Nick
Administrator
Looks like he has a new lawyer - http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/making-murderer-steven-averys-lawyer-7236406
Netflix - Making a murderer (9 Viewers)
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Going to be interesting to see what happens from here on in. There will be huge pressure for the case to be looked at again.
Already there's been claims that one of the jurors has said they didn't think he was guilty but feared for their safety if they didn't give a guilty verdict.
There's also been claims that one juror was the father of the Manitowoc Sheriff's deputy and another juror's wife worked for the Manitowoc County Clerks Office!
Nick
Administrator
How far are you through the series? I think it is the last one when they speak to a juror.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Got to the end now. The victims brother seemed shifty to more, think he knows more than he's letting on.
Was taking every opportunity to be on TV and always smirking. If you were a relative wouldn't you want to know the truth? If it was me I wouldn't be happy after that trial.
Houchens Head
Fairly well known member from Malvern
Started watching this evening on Netflix. Managed 10 minutes before we switched off. Sorry guys. I thought this was as dull as dishwater.
Nick
Administrator
The first one is just about stuff in the past.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Considering it is a 10 hr long show I would have to say giving it 10 mins is not really giving it a go at all.
The whole case really here is the murder case, not the rape case. Think there is one episode of the rape case and nine episodes of the murder case.
Stick with it for two episodes Houch I would say. You will be completely hooked with it I'm sure. It is just so unbelievable.
Houchens Head
Fairly well known member from Malvern
I think what put me and the missus of was that it looked like it was done in a "documentary" type way. I remember looking forward to "The Blair Witch Project" years ago (not the same type of film obviously!), and thought it was shite because of the way in which it had been "filmed". I'll take your word for it Nick and Otis. Maybe give it a go again. I remember your comments on Fargo after I said it looked shite, and yes, after an episode or two, I was hooked!
Nick
Administrator
It isn't a film.
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
I know what you mean, he seemed convinced that Avery and Dassey were guilty despite nearly all the evidence being tainted in one way or another and didn't once question the crappy police work or any of the flimsy arguments or flawed evidence.
If you were a relative you'd think you would say hang on a minute, your trying to convict who you believe to be my sisters killer, I want a water tight case here with no holes in it. Not DNA tests that weren't done properly or dodgy blood evidence and two investigating officers who couldn't have acted more shifty if they tried.
Who can say for sure though, its possible that grief had taken over and he just wanted it done with.
lewys33
Well-Known Member
Interesting theory here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...ery-brendan-dassey-_n_9048104.html?1453460947
Watched episode 9 last night. Can't believe the young lad was convicted. Based on the evidence that was put forward in both cases neither would be in jail in this country. Far too much doubt.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...ery-brendan-dassey-_n_9048104.html?1453460947
Watched episode 9 last night. Can't believe the young lad was convicted. Based on the evidence that was put forward in both cases neither would be in jail in this country. Far too much doubt.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Exactly! And the Dassey confessions should have been thrown straight out of court and never been presented to a jury.
I think that part of it is the most scandalous aspect of all.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Even if you were 100% convinced Avery did it there's no way Dassey should be locked up or even allowed to give evidence. How anyone could watch the tape of his interview and think he was involved or in any way a reliable witness is beyond me.
lewys33
Well-Known Member
I can't remember who was involved in the conversation about Oscar Pistorious but it is the same thing. Even if you (as people are/were) 100% convinced he was guilty if you cannot prove it without reasonable doubt then he is innocent.
Am I right in saying that for cases such as murder in this country you have to be proven guilty beyond any doubt, let alone reasonable doubt? Obviously for lesser crimes it is the reasonable doubt statement.
Last edited:
Otis
Well-Known Member
Brand new programme on the ID channel, Steven Avery, Innocent or Guilty.
Not a patch on the wonderful documentary, but the prosecutor gets to have his say about evidence not mentioned in the documentary and it is also said that some woman has agreed to take on Avery's appeal for innocence.
Not a patch on the wonderful documentary, but the prosecutor gets to have his say about evidence not mentioned in the documentary and it is also said that some woman has agreed to take on Avery's appeal for innocence.
lewys33
Well-Known Member
Is it just me that doesn't get the "missing evidence" from the trial .......... it was either actually in there, or doesn't prove it was him at all.
Nick
Administrator
Haven't watched it yet, is it the prosecution putting their side out?
Nick
Administrator
Surely if they do that, it isn't air / water tight? Wouldn't they just take the lid off?
Otis
Well-Known Member
Yep, you would have said so. Prosecution guy (Kranz?) Says a nurse admitted to putting the syringe in the tube and he says 'and you know what? They do that for EVERY sample!'
Two things sprang to mind. If that was the case, surely the defence would know that, it being a standard practice and secondly, the defence didn't seem to refute that claim.
They still say though that the tube had been tampered with, because there was blood between the cap and the tube.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
For anyone that doesn't have ID channel and is interested its on youtube
[video=youtube_share;Hw6MsAl0BJU]https://youtu.be/Hw6MsAl0BJU[/video]
Nick
Administrator
I am no nurse, but common sense says if they have holes in the top they can get contaminated.
Otis
Well-Known Member
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Plus it wasn't just that there was a hole in the top, the security seal on the box containing the sample had been messed with as well.
Nick
Administrator
Maybe the nurse had mittens on when she was filling it up?
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Beyond reasonable doubt
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
There's now a team of forensic experts going back over everything on Avery's behalf. They're planning to use something called luminol to show that there was no blood in the garage or trailer. Seems that even after so long this new process will still detect the iron in the blood which doesn't degrade.
Guess their theory is that if they show there wasn't any blood the case falls apart.
Guess their theory is that if they show there wasn't any blood the case falls apart.
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
I get the feeling unless they can prove someone else did it he will stay in jail
Nick
Administrator
I think if it is proven he didn't do it or they can pick apart the prosecution he should at least have a fair re-trial.
Pipehitterz
Well-Known Member
ive been thinking more along the lines that brendan did it
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Looks like we're going to get a second season:
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...assey-s-cases-are-still-pending-a6903146.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...assey-s-cases-are-still-pending-a6903146.html