"Making a Murderer" on Netflix

So what did Avery get arrested for in relation to that incident? Or did the documentary get it completely wrong and that error went without correction?

 

I wouldn't know. Just stating a fact.

 

It's understandable that "google is your friend" is good in general. But here are the diagnostic criteria (must meet all):

A. Significant impairments in self (identity or self-direction) and interpersonal (empathy or intimacy) functioning.

B. One or more pathological personality trait domains or trait facets.

C. The impairments in personality functioning and the individual‟s personality trait expression are relatively stable across time and consistent across situations.

D. The impairments in personality functioning and the individual‟s personality trait expression are not better understood as normative for the individual‟s developmental stage or socio-cultural environment.

E. The impairments in personality functioning and the individual‟s personality trait expression are not solely due to the direct physiological effects of a substance (e.g., a drug of abuse, medication) or a general medical condition (e.g., severe head trauma).

Again, the person must meet all the above criteria to meet a diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder (ASPD).

 

Very true. There are so many unanswered questions about this whole case that continues to bother me. I'm going to continue to listen to the podcasts and see, weigh out the different points of view on the case. I still think that there is plenty of evidence that not all of the information was presented or presented fairly in his case. The sad part is that I'm pretty certain his nephew IS innocent and has become just another person in the political cog that hides beneath the surface of justice.

 

Ah...that's good to know. I don't remember that from the first season.

 

Yeah I get it, but that behavior does not mean he killed that poor woman. The state had more motive to frame him, than him to kill, however convoluted his pycho is. Since you can't show motive, you need rock solid evidence, and that was a litany of streches.

 

May I ask what podcasts you are listening to?

 

So you stated the fact that Avery didn't throw the cat in the fire, but didn't mention that it was his idea and he poured gasoline on the cat.

SPECIFIC FACTS OFFERED The State informs the Court that on November 23, 1982, Steven A. Avery was convicted of being party to the crime of cruelty to an animal, committed on or about September 2, 1982, in the Town of Gibson, Manitowoc County, Wisconsin contrary to Sections 948.02 and 939.05 of the Wisconsin Statutes. There were two witnesses to the animal mistreatment: Jerry L. Yanda and Peter A. Dassey. Both men provided written statements. The incident occurred at the residence of Steven Avery. The cat belonged to Steven Avery. Steven Avery built a bonfire and chased down a live cat in his yard. After Avery caught the cat, he soaked it in gas and oil. The live cat was then thrown into the bonfire where it caught fire and crawled out of the burning pit. After the cat crawled out, Avery again doused the animal with gas before it died.

On September 2,1982 Jerry Yanda provided the following written statement: I was at Steve Avery's house on Monday afternoon 8-31-82. We decided to build a bonfire. Steve built the bonfire. Steve then said let's burn the cat. Steve then chased the cat around the yard until he caught it. Steve then poured gas and oil on it. I then picked the cat up when Steve told me to. I then threw it on the fire. The cat then jumped out of the fire and ran around until it ran out of power and died. I think it is still out there. I came looking for the police because the incident made me feel bad. The statement was signed "Jerry Yanda".

On September 1, 1982 Peter Dassey provided the following written statement: Steve said let's burn the cat. He started a fire first. They got the cat. Steve poured gas and oil on it. Jerry threw the cat into the fire. It burned up. The statement was signed "Peter Dassey".

Wait - Steven wasn't the one who threw the cat into the fire? Not according to Kratz motion. It was Jerry Yanda. : MakingaMurderer

 

I didn't say it proves he killed her. I said he was psychotic. Since the DSM is well beyond what I learned in Psychology 101, let me downgrade it to informal speech. His role in the torture and death of his own family cat proves he's a sick ****.

 

Avery is such a trashbag.

 

Got you, he does have problems which makes it harder on him...

 

Have you happened to see Part 2 yet? Almost all the questions after Part 1 are addressed by Kathleen Zellner plus hundreds of pages of scientific evidence that remove Avery as the killer. 4 judges on two appeals courts agree with you about Dassey. Unfortunately, the SCOTUS didn’t take his final appeal on his “confession.”

Again, all those unanswered questions are answered in Part 2. Bobby Dassey had tons of horrific pictures of women being tortured and worse. Katz misled Avery’s original attorneys by saying that it was Brendan’s computer (it wasn’t) and that there was nothing of value relating to the case. A major lie by Kratz to not have Avery’s attorneys (just before the trial) do a forensic analysis. Just one more time Katz lied to the defense attorneys.

 

Not sure if you are responding to me here. I'm not the guy that was involved in the reddit discussion and other information just for the record. That was @bopdd just to clarify.

The difference between us is that I'm open to hearing other discussions on the case whether or not he's guilty, innocent, etc. as part of the discussion (although I do think that he is guilty myself although there is certainly a lot of evidence to the contrary which is why I feel there needs to be a new trial to weed out the b.s. from the real info).

I'm more than willing to entertain the notion that Avery might be innocent even though, based on the evidence I saw in season one and what I read about, I think he did it. Having said that, I also don't think he got a fair or unbiased trial and that the police planted evidence to make this an open and shut case because of how embarrassing the previous overturned conviction of rape was and the lawsuit issues.

 

I saw the entire season the day it was released and the next day as well. I know about Bobby's pictures but that, by itself, doesn't mean he did it. Earlier in the thread I indicated that he would be a viable suspect if the investigation was reopened and Avery was given a new trial.

I also asked bopdd if he had seen the second season earlier because he had become super critical about the second season of the show, sticking to his earlier guns even though he hadn't seen it.

 

You are very correct if I quoted you and responded to your post. My apologies sir.

I’m with you as far as discussion. I just don’t think there’s much as far as Kathleen Zellner’s scientific investigation into what really happened to Teresa Halbach. As she admits, she’s OCD with getting to the understanding of what really happened. Also, as she said in Part 2, when you find the prosecution lying about facts once, there has to be more. And, again, she finds dozens of problems with the original prosecution.

 

The main lie Zellner found was that Bobby lied about not seeing Teresa leave Avery’s property. His own brother wrote a statement (before the first trial!) that Bobby told him that, “He (Avery) couldn’t have done it because he (Bobby) saw Teresa leave.”

My guess is that he’s likely seen it (maybe not) and Zellner leaves very little left to debate about. And yes, Avery’s appeal is in, but I haven’t heard about a new trial yet. I’m guessing that’ll be Part 3. Zellner will walk out with him when he’s a free man, as she’s done with so many other innocent “criminals.”

 

Let's just say I'm glad you're not a judge.

 

Right and the fact that Bobby changed his testimony makes him suspect (he saw her leave, he saw her walk to Steven's trailer, she was gone before Bobby came out to the car, etc.) something that the defense (as I recall) missed the first go round. Three different statements within a short span of time and one of them perjured because he stated under oath what he, later, contradicted according to his mom's facebook post (although I don't know if the defense can bring that in because it came from her on facebook not directly from him, still it would be evidence that he is an unreliable witness).

 

Right. Bobby perjured himself when he testified that he he didn’t see Teresa leave the property. When he saw her leaving, he got in his truck and followed her. The experiment, knowing the timing that everything happened, demonstrated that Bobby could have followed, caught up with her and pulled her over to do a “hustle” shot (unscheduled photo shot) and Bobby had her where he could have killed her.

 

They did create a plausible scenario for him as a possible murderer. Again, though, it would be really helpful to have a smoking gun for him--some sort of physical evidence unfortunately, so much time has passed I would wonder if there is anything at all that could matter. I wonder if casting a shadow on him is enough along with the new physical evidence to create reasonable doubt?

 

To be clear (again), I know all of Zellner's arguments. But I would ask: have you read through all of super_pickle's responses on Reddit, where she systematically addresses every single point raised in the first and second season? My guess is that you haven't. Nor has @rburly (not recently, anyway). You might consider doing so before once again making it sound like I'm critical of all this stuff as if it's a matter of sheer will, and not research. I know the facts of this case. I also know the rebuttals to Zellner's claims. Not only does Avery still look guilty as heck, but it's still more than possible that the evidence was never tampered with. Putting Dassey aside, this whole fiasco is not necessarily the miscarriage of justice you might think it is. It could be, but it could also not be. The media completely plays up the Zellner angle (I have my own suspicions about that), and it doesn't help. However, if you read through actual responses from actual people who dove into every single aspect of this case, it's the documentary that comes off looking the most manipulative.

It then remains completely odd to me that you can be so critical of the "justice system" based on what you think are the facts, but simultaneously so reluctant to dive into all the rebuttals, and likewise reluctant to take the documentary itself to task. At the very least, you should bear this in mind: it has not been proven that police officers framed Avery for murder, but it has been proven that the documentary re-edited footage and created outright false impressions. And I know that as a former documentarian you consider that to be okay, but I would say in this particular instance it's not okay at all, given the subject matter. Along similar lines, I'm still not quite convinced that you or others are aware of how much information was manipulated by the documentary in order to make its point. The irony is not lost on me, but it does seem to be lost on most viewers.

And even if you didn't feel like reading pages of Reddit responses, a truly open-minded person would at least raise Zellner's points or the documentary's points as questions, in hopes of obtaining full clarity. But that literally never happens. No one seems interested in distinguishing fact from semi-fact from total fiction. They'd rather just take the movie's word for it.

 

Sorry for not responding for a while, but I spent the last two days re-watching Part 2. I've got 11 pages of notes.

Regarding the Redditt super_pickle, I saw that person using Brendan Dassey's "confession to answer many questions. His "confession" was coerced no matter where we are in his judicial situation. (I know the Supreme Court refused to look at his case)

I wanted to go back and find the information about Bobby Dassey. Despite perjuring himself with his testimony in court (Bryan's written statement stating that Bobby said, "Steven couldn't have done it. I saw her leave his property," and recanting his written statement. The prosecution withheld the information about Bobby's computer, first by mislabeling it as "Brendan's computer" and Fassbender keeping 2400 pages of information about what was found until it was sent to Zellner on April 17 of this year!

The 4 new suspects turn out to be Ryan Hillegas who was Teresa Halbach's ex-boyfriend, Scott Bloedorn who was her roommate, Scott Tadych who is Brendan and Bobby's stepfather and Bobby Dassey. So much information about them.

Scumbag Ken Kratz continues to show up to anything and everything Avery related. So much about him as well.

Sergeant Andrew Colburn. Remember in Part one that someone called police in 1994 or 95 and said he had committed assault in Manitowoc County and someone else was in jail for it and the cops didn't write a report? Colburn admiited in Part 2 that he was the officer who took the call and failed to write a report. In December 2016, a guy who got in touch with Zellner and told her how, in December 2016 after watching Part 1, he remembers seeing TH car on November 4 and went into a Cenex gas station, where there was a picture of Teresa Halbach and her car on the door and the guy told Colburn, I just saw her car on 147." This was on November 4, the day before the RAV4 was "discovered." Again, Colburn didn't document the conversation. The guy was a truck driver who had been in school with Barb, Brendan's mom. After watching Part 1, the guy texted Scott Tadych and told him about his experience in 2005. He sends two texts. He eventually gets a response back from Tadych, "I'm really sick now... can hardly talk so I'll call you tomorrow." Tadych never gets back to him.

There's just so much. My thinking is that they used Brendan's "confession" to create the events of October 31. They gave Brendan certain "facts" and he filled in the details.

 

I've met quite a few people who are in prison for being convicted of murder (and also people in custody for trial on murder charges).

None has ever been aggressive.

 

So do you think Avery did it or no after watching Part 2?

 

I worked for 18 years with murderers and there’s many had a history of crimes, usually starting around age 12 (when records start being kept). Now, there are lots of people convicted of murder and it was their first crime. People seem to have this idea that Avery is a cold-blooded murderer who planned this out. I would expect someone like that to have a long history of criminal behavior.