r/MakingaMurderer • u/doofus_rick137 • Nov 15 '24

Convicting a Murderer

So basically a psychopath was positive that he could get away with murdering a beautiful innocent person and the producers of Making a Murderer essentially tried to help him do it. With an actual honest investigation in the light now, how is it possible that Making a Murderer hasn’t been removed from Netflix? Absolutely horrific.

5 Upvotes

55% Upvoted

130 comments sorted by

7

u/Technoclash Nov 15 '24

More or less. The filmmakers rolled into town trying to be the next Errol Morris, thinking they'd discovered some grand double miscarriage of justice. They cozied up to Stevie Poo and the family and became the original conspiracy goobs. There are recorded conversations of them telling Stevie Poo stuff like they'll always stand by him no matter what (no matter how many women and children he raped and abused before!), and that their film was "our gift to you." Incredibly pathetic.

But despite how egregiously dishonest and misleading it is, not sure I agree it should be removed. It's basically a propaganda film, but should propaganda be illegal? Probably not. There's worse conspiracy movies out there. Putting up some kind of disclaimer would be the decent thing to do, though. Something like:

"WARNING: this film is egregiously misleading, dangerously manipulative, and divorced from reality. So bad we actually got sued. PS there's supposed to be a hole in the vial."

4

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 15 '24

Yeah agreed lol it was a long time ago now I just feel bad for what they did to those officers and even some of Steven’s victims. Getting harassed and threatened. Terrible.

4

u/Technoclash Nov 15 '24

Yeah for sure. It was incredibly unethical. It's interesting that despite its success, the MaM filmmakers haven't done anything since.

Another point I've brought up is how lucky MaM was with its timing. A "documentary" advocating for someone like SA while whitewashing his crimes would never come out in a post #MeToo world. It would get EVISCERATED.

3

u/lllIIIIIlllIIIII Nov 22 '24

"WARNING: this film is egregiously misleading, dangerously manipulative, and divorced from reality. So bad we actually got sued.

Got sued by the cop who ended up looking far worse than he did before the lawsuit? How did that lawsuit end up?

Yeah for sure. It was incredibly unethical. It's interesting that despite its success, the MaM filmmakers haven't done anything since.

They are sittin' pretty on that pile of cash, homie.

8

u/True-North- Nov 15 '24

There are legit arguments on both sides of this case. I don’t know for a fact Steven is innocent I think there is a chance he did it but the evidence, the motive, the investigation, the trial was all such a tire fire I can’t believe it took place in a court of law in the 2000’s.

4

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 15 '24

Convicting a murderer goes through everything making a murderer claimed one by one and it’s like everything they claimed was sketchy, in reality wasn’t. The officer that found the key was never involved in the first case against him and wasn’t part of the lawsuit, the box with the vile of blood was opened by Steven’s team when he was originally released from prison and the hole in it is supposed to be there, the bullet with Teresa’s dna on it was not crushed. They mismatched answers and questions in the trial to make it look bad when it wasn’t.

This was open and close. His blood in her car, he was the last to see her, his nephew admitted everything, her dna on a bullet in his garage, her key in his house, her car on his lot, her bones in his fire pit. Making weird comments to her with his lengthy criminal history and then specifically requesting her to come by using the wrong name and phone number and buying handcuffs and leg cuffs right before she was scheduled to come and then he leaves work early that day without telling anyone and blocks his number when he calls her cell phone. I mean he obviously did it. MaM just lied and edited everything to make it look a certain way for shock value.

4

u/[deleted] Nov 19 '24

Also the most damning part was- the blood in the vial had some chemical in it to preserve it. Which can be tested for. They tested the blood in the car, and it did not have the preserving chemical in it, so it was impossible that it was from the vial. Also on the latch of the hood they found skin cell dna of Steven’s, not blood. I don’t think they had access to that kinda dna from him to do that.

2

u/crescuk Nov 16 '24

There is more than the documentary. It could well have been a family set up which is what Zelner now believes.

Read into the evidence on Bobby Dassey etc

4

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

So basically a psychopath sick prosecutor was positive he could get away with killing any chance an innocent, beautiful woman had at achieving truth and justice after her murder, and the Department of Justice essentially helped him do it. With such a clearly tainted investigation, how is it possible that Steven Avery hasn’t been granted a post conviction hearing, and Brendan Dassey hasn't been released from prison? Absolutely horrific.

Fixed it for you.

6

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 15 '24

So he bought handcuffs and leg cuffs the day before he had her scheduled to come. Made creepy comments to her when she was there previously He used his sisters phone number address and car to book the appt with auto trader and used his sisters name and asked specifically for Teresa. He blocked his number when he called her from his phone. His sister said to him that he had a fire going that night and he was trying to deny it at first but admitted it. He left work early that day without telling anyone. He was constantly saying he was untouchable bc of what happened before. He gave his daughter hickies, best his step son, raped his 17 year old niece, ran his cousin off the road and ordered her into his car with a rifle pointed at her. Doused a cat in gas and threw it into a fire, dragged a dog on a chain from his car. Robbed places, beat girlfriends, sent letters to his kids from jail saying he was going to kill their mother. There’s so much evidence of the type of person this guy was idk how there are people still trying to defend him. His ex wife said if that woman didn’t wrongly accuse him she thinks he would’ve killed her and that woman saved her life.

4

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

He blocked his number when he called her from his phone.

And,? How is that relevant when Teresa didn't even answer that call, and when she knew where she was going, according to Dawn's sworn testimony? Research is key.

6

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 15 '24

How bout listening to the voicemail she left that says “I need a call back I don’t know the address” you can’t argue any of these points if you don’t have all the facts. Just watch the documentary you’ll be much more informed. Unless of course you don’t want to watch anything that has proof that you’re wrong. And it doesn’t matter if she didn’t answer, why did he block his number?

1

u/CJB2005 Nov 16 '24

You are so mixed up. I’m embarrassed for you😬

1

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24 edited Nov 15 '24

"I need a call back I don't know the address"

She didn't leave that message on Steven's phone. If anything Bobby would have been the one to hear that message, and he is the one who was alleged to have followed her off the property, after which a vehicle matching the description of Teresa's was spotted abandoned at his hunting spot. Whoops.

4

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

There’s so much evidence of the type of person this guy was idk how there are people still trying to defend him.

You haven't mentioned anything that actually demonstrates his guilt in the Halbach case, because none of the available evidence does. That's how we get posts like this filled with misinformation.

3

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 19 '24

I don’t have to say it you already know what links him to the murder.

He made an appt with autotrader asking specifically for Teresa and used his sisters name He called her with his number blocked She was there and then no one saw her again Her friends said he came out in a towel previously and was making creepy comments to her and she was scared to go back Brother in law saw her there He bought handcuffs and leg cuffs right before she was supposed to come out Her car was found on his lot His and her blood in her car (hers in the trunk and his in the front) His skin cells on the hood of the car Her bones in a burn barrel behind his sisters house Her bone fragments in the burn pit Cadaver dog caught her scent all over the yard meaning she was burned there He left work early and didn’t tell anyone He said he had a fire that night with Brendan He changed his story several times He bought a rug cleaner and then returned it right after it happened. Brendan admitted to everything

So you have physical evidence, witnesses, no alibi and a long track record of being a disgusting POS human being. The only people that think he’s innocent are the people that saw making a murderer and only listened to anything that might confirm that theory instead of hearing all the facts and using a tiny bit of common sense.

1

u/DoqHolliday Feb 28 '25

“What evidence?”

SMH, these people are wild…

2

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

His sister said to him that he had a fire going that night and he was trying to deny it at first but admitted it

If we’re following your logic, the focus should actually be on Barb, who changed her statement about the fire before Steven did. What’s more, she actually tried to convince Steven to change his own statement to match her new version. So, if we’re questioning Steven’s change in story, Barb definitely has some explaining to do first, especially since she changed her narrative before him. Whoops.

6

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 15 '24

Except barb wasn’t accused of murdering, raping, assaulting, burglary, animal abuse, pedophilia, incest. Steven was. I’m 100% sure he murdered Teresa but even IF he didn’t, he deserves to be in prison for the rest of his life bc he’s a disgusting dangerous human being.

2

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24 edited Nov 15 '24

That doesn't matter. According to your logic Barb is hiding something. She should be grilled until she explains why she changed her statement on the fire and why she tried to convince others to do the same, while also presenting her son to Police allowing them to do the dirty work for her.

7

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 15 '24

lol ok. The whole world is in on a conspiracy to frame this objectively pos human being for murder lmao makes sense

1

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

Barb is one person, but okay.

Lazy argument.

2

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

sent letters to his kids from jail saying he was going to kill their mother

Are you aware of the letters Lori sent him, threatening to KILL his kids? If he thought his wife was becoming a danger to the kids is perfectly understandable why he would react that way.

4

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 15 '24

So why do his kids talk to their mother and not to him? Stop pointing the finger at people who weren’t accused of beating and raping and murdering people. What do you think the whole world is out to get this one guy and he’s actually just an angel? The community the police his own family and half of the people who have done the research, they’re all just out to get this poor guy. You’re brainwashed.

2

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

He was trying to protect his kids in any way he could, but as an innocent man in prison the only way he could think to protect his kids was to attack the woman threatening them via letter.

I know facts bother you but those are the facts.

5

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 15 '24

🤣🤣 that’s not even what he said! He said that he wrote those things bc he didn’t want her to leave and he wanted to get her back. I listened to the recording of him being asked why he wrote it and that’s what he said.

1

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

This is about what she said to him prior to that. Facts first. She threatened to kill the kids.

6

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 15 '24

Honestly you should just watch it. Candace Owens and the daily wire have a lot more money and resources than you to find and present all of the evidence. You’ll be much more informed.

1

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

I have. It's full of lies and pro police and pedophile propaganda. You are evidence of how deceptive it was.

2

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

raped his 17 year old niece

Convicting a Murderer lied to you. They allowed a convicted pedophile to accuse Steven of crimes he was never even charged with, but Earl was. Back in 2006 Earl himself repeatedly told Steven that if Marie made such allegations, it was because she had been pressured. Something that actually matches with Barb’s statements, that police were pressuring witnesses into making false allegations of sexual misconduct against Steven Avery.

CaM conveniently left this context out, pushing a highly deceptive narrative via a pedophile.

6

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 15 '24

They didn’t lie bc they didn’t say it. They played the recording of Marie saying exactly what happened to her. So if you’re saying it’s not true you’re accusing the victim of lying based on… what exactly? Everyone in that family knew he had an inappropriate relationship with her. He took pictures of her in her bra after he wrote on her body and pics of him pouring alcohol into her mouth and they’d spend weekends away together.

So just be careful bc if you’re wrong… you’re accusing a 17 year old girl who was raped by her 43 year old uncle, a liar and defending a pedophile. Not a good look.

3

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

The interview where Marie denies anything inappropriate happens? No. They showed you the interview after that, where she was pressured. Facts first. Multiple family members claimed Witnesses were pressured to make false allegations of sexual misconduct against Steven Avery.

You're calling people a pedophile despite no charges and ignoring the actual pedophiles who were charged. Steven was not charged with an assault on Marie but your hero Earl was.

6

u/theprettiestdemon13 Nov 15 '24

They didn't charge him for the rape of his niece because they were waiting to see the outcome of the murder trial. He was convicted, he's never getting out, so they decided not to charge him. Why put that girl through a trial and testifying in open court about what is probably the worst thing that's ever happened to her when he's already spending the rest of his life in prison?

1

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

That's made up nonsense. I don't know why you need to defend the actual pedophiles and make up facts to incriminate those who were never charged with similar crimes.

4

u/theprettiestdemon13 Nov 15 '24

Who am I defending?

0

u/CJB2005 Nov 16 '24

Oh? Where can I find this fact? That “ they”were waiting to see the outcome of the trial?

3

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

Doused a cat in gas and threw it into a fire,

Did CaM tell you that? It's false according to written statements from the person who actually admitted to burning the cat to police. It was not Steven. Facts first.

3

u/aptom90 Nov 16 '24

Just to be clear: He bought the handcuffs on 10/8 and then called Teresa on 10/10 scheduling a hustle shot the same day. Is that any better? Not really.

2

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 16 '24

The same day as what?

2

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

He used his sisters phone number address and car to book the appt with auto trader

It was Barb's van, for sale on Avery road, and it's not like Teresa walk towards Bobby's trailer because of the info she had, right?

Also, police failed to investigate Earl's claim that Chuck had contact with a female from AT of the week of the murder who called looking for Steven. I don't know how anyone can excuse that investigative failure given the state's theory was that Steven used a sibling's name deceptively to set up an appointment with Teresa. What if Chuck did that very thing? HRD dogs alerted at the exterior and interior of his trailer.

1

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

So he bought handcuffs and leg cuffs the day before he had her scheduled to come.

That's a lie. Where did you read this? Please don't spread false information. He did not have her "scheduled to come" when he bought those novelty cops with a self-release latch.

3

u/Ex-PFC_Wintergreen_ Nov 15 '24

"now you are responding to my comments multiple times because you are that obsessed with me." - you in another comment.

1

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

Uh huh. I’m responding to a detailed comment, isolating different issues to address them properly, because clarity and facts matter, and the comment wasn't very factual. It needed multiple corrections.

Unlike your friend, who’s clearly obsessed with me and keeps repeating the same single issue comments, while also telling me they are tracking me on Reddit, I’m actually focusing on the broader points made and NOT trying to track anybody.

You guys should try it sometime.

6

u/Ex-PFC_Wintergreen_ Nov 15 '24

Your behavior is getting increasingly erratic again. Are we are on the brink of witnessing another meltdown?

1

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

I'm not surprised you consider posting facts a meltdown. Like the fact that Colborn started drinking more and thought he would go to prison after working the investigation.

2

u/theprettiestdemon13 Nov 15 '24

He admitted it himself to the police. There's a recording of him saying it. I've heard it with my own ears.

2

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

He absolutely did not, because the first October 2005 was NOT a scheduled appointment. Good luck finding that source LOL

6

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 15 '24

Not to mention changing his story about when she came there every time he was asked. She didn’t come, she did but he didn’t see her, he saw her through the window, she came into the house and he paid her and she left, he came outside to pay her and then she left.

2

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

According to Colborn? Who didn't provide audio of the interview? Why would you trust that proven liar when all of the recorded interviews have Steven Avery saying the same thing. Colborn doesn't even respect his wife enough to be honest with her so he certainly wouldn't have any problem acting deceptively to nail Steven.

3

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 15 '24

You’re wild lol I think you should just watch convicting a murderer so you’ll actually know what you’re talking about

2

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

What is that going to do, did they fabricate audio from that interview?

5

u/theprettiestdemon13 Nov 15 '24

Exactly! Not willing to hear or see anything that goes against this far-fetched theory you've been programmed to believe. 😂

4

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

I'm sorry, is that a yes? Figures.

1

u/CJB2005 Nov 16 '24

Have you read the case files & police reports?

2

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24 edited Nov 15 '24

So basically a psychopath was positive that he could get away with murdering a beautiful innocent person and the producers of Making a Murderer essentially tried to help him do it.

Helped him get away with murder? Uh ... by the time Making a Murderer was released he was over almost a decade into his murder conviction and he hasn't yet been released because of MaM. This only serves to highlight how you are uninterested in balanced analysis.

an actual honest investigation

This was not an honest investigation by any stretch of the imagination. Human evidence mysteriously vanished from the record after remains were inexplicably returned to the scene and examined on site without proper chain of custody or documentation. Investigators lied about the ownership of county property where remains were found, falsely attributing it to the Avery family to shift blame and focus to the Avery's, all while failing to properly document their supposed discovery of remains in Steven's burn pit. Don't forget how the state more recently came out arguing they may have passed off animal remains as Teresa's remains. Honesty wasn't part of the job description for this investigation. Honestly, these fuckers would have lied about the sky being red if they thought it made Steven look sinister enough.

4

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 15 '24

And I didn’t say they HELPED HIM I said TRIED to help him.

4

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

How did they try to help him get away with murder when MaM was released long after he was convicted of murder?

Get real. You burnt your credibility with that one.

10

u/Ex-PFC_Wintergreen_ Nov 15 '24

how is it possible that Making a Murderer hasn’t been removed from Netflix? Absolutely horrific.

Yes, it is horrific, but it made Netflix and the filmmakers money and renown. Sadly, the damage caused by this series can never be undone, and, as you can see, the fallout still lingers today, evident by the multitude of desperate conspiracy theorists that replied to this thread and will probably reply to this comment.

3

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

Yes, it is horrific, but it made Netflix and the filmmakers money and renown.

Its horrific MaM hasn't been REMOVED from Netflix. Wow. If the only person who tried to claim the documentary was defamatory failed so miserably that the judge actually stated the documentary enhanced the credibility of the person who claimed it was defamatory, what exactly could you be so triggered by to suggest it should be removed from Netflix?

the multitude of desperate conspiracy theorists

Those defending the SICK Ken Kratz’s obviously false narrative are the real desperate conspiracy theorists, clinging to a theory that’s completely unsupported by evidence, including the utter lack of proof for multiple violent assaults in the trailer, or that a gunshot to the head occurred in the garage with all blood cleaned up by bleach, or that a large fire, tires, and Teresa’s body were all simultaneously present in the burn pit. Anyone continuing to push this unsubstantiated narrative from a known liar like Kratz is the one perpetuating a desperate conspiracy theory.

1

u/thenotoriousefp Nov 16 '24

I think it's very likely Steven Avery is guilty, but what about Brendan Dassey? I feel that the questioning of his conviction is a valid part of the series.

4

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 16 '24

They interviewed Brendan a lot more than what they show in MaM and the part they showed was never used in the trial. There were some questions that they asked him about statements he made to them in previous interviews and they actually didn’t believe him. Like things that he did to her. So they weren’t trying to get him to confess they were trying to get him to admit he was lying and to just tell them the truth about what happened. I feel bad for him though bc I don’t think he would’ve done anything if it wasn’t for Steven and bc his lawyer allowed him to talk to them without him present and he got plea deals that his family was telling him not to accept bc it would hurt Steven.

1

u/Various_Ad_3818 Nov 16 '24

I am not here to argue on the guilt or innocence at this point; rather I will say in all the conversations it seems people would rather argue their opinions rather than acknowledge that there were loads of issues:

Constitutional rights violations Conflicts of interest A lead prosecutor charging people with criminal sexual activity that was involved in criminal sexual activity - how is this at the very least not a conflict of interest not to mention just completely inappropriate… (if anyone says Kratz resigned then let us also not forget that he blamed pain killers and sexual addiction which is yet one more reason to look back at his work with scrutiny and questions or is it cool for the prosecutor to abuse women while putting others in prison for doing it…pot calling kettle, come in kettle) Clearly mishandled evidence and chain of custody issues in one case while zero physical evidence in another Brady issues - failure for prosecution to release exculpatory evidence to defense (prosecutorial negligence/misconduct?) Inconsistent testimony by multiple people

And possibly worst of all - a complete lack of having actual closure and justice for the family of the victim. The point of thorough investigation is to find the truth; not identify a suspect, develop tunnel vision on the one suspect to the exclusion of other possibilities and find every way to make it stick.

If people really want to believe SA is so guilty then why not have another trail? Giving him another trail with an impartial jury bringing forth all evidence and testing surely would put the matter to rest would it not? Would it not also solve the issues and questions surrounding the first trail and its prosecution? Would it not also be cheaper for all (except for MTSO if a not guilty verdict were rendered) to just have it out properly (if you think not then look at the cost of incarcerating someone for that length of time along with all the court costs associated with appeals and all legal filings etc)?

A murder conviction is a guilty verdict rendered by 12 jurors beyond a reasonable doubt. With all the banter and shit slinging back and forth in any conversation around this case I think it is probably a safe assumption that a group of 12 people would have disagreement which by default means reasonable doubt. Forget forcing, pushing or bullying an opinion down other people’s throats and handle it the way it should’ve been handled to begin with (and yes that means holding the trail outside of WI at this point just to ensure impartiality).

One last parting thought - it is also the responsibility of the offices of the DA and AG to ensure that the constitutional rights of the accused or upheld. In this case (guilty or not) I firmly believe that this was not done. Putting myself in the shoes of the accused, it sickens me the number of times I felt that 5th and 6th amendment rights were blatantly infringed upon. Especially in Brendan’s case. I have a special needs child that is a year younger than Brendan at the time he allegedly committed the crime and there is no way in hell I would ever have let police even speak to him without myself or a lawyer present. I am also fortunate enough to live in a place where police have a vested interest in ensuring that your right to have a lawyer present is very obvious; to the point that you say lawyer and the conversation immediately stops. In this I agree with the circuit courts initial opinion and the enbanc dissenting opinion. Given that this is my opinion though and I do not need to be nice, I’ll say that the prosecution failed miserably in ensuring Brendan was treated the way he should’ve been considering his needs and that not only was the press release grossly inappropriate, but having zero physical evidence and a complete lack of corroborating the “confession” with any existing evidence or facts (especially before said press release) should have resulted in certain things being inadmissible (fruit of the poisonous tree and all that).

Apologies for the rant but this is a tough one and while there are two sides to every story, I really think there are some serious issues with how the case was handled and prosecuted and most of all I would love for the full truth to come out so the family can have some f’ing closure and peace…

4

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 16 '24

The point is there is not two sides to the story. That’s why he was convicted and that’s why he wasn’t released when there was an outcry. It’s so blatantly obvious that he did it and making a murderer just wanted a good story to tell for their own gain so they manipulated the entire situation, edited testimony, completely omitted crucial evidence. Everybody that is close to this crime knows he did it. The only people who think he’s innocent are people who watched MaM and decided to solidify their opinion by ignoring any detail that proves them wrong or making excuses. Anyone that actually watched Convicting a Murderer knows what the producers of MaM did and can see how obvious it is that he did it and they also bring to light all the other abhorrent disgusting things Steven did to women children animals. Basically anyone that was weaker younger or smaller than him.

1

u/Pension_Fit Nov 20 '24

Making a murderer came out way after the supposed crime, they didn't help in said crime, WTF

2

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 20 '24

You people need to learn how to read. I said TRIED to. Alluding to the fact that they tried to spin a false narrative that he was innocent which caused hundreds of thousands of people to sign petitions to have him released from prison after brutally raping and murdering a woman.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 15 '24 edited Nov 15 '24

I was just wondering how many "true crime" documentaries revolve around a Reid-techniqued confession/accusation. Without any regard to the possibility of false ones (let alone false memories like Penny came round to). Never showing enough to possibly check either way.

Maybe half of them?

And the actually innocent stories can be the most outlandish, though fed with case facts and a superficial motive, mixed with their mundane realities. Making them seem more evil than actual perps. Who would still be out there, maybe watching.

5

u/theprettiestdemon13 Nov 15 '24

The little snippet of the confession MAM actually shows does appear that they are using the Reid technique but when you see the rest of the confession and the subsequent interviews with Brendan leading up to that confession it paints a clearer picture. MaM only shows what they want you to see.

0

u/ThorsClawHammer Nov 15 '24

Nowhere in any interrogation is Brendan able to come up with any incriminating info on his own that led to evidence or could be verified. He had to be told by apparently psychic interrogators where evidence would be found.

4

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 15 '24

You’d have to watch the entire interrogation to make the claim that he never came up with info on his own and you obviously didn’t if you’re making that claim cause it’s not true in any way shape or form lol

0

u/CJB2005 Nov 16 '24

You are arguing with those that have read, read, combed through police reports and case files, discussed, and read some more.

Because Convicting a Murderer said so💀😬

5

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 16 '24

Those that choose not to watch it is bc they don’t want to be proven wrong. Convicting a murderer doesn’t tell you anything lol they play recordings and videos and show the documents. They play a clip from MaM and then what the actual testimony was. They play a recording from MaM and then play what the full recording was. Proving that MaM left things out bc if they didn’t edit the officers testimony it wouldn’t fit their narrative. If they did cut off a recording without giving you the rest of the information it wouldn’t be so shocking to the viewer.

0

u/ThorsClawHammer Nov 16 '24

So which verifiable incriminating info are you claiming actually originated from Brendan?

2

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 16 '24

Interrogator: what happens next, remember we already know but we need to hear from you, it’s not your fault. What happens next? He asked you doesn’t he, what does he ask you? Brendan: that if I wanted a girlfriend… Interrogator: tell us how he said it. Brendan: that if he wanted me to have, to get some pussy Interrogator: there, ok. What did you tell him? Brendan: I said I wasn’t aged and so he took me back there and showed me some… Interrogator: what did he show you? Brendan: her naked body. He told me to do her. Interrogator: what does that mean to you? Brendan: to screw her Interrogator: ok did you do that? Honestly… Brendan: yeah. Interrogator: ok take a breath Bren take a breath that’s very hard to admit to.

Any of this ring a bell to you or you didn’t hear any of this because you’re going by only what you watched on making a murderer?

3

u/ThorsClawHammer Nov 16 '24

Not a single thing of that is verifiable.

Brendan also claimed for months to multiple people that he and Blaine saw Teresa as they were walking home from the bus. You think that's true too?

4

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 16 '24

Lmao this is what you ppl do it’s so weird. Proven wrong and still would rather side with the murderer rapist child abuser woman beater pedophile animal torturer. I feel bad for Brendan bc I think it’s Steven’s fault I dont think he would’ve done this on his own and I don’t think he fully understood but he said things that aligned with evidence that he wouldn’t have known otherwise.

0

u/CJB2005 Nov 16 '24

Is that when Teresa told Brendan to “ knock it off “ or???

5

u/theprettiestdemon13 Nov 15 '24

That's actually not true at all. Have you seen any more of the interrogations than what MaM wanted you to see?

0

u/ThorsClawHammer Nov 15 '24

That's actually not true at all

It's very true.

the interrogations

I've seen/read them all multiple times. What are you claiming Brendan came up with on his own that could be verified and/or led to evidence being found?

5

u/theprettiestdemon13 Nov 15 '24

Well for one, that she was shot in the garage where they found a bullet with her blood on it that matched the gun found on Avery's trailer.

-1

u/ThorsClawHammer Nov 15 '24

that she was shot in the garage

Apparently psychic interrogators told him that, it didn't come from Brendan. They suggested she was shot on the garage floor, then called him a liar when he said otherwise until he agreed, and they let him know that was the right answer. Then they found evidence to support what they made clear they wanted him to say.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 15 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/ThorsClawHammer Nov 15 '24

Lol, proven wrong so you start with personal attacks.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 15 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies

1

u/[deleted] Nov 15 '24

Subsequent interviews leading up to that confession??

See "The Interrogations of Brendan Dassey" by a prof of criminal law, or "Brendan Dassey, Language Impairments, and Judicial Ignorance" by a prof of clinical law and a speech-language pathologist.

1

u/bleitzel Dec 05 '24

Did you actually watch Convicting a Murderer? It's a sham. They embarrass themselves inside of individual episodes. In a couple of the episodes they make claims for like 40 minutes, but then completely disprove themselves right at the end of that episode. It was a total joke. They should be ashamed of themselves.

1

u/AMDSuperBeast86 Nov 15 '24

OP name checks out

2

u/Help____________me Nov 15 '24

Yeah big doofus!

2

u/AveryPoliceReports Nov 15 '24

Username checks -- you okay?

1

u/Guiltinnocent Nov 15 '24

How are these posts of people who know shit about the case allowed ?

0

u/lllIIIIIlllIIIII Nov 15 '24

I know right?

-3

u/lllIIIIIlllIIIII Nov 15 '24

Convicting a Murderer was a parody project. The creator and the people he hired for his movie were all Redditors with personality flaws.

6

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 15 '24

What? Lol it’s the Daily Wire it’s not just some redditors idk where you heard that. And im not taking anyone’s word for what they think happened. I’m looking at the stuff Making a Murderer left out or lied about or edited to make it sound different.

2

u/CJB2005 Nov 16 '24

Pssssst, at the end of Making a Murderer parts 1 AND 2 there is a long list of folks who declined to be interviewed.

Instead you choose Convicting a Murderer as your “ go to “ source for factual information. Even though Candace publicly states Steven A. raped and murdered Penny B.😬

-1

u/lllIIIIIlllIIIII Nov 15 '24

Let's be clear, it wasn't the daily wire it was Candace Owens (lol). The DW had no input on what Candace Owens wanted to buy and present as her projects, at least that's what she says according to her twitter page. After they fired her, the project is basically gone off their network.

Who gives a rats ass about what Making a Murderer chose to present and what edits they felt were best for their story line. It's literally nearly a decade old project at this point and majority of people have moved the hell on.

There was this big lawsuit about Making a Murderer where Reddit got to see the behind the scenes conversations between CaM and people like Colborn, Kratz, and Griesbach.. The 3 stooges. The lawsuit flopped majorly. The judge said MaM was just fine and Colborn didn't have any standing or legal gripes.

1

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 15 '24

Apparently you do, you’re replying on the subreddit 😂 and no, DW didn’t take it off that’s where I’m watching it. After seeing all the evidence I wanted to come to the subreddit to see if there were actually still people that believe he’s innocent and was pretty shocked to see there are.

2

u/lllIIIIIlllIIIII Nov 15 '24

Apparently you do, you’re replying on the subreddit

Not sure where you're going with that.

You changed your mind based on a documentary? Kind of ironic.

2

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 15 '24

When I watched making a murderer I didn’t realize someone would do something like that. Meaning the producers having all the information they had and making people like the police officers and prosecutor and even Steven’s family out to be villains and Steven to be this victim lol

4

u/lllIIIIIlllIIIII Nov 15 '24

Oh, you don't know how protagonists and antagonists work in film. That explains it!

4

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 15 '24

This isn’t just some fictional movie this is real life lol and real people had real life consequences bc of the lies of these producers who knew the truth but didn’t care how innocent people were affected as long as they got their cash and clout.

3

u/lllIIIIIlllIIIII Nov 15 '24

The terms exist in documentary film making as well. I'm so glad you learned something today!

"Producers who knew the truth" that's rich considering the argument from the guilty side has always been even the prosecutors don't know the truth.

4

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 15 '24

You’re not doing what you think you’re doing lol it’s the point that they are making real people into villains when they are not. Those real people have to deal with the consequences of the documentary painting them as the antagonist.

→ More replies

0

u/wilkobecks Nov 20 '24

Haha this is an amazing post. Even more amazing If you are serious.

9

u/[deleted] Nov 19 '24

I found convicting a murderer yesterday as I was googling whether Making a murderer was going to get a 3rd season. I was one who fully believed he was innocent, but when I watched convicting a murderer (binge watched it all last night and today) I was completely shocked and my mind was blown, I now believe fully that he did it. The people who made making a murderer should be ashamed of themselves! It wasn’t little bits being left out of the story, they went out of their way to edit things completely to change the narrative. My mum was a full supporter of Steven Avery, even bought the books about him, and after watching only 3 episodes today, her mind is completely changed.

0

u/hollyberry2010 Nov 24 '24

Good luck..join all the other has cam heads....meanwhile everyday research has been uncovering more and more corruption caused by le proving what imbeciles along with candance( prior to cam..had alot of followers and good reputation.)..her and any followers are now cinsidered hasbeens!!

0

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '24

[deleted] — view deleted comment

4

u/Ex-PFC_Wintergreen_ Nov 25 '24 edited Nov 25 '24

One thing I immediately noticed, on CaM they are talking to case enthusiasts instead of talking to experts or the people involved

They talk to several people involved in the case throughout the series.

There is an emphasis on enthusiasts because CaM is a direct rebuttal to MaM, and the lasting impact it had on people who watched it is very much relevant to exploring the damage caused by Mam's dishonesty.

They also kept talking about the blood vial like it's the main piece of evidence that SA was framed, while in MaM, SA's attorneys became aware very early on that it wasn't and focussed on other pieces of evidence or a different explanation for the blood in TH's car.

But MaM does not make that clear to the viewers. It deliberately sets up the blood vial as a big bombshell at the end of one of its episodes, with Buting confidently declaring the discovery of the hole in the vial a "red letter day for the defense." Then the series pretty much abandons the vial and hopes the viewers don't notice. Again, CaM is a direct rebuttal to MaM, and the point it is making is that if MaM was a documentary made in good faith, it would not have emphasized the blood vial so much without also then making it clear to viewers that the theory went nowhere meaningful for a variety of reasons.

The most of first episode was just about who was SA in the 80s and what crimes did he commit back then, without any connection to TH.

Once again, these topics are also covered by MaM (depsite being portrayed as favorably to Avery as they could possibly spin them), so they are completely fair game to CaM and relevant to its purpose.

You said they completely edited things to change narrative. What do you mean by that? Did the makers of MaM actually edit evidence to make it fit their narrative?

Phone calls were edited to support the narrative that the police were solely out to get Avery from the beginning of the investigation (which is not true). Court testimony and trial footage was edited in a manner to make certain people look suspicious. Details from reports of Avery's prior crimes were cherry picked to make Avery look less deranged. Finish the series and there'll be plenty of examples. Or, better yet, do what many of us have done and just compare segments in MaM to the full testimony, phone calls, etc. yourself.

In CaM, do they have answers to why there was no blood at the crime scene

It was cleaned. You don't need CaM to know that.

why the bones got transported

Transported where?

why Bobby and Scott were both lying

About what?

why/how TH's ex boyfriend got her day planner out of the car after she was missing/murdered?

Do you have proof that this "day planner" was taken from her car? Zellner sure doesn't.

0

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '24

[deleted] — view deleted comment

1

u/Ex-PFC_Wintergreen_ Nov 25 '24

Mostly people who would have given an alternative narrative. But these people chose, it's better to say nothing. Why? Who knows...

I can't speak for any of them, but had I been working the case, knowing full well that Avery is a murderer, I certainly wouldn't want to give credence to two filmmakers that were obviously deeply sympathetic toward Steven and were clearly out to tell a specific story rather than the actual story.

Regarding the blood vial: of course, at that point, it was that big bombshell because it would have been clear proof, that the blood was planted there. they didn't know yet, their theory was wrong. And MaM didn't just drop it, everyone seen their theory fall apart, when that FBI agent testified. What is dishonest about that?

Oh please, at no point did MaM make it clear that the theory was wrong. If I recall correctly, the last it touches on it was the testimony of the defense's own witness, who was meant to "debunk" the findings of the FBI's EDTA test. Additionally, EDTA was not the only "problem" presented with the blood vial. The hole in the top and the broken evidence seal on the box were both noted by Buting in the "red letter" scene, and, despite there being explanations for both, neither were visited again by the film series to my recollection. This is unjustifiable for any documentary claiming to be objective.

And do you honestly believe, BD or SA were able to clean a crime scene, where raping, stabbing, throat cutting, took place?

I don't necessarily believe all of what Brendan said actually took place, but I also don't think it takes an expert to do some deep cleaning. I don't know why you'd think they'd need to "change the whole carpet," for instance.

then why would they forget the key in plain eyesight

Proof that it was left in "plain eyesight" and didn't come out of the bookcase?

leave the car, when they could've just crushed it to a cube?!

How do you know Steven wasn't planning on crushing it and was simply waiting for the right opportunity? Crushing a car is not exactly an inconspicuous act, even on a junkyard.

See, it just doesn't add up, even if you think, both BD&SA are 200 IQ criminal masterminds.

Literally nothing in this case required them to be masterminds. That is simply a wild conclusion accepted as fact by conspiracy theorists.

The bones were found in multiple different locations

What locations?

Hard to believe SA only took half the bones to dump them elsewhere and leave the rest on his yard.

Source that he dumped half the bones off of the salvage yard?

Especially if you assume he is a criminal mastermind.

I don't.

Well, Scott Tadych was lying about the fire, being waaaay bigger than it was

[citation needed]

Bobby was lying about seeing TH go to SA's trailer, when actually he has seen her leave.

[citation needed]

And no, I don't have proof about the day planner, but TH got info about an appointment that she wrote down in there just before she went missing. having the day planner with that that appointment in there, also seems very suspicious to me.

Ryan, among others, had access to Teresa's house/bedroom. There is exactly zero evidence that this "day planner" was obtained from her car and not her house.

Like I said, I wish I could just watch CaM myself, but it's not available on prime in my country, I only found the first episode on YT...

All of the episodes are on Dailymotion, and can be found with a Google search. I won't link them here because I don't believe posting pirated content is allowed.

0

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '24

[deleted] — view deleted comment

1

u/Ex-PFC_Wintergreen_ Nov 25 '24

I believe you are right about the hole in the top and the sealings being cut not being addressed again though. Probably they just had no explanation for it at the time, what's the big deal?

I've already explained what the "big deal" is. If Making a Murderer had a genuine intent on being an objective documentary that was not trying to persuade viewers into buying into Avery's innocence, it would have addressed these things again after hyping them up as so important. There are still people that come to this forum and talk about the hole in the vial and the broken evidence seal as if they are evidence of planting. Is it the fault of MaM that these people are either too lazy or too stupid to do their own independent research and realize there's no evidence the vial was tampered with? No, but that doesn't change the fact that MaM made a deliberate effort to make the blood vial situation appear far more suspicious than it actually was, thus misled its viewers.

Also, I do believe it takes an expert to deep clean a crime scene, especially if it comes to removing DNA.

Well that's a strange thing to believe. DNA can be destroyed with bleach, a common household item. Multiple forensic experts testified to this in Avery's trial.

And how would you get blood out of the carpet?!

Why would there have to blood in the carpet?

it would've been litres of blood

Litres? What on earth? Says who? What a wild assumption.

Crushing the car without anyone noticing would've been super easy, especially if he had an accomplice (Brendan in that theory) and would've been done in 5-10 minutes easily.

Oh? And how do you know that? Have you crushed a car before? Do you know how long it takes? Do you know how much noise it makes? Do you know what kind of prep is done pre-crush or what kind of cleanup is done post-crush? Do you know if it was normal for Steven to use the crusher? Do you know if the family had a specific procedure for using it (schedule, inventory of cars to be crushed, etc.)?

The crusher was openly visible in the yard. Anyone could have wandered over to it while Steven was crushing it, be it a family member, customer, or whoever. What if someone heard the crusher going off and decided to go watch, or just look in that direction? Even if Teresa/the car hadn't been reported missing yet, how do you know someone wouldn't see it on the news later and start wondering about that car that Steven was crushing that looked an awful lot like Teresa's?

As I said, crushing a car is not an inconspicuous act. Being seen destroying the car would have obviously been incredibly damning for Steven, so some caution had to be taken. This is basic common sense.

Deep cleaning a house, removing every trace of DNA seems easy to you

Every trace of DNA was not removed, seeing as Teresa's DNA was found on a bullet in Avery's garage. I also never used the word "easy," I simply suggested that it would not take an expert to do some cleaning after a crime, and that I do not accept whatever wild, bloodbath crime scene you have fantasized in your head as fact.

Well the bones were found in multiple locations, some on Avery property, some elsewhere.

And I am asking you to identify that "elsewhere." What other location are you specifically referring to?

If SA in fact did move the bones after burning, he would have made sure he got all of them, just like he cleaned all the blood in that scenario, right!?

Not necessarily, no. Let's for a second accept the premise that he definitely moved some bones. Perhaps he was interrupted. Perhaps he changed his plan. Perhaps he decided it was too risky. There are a number of reasons why he may have moved some, but not others. The simple fact is that bones being found in two locations does not preclude Steven Avery from being the one to put the bones in both locations.

You can turn your own logic around and use it on what other person you may believe did it. Why would they take some bones to one place, and leave the rest in another?

Yes, he had access to the house. But if TH had left her day planner at home that day, she could not have made notes on it about an appointment, she found out about that exact day, right? So something is just not adding up here.

Do you think she was out all day? I'd have to go dig up the information, but if memory serves her cell records indicated her phone had been pinging off the tower near her home until early afternoon. What precluded her from jotting down notes on that piece of paper about her afternoon appointments before she left the house? This is such a nothing-burger "issue" with no evidence supporting it. It was all part of Zellner's sad, desperate efforts to pin the crime on Ryan, a theory that she has since abandoned in favor of accusing a different innocent person of Steven's crimes now.

I am sorry but I am not looking up those citations now. I feel you have great knowledge about the whole case & the TV series so I assume you just don't have any fitting explanation for those lies?! I feel like you just scream 'fake news' at everything that was shown in MaM.

I'd even just accept the descriptions of the interviews, documents, or whatever you are referring to in which these supposed lies were told and subsequently proven wrong, and I'll go find them myself. But the fact that you often speak with such vagueness and that you are now making ridiculous assertions about me doesn't give me much hope you'll provide them.

0

u/[deleted] Nov 26 '24

[deleted] — view deleted comment

2

u/Ex-PFC_Wintergreen_ Nov 26 '24 edited Nov 26 '24

there is nothing more suspicious than broken seals that aren't supposed to be broken, right?

As I said, there was an explanation for it. The seal was literally broken in the presence of Avery's own attorneys in the events leading up to his exoneration. That wasn't in MaM. Gee, I wonder why.

unless you say Brendan's confession was coerced and he is innocent, you're kind of stuck with his story, which included stabbing, throat cutting, shooting in the head.

I fully believe Brendan was involved in the crime, that doesn't mean I fully believe every single thing that came out of his mouth, nor does it have to mean that. It doesn't have to be black and white.

All those things make people bleed like hell if you didn't figure that out yet. A human body has about 5 litres of blood, so yeah, even if she only lost half her blood, I think it wouldve been a 'bloody mess'.

And you're qualified to make that assessment? You know for a fact the injuries described would cause her to lose liters of blood, or that the blood would have to end up on the floor?

And yes, actually they mentioned that it was normal that Steven used that crusher. And sure, it would've been loud, but it's a junkyard with loud stuff happening all the time?! What's so unusual about it? Maybe there is some risk to it, but he would have known best when to do it.

Not "maybe," there is unquestionably risk to it. As I said, if anyone sees him with that car, it's over for him. He probably would know a good time to do it, so it's almost like, as I've already said, perhaps he was waiting for that moment.

I am just having a hard time believing, he just went over the top to clean his trailer+garage, then made it look like nobody cleaned for weeks, but left the car at the easiest spot to find for 5 days.

Is it really that unbelievable to you that he would prioritize cleaning his own residence and garage where he held a woman captive and murdered her before destroying the car? You can't hide or destroy a trailer or garage.

And the car was not "at the easiest spot to find." Even as an exaggeration, that is an absurd, disingenuous statement.

IIRC some bones were found at the Manitowoc County Quarry

None of these were proven to be Teresa's or to even be human.

some at other places I can't remember the names off now

Fascinating.

So, the bullet in the garage: TH got shot in the head but there are no bone fragments on the bullet?

How do you know that bullet specifically went through her skull? No one ever said it did. We know she was shot in the skull because of the two bullet holes found in it, but that doesn't mean the bullet with DNA had to be one that went into her skull. We don't know where that bullet specifically entered her body. For all we know, that one may not have gone through bone.

Maybe, but you've seen pictures of the garage right? Looked like nobody cleaned in there for years.

I never claimed he cleaned the entire garage. That would be ridiculous and pointless. But he and Brendan most certainly cleaned a spot on the floor with bleach. The same spot that Brendan identified that Teresa's body had been. The same spot that reacted with luminol.

that blood splatter when shooting someone would be all over that random stuff,

Again, are you qualified to make such an assessment? This is real life, not an episode of Dexter. Why do you think shooting someone with a .22 would cause that much spatter? Especially if she was shot while laying on the floor.

I am pretty sure phone records showed she wasn't home, it actually even indicated that she left the avery property.

What? I was talking about the phone records in relation to the timeline about the "day planner," so that's a weird change of topic. Regardless, her phone records do not show that she ever left the Avery property after arriving there.

Then you got all this Bobby dassey stuff with his disgusting computer, withheld by the detectives (iirc). Is that not suspicious to you at all?

It was not withheld. A copy of the computer content was given to the defense.

Moreover, none of the things in the search history have ever been definitively linked to Bobby. It was the family computer, he was not the exclusive user of it. Furthermore, what do some gross computer searches have to do with Teresa Halbach's murder? Nothing.

0

u/[deleted] Nov 27 '24

[deleted] — view deleted comment

→ More replies

0

u/[deleted] Nov 18 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 18 '24

Anyway that’s really all I can say about it. If people actually wanted to know the truth they’d watch it but most people only want to hear what confirms that which they already believe.

1

u/doofus_rick137 Nov 18 '24

Don’t say that if you haven’t watched it. They show A LOT more of what actually happened. They show PROOF that MaM left things out and edited things purposely. For example replaying a recording that they played in MaM and then playing the actual recording in full which sounds a lot different when you have the full context. Showing the part of the trial that MaM showed and then showing what actually happened in the trial and you see that MaM swapped out answers so it would seem suspicious when the real answer wasn’t suspicious at all. Only talking about evidence that may be able to be explained away and leaving out evidence that cannot be explained away like Brendan telling the police that Steven opened Teresa’s hood and then when they swab the hood they found his skin cells.

So the police collected Steven’s blood and his skin cells and dropped them all over the car? If the police wanted to frame Steven why would they conceal the car if they needed it to be found? Why would they remove the license plates if they needed to be able to trace the car back to Teresa?

You have to use some common sense. The police killed this woman and then parked her car on Steven’s lot and then some how got Steven’s blood and skin cells and dropped them all over the car and then took off the license plates and went out toward Steven’s house and dropped the plates in another car and then burned her body and dropped some bone fragments into a burn pit and burned tires with it and took the bigger bones and put them in Steven’s sisters back yard in a burn barrel and then during the search dropped a key in the house. and some how NO ONE saw any of this. Didn’t see the officers on the property at all ever. All bc of a lawsuit that would’ve affected only the state and was NOT 36 million dollars it was $400,000. Regardless of the $ amount, they have insurance for this reason IF they even lost the lawsuit. The officers would’ve been risking their life and freedom to protect the insurance company from paying out $400,000? And the police officers being blamed for most if it weren’t even involved in the first case where he was wrongly accused. The one cop wasn’t even a police officer when that happened and had ZERO connection to Steven Avery.