"Making a Murderer" on Netflix

Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by JimC, Dec 21, 2015.

  1. bopdd

    bopdd Forum Resident

    Location:
    Portland, OR
    1) You do remember that season one showed (and edited) physical video of the trial proceedings, yes? I would also add that you seem to be implying that they couldn't find someone to simply address the counterpoints, which ignores all the information they manipulated and sounds downright ridiculous at face value. The first season was filled with talking heads. If they wanted to find a talking head to address Avery's violent behavior (among other things)--which didn't make it into trial--they could have.

    2) Yes, I think the documentary definitely has an agenda, even if they do in fact believe that Avery is innocent. Same goes for Zellner.

    3) I've pointed you time and again to all the rebuttals over on Reddit. If you'd like to read them and then address specific points, I'm all for it. All I would request is that you stick with super_pickle since she's the one I trust.
     
  2. rburly

    rburly Sitting comfortably with Item 9

    Location:
    Orlando
    No, the blood didn't come from the vial of blood. It's presented so that we can have the defense answer as to how blood was placed in the car. And the placement of that blood was questionable, as Zellner pointed out in part two. There's no mixing of blood, which is very strange considering that he would have been a bloody mess if he had chopped her up. And, again, he wasn't convicted of chopping up her body, one of the indictments against him. Yes, he stopped his cousin on the road because she was spreading rumors about him, true or not.

    And I agree with you that part one seems to show that he is innocent. Because he is innocent. Time will show us that, my friend.

    Why can't you tell me in this thread what the rebuttals are? I'll go over and read some of the posts, but what I saw before was someone saying that people were lying and was generally abusive in posts.
     
  3. bopdd

    bopdd Forum Resident

    Location:
    Portland, OR
    Yes, I'm aware of Zellner's latest argument. It has literally nothing to do with that I'm talking about. I'm talking about the fact the vial was presented as evidence of something in season one when it was in fact evidence of nothing. The idea that Zellner came along and switched things up doesn't somehow negate the fact that the documentary was so manipulative in the first place. She needed a new explanation, so she found one. Mind readers do the same thing when they're convincing people that grandma Jane is talking to them. Oh wait, is it Grandma Mary? No? Okay, Grandma Sue then. Congrats on falling for it.

    Yes, I heard you the first twenty times. Perhaps one day you can look away from the grassy knoll to check out that book depository window.

    Your unwillingness to do your homework is what got us here. I'm not going to encourage it. If you want answers to your questions (presuming you even have questions), read through super_pickle's feed to find them.
     
  4. rburly

    rburly Sitting comfortably with Item 9

    Location:
    Orlando
    I have completely "fallen" for it.

    I've done whatever "homework" was needed. I'll go to Reddit, that fine, upstanding source of news and information. I'm sure everything I read there will be the truth.
     
    Sneaky Pete likes this.
  5. bopdd

    bopdd Forum Resident

    Location:
    Portland, OR
    You do realize that Zellner lifted some of her most recent arguments directly off of Reddit, correct? Oh wait. That would require you doing your homework. Nevermind.
     
    GodShifter and Sneaky Pete like this.
  6. Sneaky Pete

    Sneaky Pete Forum Resident

    Location:
    NYC USA
    I can tell you it’s a different ball game today. I do concede that things change a lot in 40 years. Perhaps I was too harsh but the notion makes my blood boil.

    Today I guarantee in any major City you can get cops investigated by reporting such behavior.
     
    bopdd likes this.
  7. Sneaky Pete

    Sneaky Pete Forum Resident

    Location:
    NYC USA

    Don’t know the details I am not involved in the case but generally if a Defendant makes a confession that is legitimately newsworthy.
     
  8. Sneaky Pete

    Sneaky Pete Forum Resident

    Location:
    NYC USA
    U.l.
    Yes it happens but it is not routine. They don’t have to plant evidence in most cases. The reason it makes news is because it is unusual.

    It is used as a defense very often, that does not make it true. You have to go with what you’ve got in a case.
     
  9. rburly

    rburly Sitting comfortably with Item 9

    Location:
    Orlando
    Ooooh, I just did some "homework." This person mixes the Dassey information with the Avery information. And, it all seems to focus on part one of the two-parter. Even if Zellner "lifted" some of her most recent arguments directly "off" Reddit, if it's correct, so be it. (I kinda doubt Zellner is reading Reddit)
     
  10. rburly

    rburly Sitting comfortably with Item 9

    Location:
    Orlando
    Kratz (the prosecutor), when asked about this said that he shouldn't have done it. You're an attorney and concerned about not tainting the jury pool, yet give it a thumbsup to the prosecutor? Interesting.
     
  11. bopdd

    bopdd Forum Resident

    Location:
    Portland, OR
    This reads exactly as it should.
     
  12. rburly

    rburly Sitting comfortably with Item 9

    Location:
    Orlando
    Thanks. It took a few minutes to write. I appreciate your endorsement.
     
    bopdd likes this.
  13. bopdd

    bopdd Forum Resident

    Location:
    Portland, OR
    Actually, do me a favor. Point me to the exact quote where super_pickle gets confused. This will be fun.
     
  14. jupiterboy

    jupiterboy Forum Residue

    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    I'd like to think it has changed. What you have in the South(west) etc. are religions that specifically discourage and teach that taking maters to the courts is morally wrong. Now this is basically a pro-business agenda and a way to keep the peace amongst the poor voting blocks, divide and conquer, etc. Point being, you can't hold teens who are raised under this sort of oppression accountable for police corruption. I'm being honest when I say that had I escalated this after having had various adults around me discourage it I well could have been kicked out of my home and been on the street. Believe me, it happened to my adopted brother. Further, this part of society covers for a variety of behaviors that are not in any way acceptable—marital rape, child rape, incest, and other abuses. A child raised in this environment is likely more concerned with protecting siblings and/or a mother from abuse than mounting a case against the local police department.

    And, at the risk of being too personal, you need to consider your position of privilege when you blindly hold someone accountable on an internet forum.

    Perhaps...
     
    trem two and rburly like this.
  15. rburly

    rburly Sitting comfortably with Item 9

    Location:
    Orlando
    The big pickle isn't confused, but the writing was confusing until I realized what s/he was doing.
     
  16. rburly

    rburly Sitting comfortably with Item 9

    Location:
    Orlando
  17. bopdd

    bopdd Forum Resident

    Location:
    Portland, OR
    Exactly. You can move on now as you always do--wouldn't want you to dwell on nuances for too long.
     
  18. tman53

    tman53 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Pa
    Brain fingerprinting, now there's real science. I wonder why I haven't heard of this being used in other cases. I wonder...
     
    Sneaky Pete and bopdd like this.
  19. rburly

    rburly Sitting comfortably with Item 9

    Location:
    Orlando
    Because it's a new science. For those who don't want to read the article, Farwell is offering Ken Kratz, attorney extraordinaire, $100,000 if he can beat it. He's offering anyone who can beat it $100k.
     
  20. Sneaky Pete

    Sneaky Pete Forum Resident

    Location:
    NYC USA
    I understand your position. You don’t know much about me but I have seen exactly what you are talking about. You have to query jurors one whether they feel comfortable “judging” someone. Some are deeply taught as a religious tenet that is wrong. It can be a way of keeping people oppressed.
     
  21. tman53

    tman53 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Pa
    I think this paragraph says all I need to know.

    Brain fingerprinting
    is a lie detection technique which uses electroencephalography (EEG) to determine whether specific information is stored in a subject's brain. The technique consists of measuring and recording a person's electrical brainwaves and brain response when asked questions about a crime, attempting to elicit a "P300 response" that indicates familiarity with the details of the crime.[1] The technique is controversial, unproven[1] and of questionable accuracy.[2] Comparison of brain fingerprinting with polygraphy showed mixed results consistent with "a mix of proven techniques and dangerously exaggerated benefits".
     
    Sneaky Pete likes this.
  22. rburly

    rburly Sitting comfortably with Item 9

    Location:
    Orlando
    It would be an easy $100k for Kratz. I agree, he should do it.
     
  23. Sneaky Pete

    Sneaky Pete Forum Resident

    Location:
    NYC USA
    Read more carefully. I said I didn’t follow the case but in general telling the media a Defendant has made a confession is legitimately newsworthy.

    I’m surprised that you think something like a confession should be suppressed information. Obviously there were other factors at play.

    I’ve tried to be objective and introduce some common sense and real world experience into the discussion.

    I’m not a fan of mob justice either, even when it happens in cyberspace.
     
    tman53 likes this.
  24. rburly

    rburly Sitting comfortably with Item 9

    Location:
    Orlando
    The prosecutor told the media what the confession was, i.e. the details of what was said. Most people found the “confession” to be coerced by the detectives of the 16-year-old low functioning. If you’re unfamiliar with this documentary, I’d be interested in what you think if you watch it.
     
  25. Sneaky Pete

    Sneaky Pete Forum Resident

    Location:
    NYC USA
    A coerced confession is worth nothing. If there is evidence it was coerced it should be thrown out, or exposed on Appeal. What did the Court decide about its admissibility? A developmentally disabled minor, that is a tough case.

    It is routine for defendants to make confessions and try to disclaim then later. It has to be litigated.

    Having been involved in some cases that were made the subject of documentaries and massive press coverage I tend to avoid watching them. They take too many liberties for my taste.

    I just wanted to offer some practical and hopefully objective general information. Trying to calm the waters. It didn’t work. :) Surprise!
     

Share This Page