Making a Murderer (Spoilers)

[NDWorld247]

My big take away at the moment is if Avery didn't do it, who did? I don't really believe the cops killed her. The ex-boyfriend seemed very fishy to me. The brother deleted voicemails during a pertinent time frame. The ex-bf search team miraculously finds the Rav4 (and just so happened to be the person he gave the digital camera to). I mean it's pretty clear the cops were hell bent on convicting Avery. But that doesn't necessarily answer who killed her (if you believe the cops didn't do it either....maybe they did, idk).

I think it was Bobby Dassey and his cousin.

 

[gkIrish]

As to who did it this article sums up the possibilities pretty well. I think it was "the German"
‘Making a Murderer’: Who killed Teresa Halbach theories - Business Insider

What I think happened is

A) The German killed her
B) Coburn found the car on the Avery property at the time he called in the license plate number and car make and model to dispatch.
C) Lenk extracted a blood sample from the test tube and planted the blood in Theresa's car.
D) The key was planted by Lenk
E) After the "confession" by Brendan, the bullet shell was planted in the garage.

My timeline may be a little off but I think that's what happened in some order or another.

 

[greyhammer90]

I hate being that guy who postulates on far fetched theories but...

Am I the only one who found the brother/boyfriend shady? Especially the interview where the brother is answering for the boyfriend on their searching of the Avery compound.

 

[gkIrish]

Saw this on reddit---

Avery jurors have industrial, retiree bent

...The jury for Steven Avery's homicide trial is dominated by people who hold blue-collar jobs or don't work, either because they are retired or are homemakers.

There's also a 41-year-old man who describes himself as independently wealthy, retired and as a part-time singer in a rock 'n' roll band.

Perhaps more to the point for Avery, the panel selected Friday includes a man whose son works for the Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department and a man whose wife works for the Manitowoc County clerk of courts office. Avery, 44, is charged with killing 25-year-old photographer Teresa Halbach.

Those connections are significant because Avery claims that a vial of his blood was left unsecured in the clerk's office and that sheriff's deputies used it to plant his blood inside Halbach's vehicle...

 

[BleedBlueGold]

As to who did it this article sums up the possibilities pretty well. I think it was "the German"
‘Making a Murderer’: Who killed Teresa Halbach theories - Business Insider

What I think happened is

A) The German killed her
B) Coburn found the car on the Avery property at the time he called in the license plate number and car make and model to dispatch.
C) Lenk extracted a blood sample from the test tube and planted the blood in Theresa's car.
D) The key was planted by Lenk
E) After the "confession" by Brendan, the bullet shell was planted in the garage.

My timeline may be a little off but I think that's what happened in some order or another.

Saw this on reddit---

Avery jurors have industrial, retiree bent

This makes my head explode. Btw, huge fan of Reddit...man, that site can dig up some shit.

 

[nlroma1o]

This DocuSeries was incredible! My wife and I binge watched it over the weekend, and were just blown away by it. I don't even know where to start on the subject. I guess I'll start by saying IMO I don't think SA killed TH. The man was about to win millions in a lawsuit, and his GF was about to get out of jail in a matter of weeks. He was a simpleton, all he wanted was to be left alone. He was so close to having all of that, why would he kill TH? I 100% believe the Manitowoc County officials are the scum of the earth. The worst type of people I've ever seen. I am 99% sure they framed SA. The Manitowoc County's insurance company told them they weren't going to pay for the lawsuit. The County had to be thinking, how are we going to tell the public we need more tax dollars, because we are shady ass officials who took 18 years of a mans life. The tax payers will just be thrilled to hear all of this and will definitely re elect us to office. These corrupt monsters jumped on the first opportunity they had to frame him.

My theory is that someone killed TH and abandoned her car somewhere. The police found it and then plant the car on the property, burn the body in the gravel pit. Then transfer the bones to the bonfire pit by the house. Followed by planting the key in the bedroom. The police had the entire property initially for 8 days.... 8 freaking days. Leng and Colburn could have easily done this.

Also, when Colburn was on the stand and listened to the dispatch call where he called in the Rav 4 license pate number, I LOST MY SHYT! I went nuts, screaming at the TV. How in the hell would anyone, with any intelligence believe that Colburn wasn't standing there looking at the vehicle. How else would he know the license plate number? If he claims he was given the plate number prior by a police source, why is he calling the plate number back in? Oh and he just guesses that the model is a Toyota Rav 4.

I think the hardest part for me, is just how sad it is that Brendan Dassey has been sitting in a cell for the last 10 years. That poor kids life was literally taken away from him... Kraz and Len Kachinsky clearly were on the same side and teamed up to try and get Brendan to testify against SA. And as a result, this innocent CHILD is sent to prison because he was scared, intimidated, and than manipulated by people who are absolute monsters in my eyes. That to me was the most upsetting piece of the case.

 

[woolybug25]

I struggled with the same questions -- but the defense doesn't need to identify the killer, just prove that it wasn't Avery.

In one of the early episodes, the defense lawyer spends time talking about how juries struggle with this because they want to provide the victim's family with closure.

They shouldn't have had to do even that. It's the prosecutors job to PROVE that the accused committed the crime beyond reasonable doubt. I get what you're saying though.

Maybe one of you law guys can answer me this... in Kratz' closing argument, he clearly tells the jurors that the murder took place in the garage (not the house, like Brendan's confession) and then proceeds to get Brendan convicted off of his confession of the crime taking place in the house.

How can two people be convicted of the same crime, where the details of how it took place are completely different in each case? That boggles my mind.

 

[gkIrish]

They shouldn't have had to do even that. It's the prosecutors job to PROVE that the accused committed the crime beyond reasonable doubt. I get what you're saying though.

Maybe one of you law guys can answer me this... in Kratz' closing argument, he clearly tells the jurors that the murder took place in the garage (not the house, like Brendan's confession) and then proceeds to get Brendan convicted off of his confession of the crime taking place in the house.

How can two people be convicted of the same crime, where the details of how it took place are completely different in each case? That boggles my mind.

Closing argument is not considered evidence. The jury is not supposed to use it as evidence. So if there were inconsistencies in the closing arguments of either case it has no bearing.

Also there is probably a rule of evidence in Wisconsin that prevents the testimony in on criminal trial from being used in the criminal trial of a different person.

That being said I'm basing that all off memory from law school as I don't litigate.

 

[woolybug25]

Closing argument is not considered evidence. The jury is not supposed to use it as evidence. So if there were inconsistencies in the closing arguments of either case it has no bearing.

Also there is probably a rule of evidence in Wisconsin that prevents the testimony in on criminal trial from being used in the criminal trial of a different person.

That being said I'm basing that all off memory from law school as I don't litigate.

That makes sense.

But geez... something feels fundamentally dirty about convicting two people of a shared crime, but explaining the details of the crime completely different in each trial.

 

[tussin]

They shouldn't have had to do even that. It's the prosecutors job to PROVE that the accused committed the crime beyond reasonable doubt. I get what you're saying though.

Good catch... I misspoke there. I'm clearly not fit to be a lawyer. grin:

 

[gkIrish]

That makes sense.

But geez... something feels fundamentally dirty about convicting two people of a shared crime, but explaining the details of the crime completely different in each trial.

Absolutely. I think the prosecution should face criminal charges for trying to convict Brendan Dassey. They absolutely knew the confession was coerced and the lack of absolutely any physical evidence whatsoever confirms it. It breaks my heart that the kid is in jail and I would volunteer my time to defend him if I thought I could do it successfully.

I think they are trying to take his case to the Supreme Court. Probably has a good chance there if they decide to take the case.

 

[Henges24]

How can two people be convicted of the same crime, where the details of how it took place are completely different in each case? That boggles my mind.

Just like how SA was found not guilty of mutilating a dead body but Brendon was found guilty of it. Thought that was very strange.

Also not sure how Brendon could have been found guilty of it if he never even admitted to it. In his hand-written confession, he said he "seen toes" in the fire when he went over to SA house for the bonfire. He never admitted to directly burning the body. If all the evidence they had on him was his 'confession' then how can they guilt him of that charge if he never admitted to it? Seems like throwing gas on a burning fire to me.

 

[JSBusch]

What's amazing to me is the lack of actual investigation and police work done in this case.. there were SO many promising leads but they were so blinded by Avery. It's also incredible how many procedural mishaps there were. Between Manitowoc county being involved when they shouldn't have been, the forensic specialist disregarding the procedure about conclusive findings and sample contamination, and the presentation of a litany of fabrications negatively reflecting on Avery and the defense (realistically could've been ruled a mistrial)..

The defense team was awesome.. and the justice system saddens me in this case given the lack of the presumption of innocence.

 

[WhoDeyIrish]

I thought the documentary was pretty one sided for Avery. For whatever they showed during the documentary I didn't think they could prove that he actually did it beyond reasonable doubt. However, I am pretty confident that he did do it. I thought he was a little off from the beginning his eyes really freaked me out a bit. I thought there was a lot of sketchy things and the DA was definitely scum but I think they got the right guy(s).

 

[BleedBlueGold]

I thought the documentary was pretty one sided for Avery. For whatever they showed during the documentary I didn't think they could prove that he actually did it beyond reasonable doubt. However, I am pretty confident that he did do it. I thought he was a little off from the beginning his eyes really freaked me out a bit. I thought there was a lot of sketchy things and the DA was definitely scum but I think they got the right guy(s).

The producers of the docuseries tried to keep it unbiased. They offered to interview Kratz multiple times and he declined. The producers also withheld the story about Kratz sexting scandal (which would've made him look even worse). It may seem one-sided, because it wasn't without effort to include both sides.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion on whether he did or did not commit the crime. The problem lies in court that like you said, they didn't prove his guilt, yet he still got convicted.

Pretty sure, "However, I am pretty confident that he did do it. I thought he was a little off from the beginning his eyes really freaked me out a bit," wouldn't hold up in court. Haha.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

This series has me obsessed with other stories like it. I just started listening to the "Serial" podcasts today.

 

[tussin]

The most heartbreakening moment so far was how Dassey (and his mother) didn't know the meaning of "inconsistent." It's beyond criminal that they coerced the initial confession out of him without a lawyer present. So sad.

 

[tussin]

This series has me obsessed with other stories like it. I just started listening to the "Serial" podcasts today.

You're in for a treat. #AdnanDidIt

 

[JSBusch]

The producers of the docuseries tried to keep it unbiased. They offered to interview Kratz multiple times and he declined. The producers also withheld the story about Kratz sexting scandal (which would've made him look even worse). It may seem one-sided, because it wasn't without effort to include both sides.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion on whether he did or did not commit the crime. The problem lies in court that like you said, they didn't prove his guilt, yet he still got convicted.

Pretty sure, "However, I am pretty confident that he did do it. I thought he was a little off from the beginning his eyes really freaked me out a bit," wouldn't hold up in court. Haha.

Depends on which court.. Calumet county? Material evidence. Slam dunk.

 

[gkIrish]

The most heartbreakening moment so far was how Dassey (and his mother) didn't know the meaning of "inconsistent." It's beyond criminal that they coerced the initial confession out of him without a lawyer present. So sad.

OMG agreed. When they didn't know what that word meant my heart broke.

I will say that he seemed a lot more intelligent during the trial. Although he should have put more blame on the detectives instead of saying "I don't know."

 

[goldandblue]

Did any of you notice on episode 3 when they are showing up at the court for SA's preliminary hearing Det. James Lenk is wearing an Notre Dame jacket??

 

[koonja]

Friend is 2 episodes in and watching the 3rd tonight. Would I be too far lost if I started from ep 3 and continued from there?

 

[notredomer23]

Did any of you notice on episode 3 when they are showing up at the court for SA's preliminary hearing Det. James Lenk is wearing an Notre Dame jacket??

Well, Notre Dame knows a thing or two about coverups.

 

[woolybug25]

Friend is 2 episodes in and watching the 3rd tonight. Would I be too far lost if I started from ep 3 and continued from there?

Some may disagree, but I think that there is far too much background information in the first episode to start that far along. I would watch the first two first.

 

[greyhammer90]

Friend is 2 episodes in and watching the 3rd tonight. Would I be too far lost if I started from ep 3 and continued from there?

You would piss your friend off guaranteed. It would definitely be a pause every ten seconds and explain something deal.

 

[greyhammer90]

My girlfriend is a School Psychologist (not a counselor, she's the lady who shows up and runs standardized tests to determine if you're gifted/disabled), she is getting physically angry at the Brendan scenes.

 

[Jimmy3Putt]

IMO the ex boyfriend needs to be seriously looked into.
His little flash of duper's delight on the stand gave him away.

 

[gkIrish]

Friend is 2 episodes in and watching the 3rd tonight. Would I be too far lost if I started from ep 3 and continued from there?

The first 4 episodes are the best IMO. I would just watch them.

 

[woolybug25]

IMO the ex boyfriend needs to be seriously looked into.
His little flash of duper's delight on the stand gave him away.

Not to mention, the phone provider said that someone deleted voicemails from after she was last seen. That person would have had to of had her password. Something the ex boyfriend admitted to when he said that he broke into her phone when she went missing by guessing the password.

 

[WhoDeyIrish]

Not to mention, the phone provider said that someone deleted voicemails from after she was last seen. That person would have had to of had her password. Something the ex boyfriend admitted to when he said that he broke into her phone when she went missing by guessing the password.

I thought it was the brother that broke into the phone? Maybe I'm wrong. Thought the boyfriend was on the computer or something.