he readily confessed and took the punishment. Perhaps others on the compound knew of his interest in her and used it against him. Maybe they killed her and clumsily tried to pin it on Steven. Then the cops got involved and tried to make the "evidence" look more convincing with their tweaks. This idea would also explain Brendan's odd responses about the events of that day. I think he heard some details after the fact or possibly saw _something_. This likely confused him or perhaps he was coached by someone to say certain things. During the interrogations, he knows he needs to tell that story, but can't keep the details straight.

    Regardless of all the speculation about what actually happened, the bottom line is that there is clearly reasonable doubt all over the case.
     
  19. Jan 12, 2016 #79 of 253
    Dan203

    Dan203 Super Moderator Staff Member TCF Club

    54,518
    7,530
    Apr 17, 2000
    Nevada
    Exactly. No matter if he did it or not I don't think the Jury should have convicted. There was just way too much reasonable doubt.

    And the kid... I'm not sure he should have even been considered competent to stand trial. He seemed to be severely mentally handicapped and they had video proof that the police used that to manipulate him into saying things that were completely untrue. (most of the story he told could be disproved by the physical evidence)
     
  20. Jan 12, 2016 #80 of 253
    DevdogAZ

    DevdogAZ Give 'em Hell, Devils

    59,031
    4,492
    Apr 16, 2003
    Arizona
    According to this short blub from The Daily Beast, Steven Avery's defense team filed another appeal on Monday.

     

Share This Page

spam firewall

Advertisements