Making A Murderer ***CONTAINS SPOILERS***
Discussion
Centurion07 said:
Apparently BD did take one and failed. The result was called "inconclusive".
He never 'failed' the test, it just came back as 'inconclusive'... Surely a suspect asking for a polygraph test, and having one done would work in his favour during the trial? (even if it came back as inconclusive).
His original lawyer and his investigator were truly dreadful, it was a blatant case of conspiring with the authorities to put Steven, and then Brendan away for life.
I do wonder, if it wasn't for what his own lawyer/investigator did, and the evidence of his silly 14 year old cousin
gave, whether he'd still have been found guilty...
How their wasn't a retrial for Brenden is beyond me.
Leroy902 said:
Anyone who enjoyed making a murderer, I'd highly recommended you watch a documentary called West of Memphis.
Afew other documentaries I've watched recently that I thoroughly enjoyed...
1) The jinx the life and death of Robert Durst,
2) Dear Zachary
Watch Central Park 5 as well. Afew other documentaries I've watched recently that I thoroughly enjoyed...
1) The jinx the life and death of Robert Durst,
2) Dear Zachary
Ayahuasca said:
thebraketester said:
I dont think he did.
If you had done it what would you do with the body? I tell you what i would do. 1 hr drive from Manitowoc and you are in the middle of nowhere... drive the car/body there.... set on fire with lots of petrol.
Why did he think that leaving the car in the lot and burying the body 10meters from his house would be a good idea.
Because not the brightest spark in the world?If you had done it what would you do with the body? I tell you what i would do. 1 hr drive from Manitowoc and you are in the middle of nowhere... drive the car/body there.... set on fire with lots of petrol.
Why did he think that leaving the car in the lot and burying the body 10meters from his house would be a good idea.
London424 said:
But apparently a criminal genius when it comes to cleaning up blood and DNA evidence?
That case of the young girl in Bristol being murderred and cut up by her step brother in the bathroom of his house.....? No evidence in the bathroom. Not a spot. In fact, the room was so clean, it was utterly suspicious, as they were slobs.
London424 said:
But apparently a criminal genius when it comes to cleaning up blood and DNA evidence?
There was apparently blood and DNA in the garage aside from the "dodgy bullet fragment"It was deer blood. So genius enough to eradicate all human blood/DNA yet leave animal blood but stupid enough to miss one small bullet fragment.
davamer23 said:
London424 said:
But apparently a criminal genius when it comes to cleaning up blood and DNA evidence?
There was apparently blood and DNA in the garage aside from the "dodgy bullet fragment"It was deer blood. So genius enough to eradicate all human blood/DNA yet leave animal blood but stupid enough to miss one small bullet fragment.
Something would have been found if she was raped, had her throat slashed and got shot numerous times in the head.
If you tell the story in the right way, and feed enough information to the press you can make anyone look guilty and they have to be proved innocence. The issue with this case is so much was feed to the press and media that people automatically thought he was guilty and the jurors minds made up.
Steven was already investigated, tried, and found guilty by the public even before the court case. The lack of real evidence is just a minor bump in the road to getting a conviction. Its a scary thought.
I know i mentioned it earlier but watch Central Park 5....people got convicted on no evidence at all. Shocking.
Steven was already investigated, tried, and found guilty by the public even before the court case. The lack of real evidence is just a minor bump in the road to getting a conviction. Its a scary thought.
I know i mentioned it earlier but watch Central Park 5....people got convicted on no evidence at all. Shocking.
I've now watched all of it.
It's so troubling to me this documentary shows that the US police and justice system have one track minds. They see a suspect and do everything to build a case to bring a conviction for that person whilst overlooking potential elsewhere.
Bobby and his dad (step-dad?)
Teresa's brother
Teresa's ex boyfriend, who is still a friend, who claimed she was living with a guy, but not romantically and he just popped in to see her the weekend before she went missing, who guessed phone passwords, accessed accounts... Am I missing something? How was he never suspected?
Based on the evidence the most likely killer IS Steven IMO. But most likely shouldn't put people away for life. Also, I think it was Steven's defence lawyers (who were awesome) who said that a confession is an admission of guilt and is seen so in court.
Brendan was, with a lack of a better way of putting it, a simpleton with special needs. His treatment has been disgusting. The only thing consistent with any of Brendan's testimonies at any time was when he wasn't pressured or pushed with leading questions. Before O'Kelly coerced him into drawing diagrams, at his own trial on the stand and I think on a couple of other occasions his events were straight in his mind, like a simplistic honesty. "Went home from school 3.30, played Playstation and watched TV until around 5, received call Blaine's boss about 6, more TV until Steven calls around 7, go to bonfire, drive in golf cart, head home around 9.30, phone call to mum before bed."
The inconsistencies all happened when pushed to talk about what happened with Teresa and only when singled out, no parent or attorney present.
It's so troubling to me this documentary shows that the US police and justice system have one track minds. They see a suspect and do everything to build a case to bring a conviction for that person whilst overlooking potential elsewhere.
Bobby and his dad (step-dad?)
Teresa's brother
Teresa's ex boyfriend, who is still a friend, who claimed she was living with a guy, but not romantically and he just popped in to see her the weekend before she went missing, who guessed phone passwords, accessed accounts... Am I missing something? How was he never suspected?
Based on the evidence the most likely killer IS Steven IMO. But most likely shouldn't put people away for life. Also, I think it was Steven's defence lawyers (who were awesome) who said that a confession is an admission of guilt and is seen so in court.
Brendan was, with a lack of a better way of putting it, a simpleton with special needs. His treatment has been disgusting. The only thing consistent with any of Brendan's testimonies at any time was when he wasn't pressured or pushed with leading questions. Before O'Kelly coerced him into drawing diagrams, at his own trial on the stand and I think on a couple of other occasions his events were straight in his mind, like a simplistic honesty. "Went home from school 3.30, played Playstation and watched TV until around 5, received call Blaine's boss about 6, more TV until Steven calls around 7, go to bonfire, drive in golf cart, head home around 9.30, phone call to mum before bed."
The inconsistencies all happened when pushed to talk about what happened with Teresa and only when singled out, no parent or attorney present.
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff