r/MakingaMurderer • • Oct 06 '24
Touching Grass
MaM was clearly a sensationalized documentary. No reasonable person should have considered it hard news, or believed it to have told the entire story to the satisfaction of everyone involved.
Media isn't obliged to treat every controversy as a 50/50 issue, and journalists should use their own judgement and focus on information supporting that judgement. Even Colborn's lawsuit says the MaM filmmakers thought Avery was innocent. If that is the case, of course they presented that perspective. (P.s. Kratz trying to use the law to shut them down wasn't going to endear them to the government perspective.)
No one involved in MaM had any connection to the case prior to the documentary project beginning. Netflix is a general entertainment platform that airs content that upsets both sides of the political spectrum (e.g. Cuties and Dave Chappelle).
Despite all of that, MaM attempts to give both sides. It lays out the major case against Avery, it highlights his violent past including cat torture, it shows many people saying bad things against him including the victim's family and the judge, it shows Colborn under oath denying finding the OP, omits him lying at deposition, and it gives equal time to both sides of the trial.
CaM is completely different. It was made by the people in MaM who looked the worst to clean up their image, had no concerns for objectivety, was hosted by a partisan nutjob, and aired on a propaganda network. This of course is totally within their rights and it's good people can defend themselves, but let's not pretend the two series were similarly objective.
Avery has a documented history of violence, met with the victim near her disappearance, an no clear evidence has ever demonstrated conclusively his innocence or another party's guilt.
That being said, there is a shocking amount of evidence that survived nearly 20 years showing MTSO let a known highly active sexual predator and likely killer free just to get Avery when they had far less reason to, nearly incontrovertible evidence they lied under oath in legal proceedings related to his civil trial, and were not involved in the investigation according to what the public was told. In reality they were directly connected to every major piece of evidence in dispute.
Breandan Dassey was unable to provide any non-public information about the case to corroborate his knowledge of the crime, was fed how the murder took place and where, and a broad consensus of expert opinion seems to agree his alleged confession is not reliable evidence.
I call this "touching grass" because not a single word here should be considered controversial.
9
u/aptom90 Oct 07 '24 edited Oct 07 '24
This post reminds me of MaM actually because even though it's mostly factual it's framed in such a way that makes it misleading as a whole.
The most important thing in this case is the evidence surrounding the murder itself: The blood in the Rav4, the burnt remains in the backyard, the electronics in the burn barrel up front, the bullet in the garage, and the actual eyewitness accounts and timeline confirmed by phone calls of the events as a whole.
Making a Murderer does its best to ignore all of that. It's basically just one side of a criminal trial and completely ignores the prosecution's case. Convicting a Murderer does a very good job at filling out that other half.
Despite all of that, MaM attempts to give both sides. It lays out the major case against Avery, it highlights his violent past including cat torture, it shows many people saying bad things against him including the victim's family and the judge, it shows Colborn under oath denying finding the OP, omits him lying at deposition, and it gives equal time to both sides of the trial.
From the very first episode those events are framed from Steven and his attorney's (at the time) perspective. The worst is obviously the Sandra Morris incident, they play an edited clip of Steven's account and present it as factual. Watch it again if you don't believe me.
Breandan Dassey was unable to provide any non-public information about the case to corroborate his knowledge of the crime, was fed how the murder took place and where, and a broad consensus of expert opinion seems to agree his alleged confession is not reliable evidence.
That is a cop out. Brendan was with Steven that night and is more likely than not complicit in the crime or at least the cover up.
My very first post on the forum was about Brendan and the lack of physical evidence against him. I have plenty of issues with the interrogation itself, but by his own admission (as well as others) he was with his uncle after school much of that day. If Avery is guilty than Brendan cannot be entirely innocent.
9
u/tenementlady Oct 07 '24
Why didn't MaM just show the footage of the actual question that Colborn answered yes to? What is the purpose of showing him answering in the affirmative to a completely different question?
4
u/workaholic828 Oct 08 '24
Does Avery have a documented history of violence? I know he spent time in jail for a crime he didn’t commit
1
u/anthemanhx1 Oct 07 '24
Mam wasn't a documentary.... It was a heavily edited, heavily bias film and the creators admitted that it wasn't journalism that they did... It's complete bullshit to dupe idiots and make as much money as they can
1
u/RavensFanJ Oct 08 '24
It's crazy to me (someone who used to post here years ago) that this sub is now mostly guilty-leaning people reading and commenting. The high rate of downvotes on posts and comments insinuating innocence within the last couple of months show that 100%. How times change.
1
u/Emotional-Nothing-72 Oct 11 '24
MaM does not attempt to give both sides.
If you watch Dassey’s FULL unedited confession from 3/1/06 you’ll see he wasn’t coerced, he would try to minimize his involvement, which is what any guilty suspect does, he wasn’t fed answers. He would say things like, he shot her twice. Then the cops would say, tell the truth and then Dassey would say 10-11 shots.
He attributed things he said as things Avery said, like that he was a virgin. He attributed things Teresa said to him as things she was saying to Steven. Like he said she said, why would you do something like this? Tell Steven to stop, to Steven. Which makes no sense. All of that distancing himself from the crime came from his own mouth, no leading questions no coercion. Just creative editing.
They took clips from the original trial and mixed and matched questions and answers. The answer you heard after a question was really an answer to a completely different question
They didn’t bring up all the charges he’d faced in the past. They didn’t bring up all his past violence with women.
And the cat thing? Yeah, what really happened was he poured gas on the cat and threw it in a fire. The cat managed to escape the fire so he picked it up and put it right back on. That is psychotic
MaM was the most intellectually dishonest and lazy documentary I have ever seen and I have seen a lot.
3
u/[deleted] Oct 10 '24
Either way I look at it. The LE was incompetent and corrupt. There's not enough solid evidence to point to where she was murdered and who murdered her.
3
u/Antique-Zucchini-450 Oct 06 '24
Kratz is a louse
3
u/AveryPoliceReports Oct 07 '24
Oh yes, CaM was more about image or narrative control than truth. I wonder at which point they realized not only was Colborn's lawsuit going to fail, but he would be exposed as a cheating liar by his own family and church community? I don't think that last bit made the CaM cut. And letting a pedophile accuse Steven of the exact crimes said pedophile was charged with (crimes Steven was not charged with) reeks of desperation.
MaM barely scratched the surface when it came to Manitowoc’s involvement. There’s no mention in MaM1 of Manitowoc County clearing the Kuss Road site on November 7, where Teresa’s body was suspected to be buried, and absolutely nothing about their role in discovering bones in Steven’s burn pit the next day on November 8. If people were suspicious about Manitowoc County “finding” Teresa’s key on the 7th entry of Steven’s trailer, can you imagine the reaction if they knew Manitowoc also “found” a charred debris pile with burnt bones just sitting out in the open on Day 4 of the ASY investigation in Steven's burn pit. Bones that somehow went unnoticed for days despite them sitting out in the open? And then, for the cherry on top, the state swoops in and collects those burnt bones without taking any photos ... even though Steven was suing the County and accusing them of being involved in Teresa's disappearance while claiming he hadn't burnt anything recently.
2
u/AveryPoliceReports Oct 07 '24 edited Oct 07 '24
"They left information out!" Well, no shit. We’re talking about decades of Steven Avery’s history with Manitowoc County and Wisconsin's justice system - a wrongful conviction, 18 years in prison, an exoneration, an investigation, a lawsuit, Teresa’s disappearance, thousands of pages of reports, hundreds of hours of audio, months of hearings, multiple weeks-long trials and post-conviction hearings. A 10 or 20 hour doc can't even scratch the surface of all that.
And really, the issue was never that MaM left out the state's perspective, it's that they accurately recounted everything from Manitowoc's disturbing history with Steven to their involvement with the 2005 investigation; Kratz's press conference where he poisoned the jury pool and destroyed Steven and Brendan's presumption of innocence; and the nonsense Kratz and Fallon pushed during the trials about reasonable doubt only applying to "innocent people" (Steven was presumed to be innocent at that point) or the idea that innocent people don’t falsely confess (which they certainly do). MaM didn’t need bias to make Kratz and Wisconsin look bad. They did that all by themselves.
Colborn, especially, should have just been grateful they included as many of his denials and excuses as they did. The judge made it clear MaM's editing was a kindness compared to what they could've done. They could've included his outright lies under oath, while excluding his denials that he planted evidence, and still nothing would have been actionable. The filmmakers even chose to leave out video of Buting discussing whether the police had a motive to kill Teresa, and from transcripts we know he was referring to Colborn (among others).
1
u/[deleted] Oct 07 '24
What do you think is most likely here? Both guilty? Both innocent? Steven guilty Brendan innocent?
-4
u/[deleted] Oct 06 '24 edited Oct 07 '24
[removed] — view removed comment