Making A Murderer ***CONTAINS SPOILERS***
Discussion
lemmingjames said:
How does she get paid as well as if shes working pro-bono, if she gets him out of jail, does she give the state her costs or is it just free publicity for her and she gets work from it?
She owns her law firm judging by a few things I saw, so I think she is genuinely doing this for free. No doubt if she wins she will get her costs. Imagine how different it could have been if he had her first time round. If I were innocent of a crime and being tried for it, I'd definitely want her in my corner!BrabusMog said:
lemmingjames said:
How does she get paid as well as if shes working pro-bono, if she gets him out of jail, does she give the state her costs or is it just free publicity for her and she gets work from it?
She owns her law firm judging by a few things I saw, so I think she is genuinely doing this for free. No doubt if she wins she will get her costs. Imagine how different it could have been if he had her first time round. If I were innocent of a crime and being tried for it, I'd definitely want her in my corner!skahigh said:
BrabusMog said:
lemmingjames said:
How does she get paid as well as if shes working pro-bono, if she gets him out of jail, does she give the state her costs or is it just free publicity for her and she gets work from it?
She owns her law firm judging by a few things I saw, so I think she is genuinely doing this for free. No doubt if she wins she will get her costs. Imagine how different it could have been if he had her first time round. If I were innocent of a crime and being tried for it, I'd definitely want her in my corner!I think the initial defence lawyers did a great job and made a solid case, it seems Zellner has far more time and resources than those fellas though. And the original prosecutor Kratz is still on the Avery bandwagon after all this time, like he has an agenda.
Or maybe the documentary is just painting it that way.
Got to stay open minded.
Spanna said:
skahigh said:
BrabusMog said:
lemmingjames said:
How does she get paid as well as if shes working pro-bono, if she gets him out of jail, does she give the state her costs or is it just free publicity for her and she gets work from it?
She owns her law firm judging by a few things I saw, so I think she is genuinely doing this for free. No doubt if she wins she will get her costs. Imagine how different it could have been if he had her first time round. If I were innocent of a crime and being tried for it, I'd definitely want her in my corner!I think the initial defence lawyers did a great job and made a solid case, it seems Zellner has far more time and resources than those fellas though. And the original prosecutor Kratz is still on the Avery bandwagon after all this time, like he has an agenda.
Or maybe the documentary is just painting it that way.
Got to stay open minded.
The jiffle king said:
We plan to rewatch the first series before the 2nd to remind ourselves of the full story
There are so many things that raise doubt like the way the vehicle was found, phone records, 7 searches to find the keys, etc etc
As for Dassey, you have to feel for him
I wouldn't bother, there is a quick 3 min recap at the start and a lot of stuff is re-covered, we didn't feel we missed anything by not rewatchingThere are so many things that raise doubt like the way the vehicle was found, phone records, 7 searches to find the keys, etc etc
As for Dassey, you have to feel for him
BrabusMog said:
Spanna said:
skahigh said:
BrabusMog said:
lemmingjames said:
How does she get paid as well as if shes working pro-bono, if she gets him out of jail, does she give the state her costs or is it just free publicity for her and she gets work from it?
She owns her law firm judging by a few things I saw, so I think she is genuinely doing this for free. No doubt if she wins she will get her costs. Imagine how different it could have been if he had her first time round. If I were innocent of a crime and being tried for it, I'd definitely want her in my corner!I think the initial defence lawyers did a great job and made a solid case, it seems Zellner has far more time and resources than those fellas though. And the original prosecutor Kratz is still on the Avery bandwagon after all this time, like he has an agenda.
Or maybe the documentary is just painting it that way.
Got to stay open minded.
The thing I just can’t get on with about Steven’s case is that near enough the whole department would surely have had to have been in on it for this amount of planted or innacurate evidence. Someone would’ve crumbled by now.
Spanna said:
One thing I’ll be fair about in the press conference, he was directly asked about the book and deflected it as unimportant and irrelevant to discuss during the presser.
The thing I just can’t get on with about Steven’s case is that near enough the whole department would surely have had to have been in on it for this amount of planted or innacurate evidence. Someone would’ve crumbled by now.
And then they cut to him schmoozing with the journo's and him stating his book was better than others - as you said, keep an open mind. Why did he call a presser of his own if it wasn't for publicity in one way or another... My opinion, of course, but I can't see any other reason.The thing I just can’t get on with about Steven’s case is that near enough the whole department would surely have had to have been in on it for this amount of planted or innacurate evidence. Someone would’ve crumbled by now.
I'm on the fence about Steven Avery but there is certainly enough doubt in my mind to be able to return a guilty verdict if I'm a juror. Brendan Dassey seems innocent to me based on various things i've read and also two seasons of this show.
Judging by whats been shown on the programme then i dont think they are guilty, especially given what the new lawyer has shown but then anything can be shown to prove something they want (though as she says, its about casting doubt in the jurys mind or what not).
However, i dont think theyll be released as it will cause too much of a s
t storm within the county and if the cops in this where 'corrupt' here, what other cases did they do wrong and they imprisoned the wrong person.
If they do, then they will be very very wealthy people
However, i dont think theyll be released as it will cause too much of a s
t storm within the county and if the cops in this where 'corrupt' here, what other cases did they do wrong and they imprisoned the wrong person.If they do, then they will be very very wealthy people
lemmingjames said:
Judging by whats been shown on the programme then i dont think they are guilty, especially given what the new lawyer has shown but then anything can be shown to prove something they want (though as she says, its about casting doubt in the jurys mind or what not).
However, i dont think theyll be released as it will cause too much of a st storm within the county and if the cops in this where 'corrupt' here, what other cases did they do wrong and they imprisoned the wrong person.
If they do, then they will be very very wealthy people
Crossed my mind, too. Surely it would open up all sorts of appeals based on new case law? I am a lay person though, as Kratz would say However, i dont think theyll be released as it will cause too much of a s
t storm within the county and if the cops in this where 'corrupt' here, what other cases did they do wrong and they imprisoned the wrong person.If they do, then they will be very very wealthy people
lemmingjames said:
Judging by whats been shown on the programme then i dont think they are guilty, especially given what the new lawyer has shown but then anything can be shown to prove something they want (though as she says, its about casting doubt in the jurys mind or what not).
However, i dont think theyll be released as it will cause too much of a st storm within the county and if the cops in this where 'corrupt' here, what other cases did they do wrong and they imprisoned the wrong person.
If they do, then they will be very very wealthy people
Avery should already be wealthy given his false rape imprisonment, the payment only stopped by Halbach’s disappearance and him being a suspect. I don’t know he wasn’t still paid out, at least he could help his family with those funds. However, i dont think theyll be released as it will cause too much of a s
t storm within the county and if the cops in this where 'corrupt' here, what other cases did they do wrong and they imprisoned the wrong person.If they do, then they will be very very wealthy people
jonm01 said:
Avery is guilty as hell. Good lawyers can throw doubt on everything though and that is how they get people off. Obviously helps that in this case the cops have clearly gone a bit to far to make sure they get their man.
I'm finding it hard to get on board with Season 2 to be honest. It strikes me as one of those things where to pull this off as a stitch up there's too many individuals who need to kept quiet, and with Season 1 having been such a runaway success there's a lot of money floating about. Netflix have clearly thrown a lot of cash at the new Avery lawyer to dream up any and all areas of doubt, but it all strikes me as very academic.
My theory?
Bobby did it, cops found the car and honestly thought it had to be Steve, so made sure the evidence really pointed to him, as it also helped get them out of the 37m payout.
The cops now don't really believe he did it, but don't have any other option other than doubling down and making sure he never gets out.
Brendan had nothing to do with anything, he's just a suggestible idiot
Bobby did it, cops found the car and honestly thought it had to be Steve, so made sure the evidence really pointed to him, as it also helped get them out of the 37m payout.
The cops now don't really believe he did it, but don't have any other option other than doubling down and making sure he never gets out.
Brendan had nothing to do with anything, he's just a suggestible idiot
Spanna said:
The thing I just can’t get on with about Steven’s case is that near enough the whole department would surely have had to have been in on it for this amount of planted or innacurate evidence. Someone would’ve crumbled by now.
It could have been a gradual thing.'Great, we know who did it'.
'We know how crafty those defence lawyers are, lets improve the evidence so he doesn't get off'
'Some people really think he didn't do it, drastic action required'
'If they find out we planted evidence not only will he get off but the department will be embarrassed'
Not unusual for a whole department to work together to protect the department. It seems to have happened in the Amanda Knox case and goes back as far as the Dreyfuss affair. Groupthink essentially rather than conspiracy.
Steven Avery is undoubtedly an extremely unpleasant individual. I suspect the police have good reason to think he's guilty of previous rapes or even murders that they were never able to charge him with, and the investigation moved too quickly to an attempt to build a case.
I'm still on the fence about his guilt, the apparent concession from witnesses that Teresa was seen leaving his property does make me wonder.
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff