Thetownend.com

Anyone watched this on Netflix?

Have found it really interesting to see what lengths the state will go to convict a man.

Saying that, I think Avery is guilty and the state just wanted to convince the jury further 

We've been watching at least 2 episodes a night for the past few nights... Down to the last 2 tonight.

My wife's American but from New York City... It's a world away from small-town Wisconsin.

It's so scary what happened to him.

A brilliant watch so far...

.. He's never guilty... Completely set up...

I don't think he's guilty. It's fair that some people do but unanimously and beyond reasonable doubt? That shocked me.

I've read about the evidence apparently omitted in the documentary and can see how that'd be persuasive, but it still doesn't change the terrible way the investigation was carried out. The way Brendan was interrogated, for example. Always suspected there was something dodgy about that prosecutor too, nice chat up lines he had!

...go on...

Just watched the 1st ep. Its OK, i'm assuming its going to get more intense as it goes on.

They didn't show a lot of the prosecution evidence, but a lot of it seems fairly circumstantial

They also left out a lot more defence evidence

http://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/40dquo/prodefense_information_that_was_left_out_of_mam/

You'll see!

Aside from that though he seemed like a bit of a tool, for want of a better word? If jurors (and others) have come to their own conclusions of guilt based on evidence, then fair enough, I suppose, but if they were based on his rebuttals of the defence's case - as shown - they must have picked the thickest 12 people in the U.S. (Which would take some doing)

Two of the jurors had very close links to the sheriffs department, i reckon they bullied the rest into saying guilty - especially when the majority initially thought him innocent

There's enough reasonable doubt there to acquit. That's my conclusion.

Watched two episodes and i dont really see what the fuss is about. Seems very dragged out to me.

I've only watched the first two episodes, and it's clearly just getting started. They could hardly skim over such an important background story that's obviously going to be integral to what happened.

So far it looks like he did it...

Some fascinating stuff there!

Yeah, I think it was brought up by one of the defence on the doc actually (not that the jurors had links, but that there was a bit of a 12 angry men thing going on.)

I'm glad this series has got so much publicity, tbh. Without wanting to sound like a hipster, I've been in contact with a fair few prisoners in the states (and the organisations that support them) and when you tell people they're innocent they say "oh, I'm sure they all say that." That people even in this country are so reluctant to accept there may be some doubt (even with a unanimous conviction) is worrying, so stuff like this can only be a good thing.

Watched the whole thing yesterday , there are certainly some very strange goings on that may have been dubiously planted etc but I am still not sure that he did not do it.

To me it just seems like there would be too much evidence to plant for it to not be him.

Also, some of the evidence missed out included:
- sweat on the hood of the car (can they extract his sweat?)
- the bullet "found" was from his gun
- he supposedly sexually assaulted family members
- harassing of halbach (her number was dialled by him 3 times on the day, twice it was from a withheld number)

His nephew seemed to know too much about what happened and I can't imagine him being able to recall everything from the news bulletins... This is a guy who didn't know what inconsistent meant.

Being in prison for a crime he didn't commit for 18 years would have led to a lot of resentment from a man not so innocent in the first place.

Oh and how did avery get found innocent for burning the body but Dassey did?

Do you have more than reasonable doubt?

The way the whole thing was run, I find it difficult to see how anyone can think him guilty or innocent. The worst thing for me in a lot of ways was the treatment and conviction of Brendan. How that can be acceptable with an obviously mentally challenged minor is beyond me, especially when it's all there to be seen and doesn't require a conspiracy theory. Plus, for all the wailing from his mother, why the fuck didn't she sit in those interviews?

She said on at least one occasion she tried but they wouldn't let her. Not sure how true that is, but you can imagine her not knowing what to believe or what was best. At the end of the day most people aren't overly familiar with the system and how it works when your loved one is accused of murder.

You're right though, the treatment of Brendan was appalling. I am an anti death penalty advocate, and I know people will disagree with that, but I've conversed with people who've had similar or worse cognitive abilities and have ended up dead because they've "confessed" like he did. I can't see how anyone could be happy with that.

Fair point. I think I'd forgotten she said that because they later mentioned she'd declined the opportunity. She didn't seem like someone to take no for an answer, but I agree she would have been unlikely to know her rights.

How they could interview him without counsel present is also pretty unbelievable, not that his first lawyer would have done much good. And besides, the whole thing is there on video and yet the police, prosecutors, and family of the victim are all happy with it becuase it gives them what they want?

It also made me think of cases I've read about of people on death row, or who'd already been executed. Such a terrible system.

It does seem a bit odd to have the original judges looking at the initial appeals.
As others have said, it seems very strange these chaps will spend their best years behind bars.

Finished watching it today.
I think there is reasonable doubt at the very least.
Was a good watch regardless.

Anyone listened to serial?

I watched another documentary on Netflix called the Central Park 5 which had similar connotations to this.

It does make the American police/detectives look very lazy in just picking up petty criminals and forcing confessions out of them. (I'm sure not ALL police do this)

Love that documentary! They all sound incredibly stoic considering what they've been through.
While I realise not every investigation is that bad, this is a country that has the death penalty..

The other one that springs to mind is West Memphis when the innocent prisoners come to some kind of deal whereby they admit they are 'guilty' to be free from prison after 20 years or so, again based on nothing circumstantial apart from forced confessions. The law can be odd sometimes!

Have all you other amateur detectives watched The Jinx?

Yep.
Amazing stuff

Just finished it. Very good it was too.

Didn't see this first time around. Yes, it's V good. Annoying that Koenig focused on series 2 instead of recent happenings with series 1 material
(that doesn't give the game away does it?)

It would be interesting to hear her take on it.
There's Undisclosed (http://undisclosed-podcast.com/) if you're hankering for more material but I haven't listened to that yet.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/37327396/making-a-murderers-brendan-dassey-may-not-get-out-of-prison-after-all

Urgh