Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 4 weeks later...
Posted (edited)

I finished this last night, thanks for some of the links above.

 

I'll go first: the ten episodes were entirely too one-sided to draw the kind of meaningful conclusions that it seems much of the audience has glommed to. This is both a testament to the craft with which the series was made given how beautiful, thorough and immersive it was.

But also given that depth and gravity, and the skill with which the narrative is developed, the absence of a counterpoint weakens not only the compellingness of the series itself but also, more importantly, the case for Steven Avery's innocence.

Which is ironic given that one of the key points in the series was summed up by one of Avery's trial lawyers who laments the hubris in the system and how no one involved in the process is ever willing to concede for a moment they might be wrong.

 

I was really drawn in the first 5 or 6 episodes but it started to drag by the end. I didn't for a moment expect either of them to be acquitted and after a while much of it got repetitive. Really, how many long shots of Avery's forlorn mother did we need?

 

As for his guilt, there are a couple huge unanswered question. First, how does the DA possibly justify telling Avery's jury they killed her in the garage but telling Dassey's jury they killed her in the trailer? I guess Dassey's defense wasn't allowed to attack that. Second, regardless of which one it was, where was the blood? NFW those two numb-nuts scrub the scene (especially if they butchered her the way it was described in the Dassey trial) that well. Third, how do two bone fragments find their way to the burn site at the edge of the property? Then of course the obvious planting of evidence.

 

To me that all pointed to her being abducted and killed in her car or elsewhere, burned in the third pit and someone subsequently dumping the majority of the bones in Avery's yard (I was surprised the defense didn't put that forward as a theory). Could that have been Avery? Sure. Could it have been someone else? Well....I wish the documentary had discussed that at all. I know they arrested Avery pretty quickly but did the police investigate anyone else? Seems to me the two dudes who both had the 'I went hunting' alibi (and passed each other on the road) were worth a long look. These are not the kind of people who would be bothered by pinning their crime on uncle Steven.

Edited by KD in CT
Posted

I finished this last night, thanks for some of the links above.

 

Which is ironic given that one of the key points in the series was summed up by one of Avery's trial lawyers who laments the hubris in the system and how no one involved in the process is ever willing to concede for a moment they might be wrong.

 

I was really drawn in the first 5 or 6 episodes but it started to drag by the end. I didn't for a moment expect either of them to be acquitted and after a while much of it got repetitive. Really, how many long shots of Avery's forlorn mother did we need?

 

As for his guilt, there are a couple huge unanswered question. First, how does the DA possibly justify telling Avery's jury they killed her in the garage but telling Dassey's jury they killed her in the trailer? I guess Dassey's defense wasn't allowed to attack that. Second, regardless of which one it was, where was the blood? NFW those two numb-nuts scrub the scene (especially if they butchered her the way it was described in the Dassey trial) that well. Third, how do two bone fragments find their way to the burn site at the edge of the property? Then of course the obvious planting of evidence.

 

To me that all pointed to her being abducted and killed in her car or elsewhere, burned in the third pit and someone subsequently dumping the majority of the bones in Avery's yard (I was surprised the defense didn't put that forward as a theory). Could that have been Avery? Sure. Could it have been someone else? Well....I wish the documentary had discussed that at all. I know they arrested Avery pretty quickly but did the police investigate anyone else? Seems to me the two dudes who both had the 'I went hunting' alibi (and passed each other on the road) were worth a long look. These are not the kind of people who would be bothered by pinning their crime on uncle Steven.

To this point, I don't think they were allowed to suggest a 3rd party could have done this. Their best hope was to show the police didn't interview other suspects and that evidence was planted.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if it was those two guys. I also think its very possible Steven did it, but if he did, it didnt happen in the way investigators described it

Posted

To this point, I don't think they were allowed to suggest a 3rd party could have done this. Their best hope was to show the police didn't interview other suspects and that evidence was planted.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if it was those two guys. I also think its very possible Steven did it, but if he did, it didnt happen in the way investigators described it

 

They mentioned the defense wasn't able to name other suspects but I wasn't clear how far that extended into offering other theories of the crime without naming names.

 

Two guys who were on the property and left to go hunting (separately) right around the time she was there is very suspicious to me.

Posted

He had access to a car crusher. The lead cop on the case called dispatch to with the rav 4s plate number THREE SAYS BEFORE IT WAS "FOUND." Those two points alone are reasonable doubt.

And her exboyfriend "guessed" her cell phone accounts password? How about just say "she told me what it was" or "she used the same password for everything."

Posted

These last four or five new posts really nail it for what I walked away with. Do I think he did it? Very possibly, but the list of things just discussed are incredibly odd.

  • 3 months later...
  • 1 month later...
Posted

Get the kid home so he can finally watch some wrestlemania

unfortunately for him, Wrestlemania isn't until March. He won't be home long enough to enjoy it. He's and idiot and most likely guilty of something besides being stupid. He most likely picked up some bad habits in prison too and will end up doing something dumb
Posted

unfortunately for him, Wrestlemania isn't until March. He won't be home long enough to enjoy it. He's and idiot and most likely guilty of something besides being stupid. He most likely picked up some bad habits in prison too and will end up doing something dumb

No offense Mr. Ags, but do you think your perception may be slightly biased because you're a CO? What do you think he is guilty of doing?

Posted

No offense Mr. Ags, but do you think your perception may be slightly biased because you're a CO? What do you think he is guilty of doing?

I usually only answer to people when they call me by my actual screen name. I have no idea who Mr. Ags is.

 

But since you brought it all up, I was not serious in this other than the fact that the kid is an idiot. Honestly, chances are he's not learned any kind of criminal type activities while in prison.

 

But that doesn't mean that I think the kid is innocent or guilty. After all, he did admit to the crime about 10 different times of you watched the series. I get it that he was cohersed into just about everything he did. But he did manage to come up with some pretty elaborate details about the murder and how it happened.

Posted (edited)

I dont know. The kid was left alone on an island with like a 50 iq... up against a team of trained professionals with unlimited time.

 

With that said, rags is onto something. He is already challenged, couldnt finish his education, spent some impressionable years in prison, and is going back to a lower class socioeconomic situation. He has a stacked deck against him.

Edited by May Day 10
Posted

I dont know. The kid was left alone on an island with like a 50 iq... up against a team of trained professionals with unlimited time.

 

With that said, rags is onto something. He is already challenged, couldnt finish his education, spent some impressionable years in prison, and is going back to a lower class socioeconomic situation. He has a stacked deck against him.

If there is anyone who could spend a decade in prison and come out having learned, picked up, or retained not a thing, its this kid.

Posted

If there is anyone who could spend a decade in prison and come out having learned, picked up, or retained not a thing, its this kid.

you've got that right
×
×
  • Create New...