Wait a second, the father of a Manitowoc County Deputy was a juror in SA's trial?

Yep.

The defense were well aware, and probably could have struck him for cause, but chose not to.

http://onmilwaukee.com/movies/articl...volunteer.html

Thanks for pointing to a site citing already outdated info that is clearly an anti-Steven Avery campaign filled with ridiculously idiotic "facts".

The fact that someone made this site and called it thestevenaverycase.com just goes to show you how ridiculous this case is. The evidence should speak for itself. You should not have to create a website filled with half truths and conjecture to back up an absolutely ludicrous decision by a tainted jury.

As stated by Strang and Buting in multiple interviews, They could not have just struck him for cause, that's not how jury selection works. It also goes to show you how stacked against avery this jury was since he was left on and the defense used all their allowable strikes to remove jurors they deemed WORSE than this guy.

Thanks for directing me to the story though, it reminded me that not only was his son a sheriff's deputy, but he was a "very active" volunteer. He was so active he had his own sheriff's dept. squad car.

Oh boy, skills is back.

Yeah, but it's less than a strong return. Not sure why he's so off his game. I guess there's only so much you can say or do when trying to justify Manitowoc County's actions before you start to look desperate.

“When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.”

Lol at saying the documentary wasn't biased.

When one side (the defence) agrees to co-operate with he filmmakers, and the other side (the prosecution) doesn't, it's going to come out biased no matter what.

They approached the prosecution and were rebuffed.

They can only piece together what they filmed.

I'm in the undecided whether or not he's guilt camp. He certainly could be. I've read a lot on here and Reddit and other sources. I read a lot of BD's transcripts.

Obviously stuff was left out of the documentary, I still think they did a fair enough job piecing together what they did.

It's because the prosecution realized what the filmmakers goals were and cooperating would almost surely be spun to make them look even worse then if they did nothing. If they wanted to make a non biased documentary they wouldn't be including all of those families scenes. Like they may try to be non biased with the court room scenes, but all of the scenes outside the courtroom serve the sole purpose of sympathizing with the Avery family.

It's an incredibly biased documentary with the sole aim of convincing the viewer that Avery is innocent. If their sole goal was to convince the viewer that he didn't get a fair trial then they wouldn't need to include all of the other scenes.

I enjoyed the doc, and it's a riveting tale. But don't lie to yourself and say the documentary wasn't leading you to believe a certain conclusion.


Edit: I do think they did a semi fair job of all the courtroom scenes, but the non court room scenes were making you view the courtroom scenes differently then if you were objective. Not to mention I saw a thing on reddit about how colburns testimony om the stand had repeated reaction shots.

I mean. They could have named the documentary anything neutral. Stephen Avery v Manitiwoc County. The Murder of Theresa Halbach. Obviously these are bad, but you get the point.

But they named it Making a Murderer. LOL at thinking any doc with that title isnt going to be biased. This directly concludes one of two things: 1. That he is innocent and was framed. 2. That a 18 year false imprisonment lead a guy to become mentally unstable and murder someone. Only one of them was ever brought up in the doc.

That's the main takeaway from it for me. Avery's lawyers were in such agony over the justice system that you really got the sense that it's even worse than we could imagine. Total failure.

Thank you! Finally some sensibility versus this sham.

The makers set out to show what is wrong with the 'justice' system in general and succeeded.
They are on record saying they don't know if he is innocent or guilty.
Did you not see things that are clearly wrong regardless of Avery's guilt in the murder case?
Brendan seems very much innocent or at least not guilty beyond reasonable doubt, don't you agree?

WAT?

Schulz is blaming the film makers for this? These are things the prosecution team failed to dig into.

It's almost as if no one knows the answers to those basic questions except the murderer. If we did, there would be no arguments. The answers or the determination of those answers to the basic questions seems to be overly complicated by the situation.

The piece isn't bad and it does bring up some clear issues with the movie. The goal of the film isn't meant to be unbiased and I don't think they presented it in that way. I think man viewers, myself included, would have preferred it to be unbiased but I'm guessing it would have made for much less viewers and much less controversy.

I don't, by any means, agree with a pardon for SA. All I want is a new trial with an unbiased judge/jury for SA and BD. I want other people to be investigated and I want the sheriff's department to be audited and potentially reprimanded for there misgivings. The only thing I really want is fairness. SA could be easily put back in prison for the murder with another trial and I'd be fine with that if the grounds of which he is being prosecuted are fair and unbiased. I don't think SA is a great person by any means and is capable of committing the crime. With that being said, nothing about the investigation or the evidence makes any logical sense. Hopefully there are people smarter than I that can help determine what really happened (the basic questions) and put whoever is responsible for this tragedy behind bars. Likewise, if the Sheriffs overstepped their bounds, I want them to be punished.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/20...dead-certainty

I thought the last statement was proven to be false.

It's false that they found (non-blood) DNA under the hood, or that it would be impossible to plant?

I believe it's true and is significant because her battery was disconnected.

I don't really care what they say, they spent 10 hours telling the story that Avery is innocent and then named the series making a murderer. They obviously don't know either way because only the real killer(s) and/or Steven Avery know the truth(I'm confused as to what they are supposed to say other than they don't know).

I am on record itt saying this shows monumental failure in the criminal justice system, I agree with that and the documentary did a good job showing that. But to think they didn't want to also lead the viewer into thinking he was innocent is silly. Just look at the title.

It's a biased doc. It's a great doc. They are not mutually exclusive.

I think Steven Avery is incompetent at everything in his life. From school, being a parent, to a husband/boyfriend, or dealing with the law. His whole entire being is unkempt.

But he magically turns into an expert at meticulously scrubbing a violent crime scene for a few days in the middle of this completely inept life. Where the prosecution can't even make up their mind where anything really happened?

Nobody innocent would ever confess to a crime, right?


***In August 2006, a 41-year-old elementary school teacher, John Mark Karr, falsely confessed to murdering JonBenét. At that time, Karr was being held on child pornography charges which originated in Sonoma County, California.

Authorities tracked Karr down by using the Internet after emails were sent regarding the case to Michael Tracey, a journalism professor at the University of Colorado.[31] Karr was arrested in Bangkok, Thailand, on August 15, 2006, and confessed to killing JonBenét. He claimed that he had drugged her and sexually assaulted her but also claimed that her death was an accident.[32] Investigators and legal authorities distrusted Karr's confession, as he provided only basic facts that were publicly known and failed to provide any convincing details. His claim of drugging JonBenét was also distrusted because no drugs were found in her body during the autopsy.[33]

DNA samples taken from Karr did not match DNA found on JonBenét's body. Later that month, prosecutors announced that no charges would be filed against Karr for the murder.[34][35][36] According to CNN, "Authorities also said they did not find any evidence linking [Karr] to the crime scene."[37] The press coverage of Karr's false confession was described as a media frenzy.[38][39][40][41]

Karr was subsequently released from the child pornography charges.[42]***

The dna analysis who collected the skin cells from the hood latch (as you cannot get DNA from sweat) was wearing the SAME gloves that HE used to perform tests on OTHER objects collected from the SA property. FACT
The bullet THAT had TH DNA was also compromised by the DNA analysis & she had SA objects all over her work space AND was supposed to be showing new workers how she done her JOB.
The bones found on the Avery property were also compromised by the MCPD/Calumet officers when the fire pit was disturbed, same with the burn barrel & the quarry bones.
.22 rifle was NOT the murder weapon due to NO BLOOD BLOWBACK OR OTHERWISE, no DNA,hair or sweat that belonged to SA.
NEVER has there been ANY DNA of TH EVER been found on/in SA property or ON the avery YARD. Since the bullet DNA should have been ruled inadmissible.
Judge ruled the phone records inadmissible.

That leaves the CAR & BD's statement & the MEDIA BIAS plus Kratz.

Oh & the failed attempts of CALUMET COUNTY to find a bullet & car keys that I left out above but Kratz said that himself" even if you believe the key was planted", so to the rescue was Lenk(BULLET,KEYS)

So I believe that the source of the NY article has a few facts wrong. And has come to a biased conclusion.

1 Other FACT is that the SAME DNA analysis who messed up the bullet also performed the tests on the HAIR that convicted SA in the 1st trial that got him 18yrs, and said it was a MATCH.WTF is.......... 100% Fact.

Yeah, Karr seems like your average adult not having mental health issues.