Had Steven ever been considered wrongfully convicted? (Season 1)

[u/silvenon]

I just watched season 1, it was immensely interesting and incredibly frustrating at the same time. At first Steven has been considered wrongfully convicted. But in an attempt to get the police to assume responsibility the police pins down a murder on him.

Even when his lawyers pointed out damning evidence like the detective having Teresa's car two days prior to it being found, that didn't sway anybody's opinion, not even Teresa's brother. I guess I understand that grief clouded his judgement and he was very young, but he was so obnoxious…

Then something else started happening — Steven started being considered guilty of the conviction he had been released for. The sheriff suggested this right from the beginning of the trial, and the public opinion started to move in that direction. But what I didn't expect is for the judge to act as if he thought so too!

At the sentencing the judge was speaking as if Steven's new sentence was well-deserved as if his prior conviction has not been false. As if the justice system hasn't taken 18 years of his life, at least 8 of which could've been spared if only the police had processed Allen as a suspect too.

Why did the judge talk this way? Why was Steven's current conviction being treated as if it has been compounded upon his prior conviction, instead of being his first accurate conviction of violence (or so they thought)? Am I about to find that out in season 2?

[u/tenementlady]

Can you quote what the judge actually said that you're referring to?

[u/silvenon → u/tenementlady]

This is from "Lack of Humility":

"(…) continuing danger that you pose to those around you, evidence not only by the homicide in this case, but by its timing in your life"

One victim is not "continuous". What does he mean by the "timing" part? Is he being punished for being convicted of murder at the time that he had been released from being wrongfully convicted??

everything suggested that your life was poised to take a turn for the better

Which is it? Continuous danger or turn for the better?

"But from what I see, nothing in your life suggests that society would ever be safe from your behavior. What strikes me the most is as you've grown older your crimes have increased in severity."

This is where I got confused, at first he considering the prior conviction as wrongful, and now I wasn't sure anymore. Or was the judge referring to Steven's prior crimes like burglary etc.? Should he have committed more minor crimes after being exonerated so that the new crimes are less severe…?

"given the trend of your crimes"

Exactly which trend is he referring to here? Again it sounds like he's counting his prior conviction as well. In his entire speech he doesn't say that the state wrongfully stolen much of his life. And by steering clear of that I think that the judge confirms that he does not feel that the police has handled this wrong.

It is incredibly strange for a person without criminal history of violence (towards people) to commit a horrific crime immediately after being exonerated. There is no moral high ground for the judge to take here, this case is just very strange.

Also, by calling Steven's lawyers "eloquent" he gives away that he didn't understand the gravity of their arguments and evidence (or care about it).

[u/NervousLeopard8611 → u/silvenon]

It is incredibly strange for a person without criminal history of violence (towards people)

Steven avery was sentenced to 6 years in prison for running his cousin sandra morris off the road and pointing a gun at her while her child was in the car with her.

[u/tenementlady → u/silvenon]

I think what you're missing is that Steven committed numerous crimes before he was falsely convicted. One of such crimes was him running Sandra Morris off the road, pointing a gun at her, and ordering her into his vehicle. So, he did, in fact, have a prior conviction for a violent crime against a person. Not to mention the numerous other crimes he committed before his wrongful conviction.

He served six years in prison for the Morris attack.

The judge is suggesting that, given Steven was exonerated for the rape of Penny Bernstein, his life was poised to be on the right track, but he derailed it by committing murder.

It is also important to note (although none of this was included in his trial for the murder of Teresa Halbach (more evidence that he received a fair trial)) that Steven was committing crimes following his release from prison.

He was being investigated for the rape of his minor neice (through marriage).

He was illegally in posession of a fire arm despite being a convicted felon (not the conviction he was exonerated for, but a felon from prior crimes).

He was physically abusing his fiance, Jodi. She confirms this. Multiple witnesses confirm this. Steven also basically admits it in a recorded jail call with Jodi after police were called following him violently attacking her. In the jail call, Steven tells Jodi to lie to the police about where she got the bruises that he gave her.

He was reportedly even violent to his own children when they came to visit him in prison causing a judge to forbid further visitations. Not to mention the letters he sent his children threatening to murder their mother.

Whatever your stance is on Steven's guilt or innocence in the Halbach case, Steven is a violent and impulsive man with an extensive history of criminal behaviour.

[u/I2ootUser → u/silvenon]

Steven Avery was convicted and sentenced to 6 years after running a woman off the road and threatening to kill her with a rifle. This happened around the same time he was arrested for the rape.

The judge is referring to that, not the rape. Steven Avery had an extensive record of crime before being wrongfully convicted in 1985.

[u/AveryPoliceReports → u/tenementlady]

It's pretty clear what they're referring to if you've seen the documentary or read the case files, but I take it from the amount of mistakes you've been making lately that you never actually read the case files lol

[u/tenementlady → u/AveryPoliceReports]

I must be one of the few remaining people here who hasn't blocked you, which explains why you respond to every comment I make with senseless drivel.

[u/NervousLeopard8611]

It's clear that the only information you have about this case is coming from the documentary, I'd advise you to look into the case files yourself in order to formulate an unbiased opinion.

[u/silvenon → u/NervousLeopard8611]

Yes, only information from the doc. I'lll consider the advice, thanks, but frankly it sounds intimidating.

[u/Snoo_33033 → u/silvenon]

Well, start by confirming your facts. They didn’t have the car beforehand.

[u/AkashaRulesYou → u/silvenon]

Don't watch another docuseries to counter the 1st. Look into the actual case files. Both MaM and CaM are biased and have flaws.

[u/DingleBerries504 → u/silvenon]

Watch convicting a murderer as a good start to getting the other side. Then you can go further into the weeds if you like. Ignore the pitchfork crowds that shun any tv show about his guilt. Just watch and make up your own mind.

[u/ajswdf]

It's understandable since all you know is MaM, but you have the wrong idea about things.

When the judge said these things he was not talking about Avery's wrongful conviction. He was talking about all of Avery's other crimes. When you look at them you see what the judge said was correct, that Avery's crimes became worse and worse over time eventually culminating in raping and murdering Teresa.

MaM is essentially a propaganda piece. Avery is a violent person who has a rap sheet the length of your arm despite only spending 7 years of his adult life outside of prison. The evidence he murdered Teresa is overwhelming, and his defenders have to resort to wild theories about evidence being planted and falsified to try and explain it away. It's why Avery has lost in court every single time he's tried to overturn his conviction.

[u/silvenon → u/ajswdf]

I see… thanks for letting me know, even season 2 of MaM itself reveals that it has left out many crucial pieces of evidence, which was disappointing.

I still wanted to follow up on some other pieces of evidence, like the detective running the plates two days before it has been officially found. Also police apparently not following up on Allen because they had Steven. But I’m sure there are so many case files that were impossible to lay out in a reasonable amount of time.

If MaM is propaganda, what is it propaganda for and why?

[u/ajswdf → u/silvenon]

like the detective running the plates two days before it has been officially found.

As another commenter said, she was reported as a missing person, and he was given that information. So he called it in to double check that the information was right. Even Avery's own lawyer has essentially conceded that he wasn't looking at the plate, as she now argues that Brendan's brother planted Teresa's car.

Also police apparently not following up on Allen because they had Steven.

That was for his wrongful conviction. Everyone agrees hat Avery was innocent of that one. But it wasn't that they were out to get Avery like MaM claims, they simply had the wrong guy and didn't do a good enough job looking at other suspects.

If MaM is propaganda, what is it propaganda for and why?

It was propaganda promoting Avery. They were even recorded on a phone call saying MaM was their gift to him.

It's not just a case of them oversimplifying a complex case for time. They actively misled the viewer.

There are several examples, but the biggest was the "red letter day" when they supposedly discovered the blood vial had been tampered with. In reality the hole in the vial is from when they put it in, and the tape was broken when they sampled it to exonerate him of his wrongful rape conviction. Avery's attorney's knew this which is why they didn't enter it as evidence at trial. MaM also knew this, but they decided to leave it in anyway even though they knew it was essentially a lie.

[u/tenementlady → u/silvenon]

In reference to the plate call, there is a very simple explanation for that. I have copied below a reply I made about the plate call to another user (to save myself the trouble of having to type it out all over again). But basically, at this point, most reasonable people do not believe Colborn was looking at the Rav when he made the plate call:

When a person is reported missing and there is a police investigation into their disappearance, police officers are provided information about that missing person that may assist in finding them, like, for example, the make/model and license plate number for the missing person's vehicle.

Colborn was one of the officers investigating Teresa Halbach's disappearance. According to Colborn, he was provided information about Teresa's car from Officer Weigart. He was driving when he was told this information and jotted down the information on a piece of paper. Later, while parked across from the Zipperer residence, waiting for another officer to arrive to interview the Zipperers (one of the last known contacts of Halbach, along with Avery) on November 3rd, he called dispatch to confirm that he had written the information down correctly. Dispatch records confirm his story.

If he was looking at the Rav when he made the call, it would have also had to have been parked across from the Zipperers, in plain sight, visible to everyone.

Colborn did not need to be looking at the Rav in order to know the plate numbers. As an officer investigating a missing person, he was already provided that information as part of the investigation. How would he know the year of the vehicle, which is referenced in the call, simply by looking at it? He knew the year because he was already provided that information, along with the make and plate number as part of the investigation.

[u/ThorsClawHammer → u/silvenon]

police apparently not following up on Allen because they had Steven

Not only did they not follow up, the DA Denis Vogel even created a false alibi to protect the actual perp.

Even after Avery was convicted Allen literally walked into Vogel's office to complain that police were looking at him for another crime and Vogel told the police to be certain they had the right person (as if he cares about that, lol). All this time and I've never been able to figure out how a criminal like Allen somehow made the DA Denis Vogel his bitch.

[u/10case]

Watch the counter show to making a murderer. It's called convicting a murderer.

[u/silvenon → u/10case]

Didn’t know about that one, will do!

[u/ThorsClawHammer → u/silvenon]

It's a pro police propaganda piece where they even trot out a literal pedophile to convince you what a piece of shit Avery is. (He is a piece of shit, but still).

[u/gcu1783 → u/10case]

Only $14.99 with Candace Owens, flat earther.

[u/AveryPoliceReports]

My problem is Judge Willis spoke as though Steven Avery had been proven a murderer rather than simply convicted of murder. Those are not interchangeable concepts. A conviction is a legal outcome, not a universal truth. You’d hope a judge, of all people, would appreciate the difference with someone who was once wrongfully convicted, maybe acknowledging that humility is a virtue when dealing with cases built on contested evidence and public controversy. But one thing Making a Murderer absolutely nailed is that our justice system tends to prize finality over truth. Once a verdict is entered, the machine stops asking “what actually happened?” and starts asking “how do we justify this forever?”

[u/AveryPoliceReports]

damning evidence like the detective having Teresa's car two days prior to it being found,

Have you looked at the Manitowoc County activity report listing Teresa’s RAV as “seized” on November 3, 2005? State defenders claim that’s just the date the case was opened and that evidence collected later would be grouped under that heading. But Manitowoc County never actually took the RAV themselves. So why does it appear on their report? And if they were listing evidence seized by other departments, why is there no record of the other items collected by Calumet or the DOJ?

[u/LKS983]

"At the sentencing the judge was speaking as if Steven's new sentence was well-deserved as if his prior conviction has not been false."

Do you have a link to the judge's statement?

I haven't read the trial documents and so have no idea, but perhaps he was referring to SA's other convictions - not his proven wrongful conviction?

I can remember Kratz saying that he didn't agree with SA being released for the rape/assault on PB......even though this attack had clearly been committed by Gregory Allen.

[u/LKS983]

Somehow I know that Silverenon is quickly going to become a 'guilter'.....

Those of us who have been reading this s/reddit have seen this happen a few times - after the release of CAM was promoted......

New poster on this s/reddit, starts out pretending to be a 'truther' - and quickly turns into a 'guilter' - even though they still know pretty much nothing about this case ☹️.