Making a Murderer (Steven Avery)

[richardh]

I've watched the Netflix documentary about the Steven Avery case.

What are your thoughts on this on-going saga?

On the evidence and information given in the documentary, I've decided that:
Avery did do the crime (murder of Teresa Halbach).
That the nephew (Brandan Dassey) be granted a re-trial
That, whatever the outcome of the Dassey re-trial, he should not be held fully accountable given his astonishingly obvious low intelligence.
That Avery be granted a re-trial because of the inadequacies and incompetence of the police investigation.
That the police are guilty of honourable corruption.

discuss

[Pandora]

Hi Richard,what did you think of Teresa's brother Mike Halbach, saying in Episode 2 (at around the 34:50 mark) "The grieving process,you know, could last days, could last weeks, could last years, you know, hopefully we find answers as soon as possible so we can, you know, begin to, you know, hopefully move on, hopefully, with Teresa still in our life".

Baring in mind that at this stage in the investigation, as far as anyone knew, Teresa was still alive, and known to police to only to be a missing person.

I personally find it odd that he mentions the "grieving process", and the need to "move on", as though he already believes her dead, before correcting himself, that she may still be alive.

[richardh]

Yes, I noticed that instantly when he said it. Was quite jarring actually. That and the fact that the male friend and another bloke also managed to access her voice mail messages AND that some of those messages were apparently deleted. Moreover the lady who located the RAV4 was somewhat suspicious and also the fact that the male friend provided her, and her alone, with a digital camera before she ventured onto the Avery's land.

All very odd and together with a lot more odd stuff is why there should be a re-trial.

Hi Richard,what did you think of Teresa's brother Mike Halbach, saying in Episode 2 (at around the 34:50 mark) "The grieving process,you know, could last days, could last weeks, could last years, you know, hopefully we find answers as soon as possible so we can, you know, begin to, you know, hopefully move on, hopefully, with Teresa still in our life".

Baring in mind that at this stage in the investigation, as far as anyone knew, Teresa was still alive, and known to police to only to be a missing person.

I personally find it odd that he mentions the "grieving process", and the need to "move on", as though he already believes her dead, before correcting himself, that she may still be alive.

[Ausgirl]

honourable corruption

Good grief. Honourable corruption? Really?

I must presume that's opposed to the kind of corruption that might occur if, say, the county officials in question had 30 million good, personal-pocket reasons to railroad the man?

Moreover the lady who located the RAV4 was somewhat suspicious

*and* a relative of the deceased, to boot.

As to Avery having done the crime, regardless of whatever corruption (of any flavour) that led to his arrest -- I'm on the fence, leaning toward innocent.

What mainly keeps me from toppling over are those star-67 phone calls, which could not have been interfered with. Though we don't have the context of how often Avery may have used that call feature, it's still a good reason to suspect he may have lured the victim to his property.

But then, surely, on being given the address, Teresa would have had the nous to put two and together, re the possibility of Avery being there -- and if in fear for her life as is claimed, would she not also surely have refused to go, especially alone?

Still, why use *67? And then... not do so, for the final call?

The present case against Avery is even filthier than the one which put him away as an innocent man. Its just wretchedly obvious there were multiple instances of shenanigans. But that doesn't make him innocent.

The whole thing ought to be a mistrial, IMO, and a good lesson in why there's no provision in the courts for "honourable corruption".

His nephew was completely stitched up, I have no doubt of that. His interrogation was plainly just reprehensible stuff.

[Ausgirl]

and ...re the oddness of the behaviour of the brother & the ex (I agree with you both, richard and Pandora on this point)...

What made me initially stop and take a hard look at the behaviour of these men, even prior to having to heard details of the password and vehicle discovery stuff, was the strange body language between them in the search party interview where Halbach watches every word the ex says like a hawk, seemingly on tenterhooks, literally watching his lips move. Classic "hope he keeps the story straight" behaviour.

Add that to the rest..

But what, if it all does indicate deception (and I think it does) -- could it mean? I really don't know.

[jason_c]

I've watched the Netflix documentary about the Steven Avery case.

What are your thoughts on this on-going saga?

On the evidence and information given in the documentary, I've decided that:
Avery did do the crime (murder of Teresa Halbach).
That the nephew (Brandan Dassey) be granted a re-trial
That, whatever the outcome of the Dassey re-trial, he should not be held fully accountable given his astonishingly obvious low intelligence.
That Avery be granted a re-trial because of the inadequacies and incompetence of the police investigation.
That the police are guilty of honourable corruption.

discuss

It's hard to say whether or not Avery deserves a re-trial. The documentary was little more than advocacy journalism. That being said I believe Avery is probably guilty, but then again I think most defendants guilty.

[OneRound]

...

The present case against Avery ...
Its just wretchedly obvious there were multiple instances of shenanigans. But that doesn't make him innocent.

The whole thing ought to be a mistrial, IMO, and a good lesson in why there's no provision in the courts for "honourable corruption".

...

I know little about the Avery case but want to check it out more. Meanwhile, the comments above by Ausgirl pretty much tally with the theme of my posts concerning James Hanratty on the A6 thread. In my opinion, a man who went to the gallows - coincidentally fifty-four years ago today - for a crime he committed but for which he was never fairly convicted.

Best regards,

OneRound

[CertainSum1]

This is yet another ironic case where the police investigation itself makes legal justice nearly impossible.

I haven't watched the Netflix special because I fear it's too biased to be fair. I've learned much of the facts of the case, though. Which makes me glad that I can't form opinions by the affect of the players. The DNA of her burned remains in his yard made me lean towards too many coincidences.

But, there's no question in my mind that the handling of the nephew's case should make some law enforcement people ashamed of themselves...