Also,

When did I defend Kratz? thats a ****ing lie.

Seen that this morning its a Classic...

Lol, ya oski and I didn't have this conversation lost..

the sad part is that it look better than the real one

^^Classic Fraley.. lol

I'll Give you this one fraley, at no time have I seen you defend this POS.

Gotta laugh at the Mantiomoc3 the last 50/60 posts You guys need to up your're game.


#TheChiefThemisstress&TheGimp

You know I fully believe that BD will get released at some point in the near future & tbh I.ve tried to look at the positive aspect of BD's case & lets face it he wasin't going to have a great life on the outside if this did not happen to him.
So he gets a bit of education inside, prob meets a few friends(The decent corrections officers ect) gets some routine in his life & peace of mind in that he has no bills.

When he gets released he's going to be quite a celeb, may get some money of the state(if not there is going to be some gofundme ACC set up plus Talk shows ect) & gonna get more action than all the peeps ITT. :/
Can't wait to see Kratz's face when BD is Balling it up with the ShowGirls from wrestlemania

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=ho...4GK8eyjXqoM%3A

Which makes it strange that you are arguing with another poster about the meaning of the scene that "doesn't even exist."

Good one.

As to Poorskillz, I am not going to apologize for understanding from my watching of the documentary that the blood vial was not important due to its physical condition - in all cases, the blood inside had to be connected to the blood evidence in the car. By virtue of the improper seal, access was already established.

Poorskillz also does not seem to understand that a practicing attorney may understand things better than a layperson. I am not going to speak to the filmmaker's intent on this particular point, but I do understand she is an attorney (or at least trained as one) as well. Perhaps in her mind, the point was conveyed. Who knows?

In any event, I had a particular understanding of what that all meant from the doc. and I am not the only one.

I also am not sure how this issue is even relevant to the issue of whether SA got a fair trial. I mean, it would if the decision to grant a new trial was based on a viewership poll, but its not.

You forgot to include this excellent quote in that discussion:

which ironically describes Oski perfectly - he watched the doc. with such extreme bias that he chose to make up portions that did fit his agenda!

Also, the scene is not in there - Oski's a lying moron.

You mean the scene that was identified by another poster? Okay.

I am sorry you were so badly tricked by those sneaky filmmakers. I guess you were worried sick that the "hole in the vial" would dash your dreams that Lenk is an honest investigator.

No sir, I remember the scene that they are talking about. I remember them saying something about the fbi coming up with a dishonest test. I do not however, remember the scene you are talking about and it apparently doesnt exist. This is ironic because you proceeded to make judgement calls about me because I didn't remember this scene.

Poorskills, Did colborn admit in court that he was a Customer at the Avery's because he liked to fix old cars?

Why would AC use the Avery yard for spares when the under sheriff has a yard?

Hmm I wonder if the averys have a record for AC before SA got released.

No wonder he lost the vote.

I'm grunching the hell out of this thread and am only on episode 4, but wow, just, holy ****ing **** wow...

I assume we're past the point of spoilers but I'll hide them anyhow:

Way past spoilers here.

In that case,

HOLY ****ING ****!

AKA "Damn Fine Police Work" - fruit snacks.

Making a Murderer Transcripts

I'm sure this is what PoorSkills uses to argue his absolutely useless points. Just so you guys are on the same page, I've provided a link to the entire docuseries transcript so you can see what episode and when exactly Brendan Dassey said "yeah" or anything else you want to confirm was said or not said or was mistaken from a later interview or w/e.

The only people who need to read transcripts are appeals courts and their new lawyers. The jury didn't read the transcripts only a few selected excerpts.

Acting like the transcripts are an accurate record of what the jury understood is to not understand the process but why should I expect anything different from poorskillz.

How are we supposed to know what actually stuck in the mind of the jury? We can't. The transcripts shows what they actually heard during the trial. Which parts they found reliable/convincing is up for discussion.

This.

Markksman is a clown, and his last statement might be the most clown thing he's said yet lol.

Markksman (just like oski) just wants to be able to still feel knowledgeable on the case without having done any research, as he's used up all his "reasonsble doubt" essays.

Markksman is like a bad live player - "The transcripts are for nerds, I don't need all that useless data. I can feel when a trial is unfair by staring into Kratz's soul."

This isn't Other Other Transcripts. Also, I don't need to do research to know Michael Moore/Ken Kratz/Fraley are full of ****.

I did research, and TheJacob is full of ****.

You guys can keep purposefully living in ignorance (the trial transcripts don't matter!) and cry about how unfair Avery's trial was and how he wasn't proven guilty... but you're wrong...

The bolded part is true. this is technically a thread about the tv show making a murderer, since the tv show is documenting a real event, I think it is completely on topic to discuss the real event.

As for you needing to look into the information being provided to you to determine if we are full of ****. Yes you do. If you don't care, that is a completely different thing.

You got me. I think Ed Edwards framed him and the cops helped cover it up.

In actuality I thought it was possible he was innocent after watching a biased documentary and now believe he is likely guilty.

And if you want to believe that, that's fine.

It's not based on the facts though, and you're wrong when you say fraley is full of ****.