ADVERTISEMENT

Making a Murderer

The thing that gets me about the case is if Avery didn't kill her then who did? If you think Avery didn't kill her then you have to believe either the police killed her just to frame him(which would be ASTRONOMICAL in the history of U.S. law enforcement. Not just that they killed her but did it JUST to frame someone else) or you believe a 3rd party did it. And if you believe a 3rd party did it...that 3rd party would have brought her burnt remains to his burn pit(why would someone take that chance) AND then the cops say "damn, this is a good time to frame Avery"...

But then again...why would Avery the Dope put her SUV on HIS property if he did it?? Other than maybe to have a trophy from the crime.

After I initally watched it I thought he was innocent, in fact I was disappointed in the ending. But after thinking about it for awhile I think he did it & the cops saw an opportunity to plant some evidence to make sure he was found guilty.
It's really the only scenario that makes some sort of sense.

One more thing...if you believe the cops killed her to frame Avery why would they take that chance?? If they were so determined to have Avery "done away with" why not just kill HIM?!?!

I agree, Lenk & Coburn are dirty and played a big part in this mess in some manner. I think it was planting evidence. Could one or both of them have a part in her death? Possibly. But that's taking hatred for Avery to an EXTREME level.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: FSUTribe76
One more thing...if you believe the cops killed her to frame Avery why would they take that chance?? If they were so determined to have Avery "done away with" why not just kill HIM?!?!

I agree, Lenk & Coburn are dirty and played a big part in this mess in some manner. I think it was planting evidence. Could one or both of them have a part in her death? Possibly. But that's taking hatred for Avery to an EXTREME level.

I don't think anyone thinks the police killed her. It is more like they saw an opportunity and gleefully ran with it as fast and hard as they could. They were going to make sure this nightmare went away including on one end having officers planted evidence and on the other side manipulating a learning disabled 16 yo into making a story. They had no interest in finding out someone else did it the moment she disappeared and he was linked.
 
One more thing...if you believe the cops killed her to frame Avery why would they take that chance?? If they were so determined to have Avery "done away with" why not just kill HIM?!?!

I agree, Lenk & Coburn are dirty and played a big part in this mess in some manner. I think it was planting evidence. Could one or both of them have a part in her death? Possibly. But that's taking hatred for Avery to an EXTREME level.

The more plausible explanation is that the Manitowoc folks found the vehicle and her body days before they said they did, enabling them to plant the blood, vehicle, and burn the body.
 
I don't think anyone thinks the police killed her. It is more like they saw an opportunity and gleefully ran with it as fast and hard as they could. They were going to make sure this nightmare went away including on one end having officers planted evidence and on the other side manipulating a learning disabled 16 yo into making a story. They had no interest in finding out someone else did it the moment she disappeared and he was linked.

"I don't think anyone thinks the police killed her"

While watching the series I certainly thought it was possible someone with the police had some connection to her death.

If someone else other than Avery or the police did kill her can you imagine the thoughts going through THAT guy's head.
"Hmmmmmm....so I kill this girl, dumped her and her SUV somewhere, then miraculously the SUV ends up at Averys house with his DNA all over it, burnt bones in the fire pit, bullet fragments etc.."
I mean, even for a killer, that has to be a tremendous amount of "what the hell is going on here".
Even if this killer brought the SUV and her bones to Avery's how did he get Averys DNA?
Still, the cops would most likely have to plant that. So that leads me back again to what the hell can this 3rd party killer be thinking to this day??? Other than the obvious "I got away with it"
 
Last edited:
"I don't think anyone thinks the police killed her"

While watching the series I certainly thought it was possible someone with the police had some connection to her death.

If someone else other than Avery or the police did kill her can you imagine the thoughts going through THAT guy's head.
"Hmmmmmm....so I kill this girl, dumped her and her SUV somewhere, then miraculously the SUV ends up at Averys house with his DNA all over it, burnt bones in the fire pit, bullet fragments etc.."
I mean, even for a killer, that has to be a tremendous amount of "what the hell is going on here".
Even if this killer brought the SUV and her bones to Avery's how did he get Averys DNA?
Still, the cops would most likely have to plant that. So that leads me back again to what the hell can this 3rd party killer be thinking to this day??? Other than the obvious "I got away with it"

That getting Steve Avery was more important than catching the real killer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dmm5157
It was actually 2005. I was texting by then, but it was old school T9 style texting at that point.

Still, it wasn't like it is now.
For some reason I thought it was 03. Either way, texting back then was nothing like it is now and no one had internet on their phones. Cell phones back then were still almost entirely used for calling. Which also brings up the weird issue with the voicemails and why some had been deleted. I can't fathom a scenario in which Steven Avery is smart enough to figure out her voicemail password and go into them to delete incriminating evidence.
 
I'm on episode 6 and my wife is an attorney, ableit not a criminal attorney, agrees he could have done it but also, may not have done it. We were surprised that the judge allowed so much evidence that should have been tossed like the FBI test. How reliable was the test? How many times had it been performed by the person who completed the test? How many false positives occurred during those tests?

How did Brendan's attorney allow him to be questioned with no representation? How was anything he said admissible with all of the changing stories and the obvious spoon fed story?

All the omitted documentary evidence paints Avery as one very creepy dude, but not one that committed the crime. I feel the family is hated in the community and probably are really awful people. I believe someone in that family committed the crime but I'm not sure as to who, how, when, where.

Halbach was never shown to be killed in the garage or the house. In my mind there is too much reasonable doubt.
 
Finally got through the whole thing last night.

Documentary was obviously one sided, wish it was more well rounded. With that said... It's a serious WTF on the cops. They were obviously doing things both wrong and highly suspicious. It's also a crazy WTF on the prosecutor. How he could argue in one trial that a person was the sole person to do something, then in the next argue that there was a helper is beyond me. The investigation was clearly aimed at one person and I think the outcome would have been different had they looked at all possibilities. I'd fathom to guess one of avery's brothers did the crime which would lead to a high DNA match probability in that evidence and they had the motive.
 
The more plausible explanation is that the Manitowoc folks found the vehicle and her body days before they said they did, enabling them to plant the blood, vehicle, and burn the body.

This wouldn't surprise me, although I still doubt the cops burned the body.

I think he did it, the cops found the car/body/remains on site before, possibly on a tip from a source in the family they didn't want to expose, but overestimated how much public sympathy would be with Avery. I think their thinking was "Oh my God, this piece of s--- did it, and the public is never going to believe us after what has happened. It will be impossible to get a conviction on this guy." Plus add in some healthy doses of revenge, embarrassment over the rape incident, and just general arrogance. I think it's possible that Avery burned the body between the cops discovering it and the cops acknowledging they'd discovered it, further complicating the cops' plan.

And so I think they way overplayed their hand in stacking the evidence, to the point it actually calls their case into question.
 
Just finished it up today and holy shite, that was some crazy and compelling stuff. Still trying to wrap my head around it all and sort out what I think happened.

I do think there was clearly enough doubt raised that a guilty verdict was shocking.

I also watched Dear Zachary (based on the recs from this thread) and that shocked me even more so. Kind of crazy to go from feeling Avery should probably be free (based on reasonable doubt) to seeing what happened in Dear Zachary and thinking how it all should have been avoided by keeping her in prison.

My mind is jello at the moment. I'm going to go watch some football and decompress.
 
I don't know anything about it, but I saw a clip of the suspect in court and he has evil eyes. Always trust the eyes. Glad he's in prison.
 
  • Like
Reactions: grady327
Finished it today.

Brandon kid was guessing on what happened to her head before the cops told him she was shot. His "confession " and interrogation was unbelievable.

No one from Mantiwoc, especially Lenk/Colburn should have been Allowed ANYWHERE near this investigation with the lawsuit stuff going on. This should have never gone to trial based on that.

No DNA in the house when she is tied up and throat slit? Huh?

Colburn calling in the license plate is crazy, did jury just ignore it.

One question I have is , some pelvic bones were found at the quarry, but that location was never even mentioned during the DOC? How was that explained to be part of story.

Wild, I think another Avery did it, but cops pinned it on him. But reasonable doubt, for sure, guilty verdict makes no sense IMO.
 
Last edited:
I read, or was it part of the documentary, that most of the jurors thought not guilty before deliberation and a couple swayed the whole group to guilty
 
I don't know anything about it, but I saw a clip of the suspect in court and he has evil eyes. Always trust the eyes. Glad he's in prison.

simpsons-angry-villagers.jpg
 
I read, or was it part of the documentary, that most of the jurors thought not guilty before deliberation and a couple swayed the whole group to guilty

One juror (and it is part of the documentary) was adamant he was not guilty and very vocal but had to leave the very night deliberation started due to a car accident his step daughter had that night. He was replaced by a backup juror. Another unnamed juror who cast a guilty vote has since told the producers that they think he was not guilty but voted guilty because they were worried the same thing could happen to them as retribution by the county (that is a bombshell IMHO).
 
As a Chicago Bears fan, I had always assumed that Green Bay and surrounding areas were full of mentally challenged homicidal maniacs, and now thanks to Netflix, I know it is so much more than that.
 
blood-in-rav-4-near-ignition-key-ep-3-7-min.png
no way he killed her...... prosecution would have you believe that he cleaned every spec of her dna.... form the entire property..... but failed to destroy the key.... clean the blood from the car.... rake the bones out of the fire pit..... plus..... i cant get over that blood stain pattern on the ignition.... i'll be damned if it didnt look like two circular dots made by a q-tip.... with a little tail like a random paint brush stroke..... cant believe the defense didnt raise those questions....

that property could make tons off the traffic of macabre tourism.....
 
I don't know if he did it, but there is certainly enough reasonable doubt to not find him guilty. He has no motive and in fact he is on his way to $36 million so doing it is the dumbest thing anyone has ever done. There is no blood to substantiate the scene that the kid talks about and using him is deplorable to begin with,the kid has the brains of a piece of hard candy. He would have admitted to killing Kenned if the detectives pushed him hard enough. He thought he was going home to play Nintendo that night.

Not liking the Avery family because they are backwoods trash does not have anything to do with guilt or innocence. The prosecutor turned out to be a sex addicted dirtball too, is he a suspect?
 
I don't know if he did it, but there is certainly enough reasonable doubt to not find him guilty. He has no motive and in fact he is on his way to $36 million so doing it is the dumbest thing anyone has ever done. There is no blood to substantiate the scene that the kid talks about and using him is deplorable to begin with,the kid has the brains of a piece of hard candy. He would have admitted to killing Kenned if the detectives pushed him hard enough. He thought he was going home to play Nintendo that night.

Not liking the Avery family because they are backwoods trash does not have anything to do with guilt or innocence. The prosecutor turned out to be a sex addicted dirtball too, is he a suspect?

Not trying to nitpick, as I think there was serious law enforcement misconduct here, but the $36 million was as likely to be a motive as to be a motive to not do anything.

The obvious scenario is he does something stupid in passion/anger, say an assault of some kind, that wasn't exactly premeditated, and it escalated. He might have "as little as" pulled out his willie at her. She responds badly, threatens to go public, he throws a punch and gives her a black eye, and all of a sudden he's looking at this lady standing between him and $36M if she's allowed to walk out that door.

It's really not that hard to envision the scenario. Being falsely convicted and later exonerated did not make this guy an angel, nor did it make him intelligent. He didn't exactly have a history of appropriate behavior or sound decision making, and it could be argued that the ordeal actually boosted his ego/sense of invulnerability. He's not a smart guy, he's not well behaved, and I think it would be a mistake to project that all of a sudden he is because he was a victim of an unfair frame up. All you have to assume to see the motive is believe he's capable of one very poorly thought out advance that took a bad turn.
 
Steven isn't much brighter than his nephew, but a little more mature and wise. He led a life of crime up to the false rape conviction. But you cant dismiss him running his cousin off the road and wanking it in public. Then there's the whole cat incident. I have known some crazy out there dumb ass people, but it takes a special kind of crazy to light your own cat or the neighbors on fire. The one sided documentary really down played his previous troubles, accusations against him and down played his sociopathic tendencies to just him being young and dumb. The guy did bad and perverted stuff before, and I believe again with the girl that turned up murdered.

There is more info you can read about this case and entire situation than what Netflix shows. He previously made the girl uncomfortable answering the door in a towel, used *67 to block her from seeing he called, had a sex swing in his trailer they fail to mention, said sex swing was described while in prison to other cons, with talk of using it to rape and torture.

Now as a another poster suggested look at his eyes. He looks like an evil dude. Does that make him guilty? Nope! But factor that in with all the evidence and back stories you didn't see on the documentary, and I believe he's guilty. I believe his slow dumb nephew is guilty too. He changed his story so many times even to his mother. Was he coerced? Yes. Does that mean he's innocent? No.

His ex fiancée has recanted and says she was threatened by him and talked about the times he had to be removed from her for periods of time due to abuse.

Now to the positives for the documentary. There is obvious blatant evidence tampering, corruption and cover ups taking place in that department. There is also the creepy ex boyfriend of the victim and her brother that come off as strange with the whole cell phone issue. And the search party stuff. I believe law enforcement and the fore mentioned brother and boyfriend conspired with law enforcement to some degree. This was probably done to make sure they got their man after being coerced by law enforcement. Should he be acquitted? Yes. Am I glad he wasn't? Yes

All in all I believe Steven Avery is a sociopath who thought he would never be convicted after what had transpired years before. I think he is an egomaniac and above the law. I also think that his urge to hurt, rape or even kill would have happened even without the previous positive notoriety. All JMHO of course.

One last thing. The nephew's own mother basically coerces her son while on recorded jail phones into saying different scenarios on multiple occasions. And now all the siblings have turned on Steven or Steven has turned on them accusing them of the murder.
 
Last edited:
blood-in-rav-4-near-ignition-key-ep-3-7-min.png
no way he killed her...... prosecution would have you believe that he cleaned every spec of her dna.... form the entire property..... but failed to destroy the key.... clean the blood from the car.... rake the bones out of the fire pit..... plus..... i cant get over that blood stain pattern on the ignition.... i'll be damned if it didnt look like two circular dots made by a q-tip.... with a little tail like a random paint brush stroke..... cant believe the defense didnt raise those questions....

that property could make tons off the traffic of macabre tourism.....
These are really good points, BUT they don't mean he didn't do it. It simply means cops planted evidence to get a conviction. That's the boat I'm in at the end of the day. He probably did it, but the cops took it upon themselves to make sure they got a conviction by planting the blood and key.
 
  • Like
Reactions: grady327
There is more info you can read about this case and entire situation than what Netflix shows. He previously made the girl uncomfortable answering the door in a towel, used *67 to block her from seeing he called, had a sex swing in his trailer they fail to mention, said sex swing was described while in prison to other cons, with talk of using it to rape and torture.

Investigation Discovery is airing a 1 hour episode on Avery, Saturday at 9:00 PM. The commercial claims "new evidence".........
 
These are really good points, BUT they don't mean he didn't do it. It simply means cops planted evidence to get a conviction. That's the boat I'm in at the end of the day. He probably did it, but the cops took it upon themselves to make sure they got a conviction by planting the blood and key.

Yep, that's where I am. And even thinking he did it, I would have voted not guilty based on what was presented on trial (as presented in the documentary + what was apparently withheld from the doc).
 
Do any of you know where the defense was going with the deleted phone messages? They showed that the brother or ex deleted something but there had to be some relevance. As far as I can tell Steven has only pointed to four of his family members as possible other suspects (At a later time of course). Why bring up the deleted phone messages in the first trial?
 
Do any of you know where the defense was going with the deleted phone messages? They showed that the brother or ex deleted something but there had to be some relevance. As far as I can tell Steven has only pointed to four of his family members as possible other suspects (At a later time of course). Why bring up the deleted phone messages in the first trial?

To show that a 3rd party could have have been the murderer because they could have deleted something incriminating. I think the judge disallowed the defense from pointing fingers directly at a 3rd party unless there was some hardcore evidence.
 
To show that a 3rd party could have have been the murderer because they could have deleted something incriminating. I think the judge disallowed the defense from pointing fingers directly at a 3rd party unless there was some hardcore evidence.

Right but it seems like they specifically went after the ex bf and brother for some reason. But the later documents from one of his appeals only has Steven listing family members and not either of those two guys as possible suspects. I'm just wondering if they were just throwing crap at the wall hoping it would stick or if they had more evidence on the brother or ex boyfriend. I'm not aware of anything else but it is a little curious to why they deleted voice messages.
 
After watching the series and fact checking some of it, I was left both horrified at our judicial system, and saddened by the willful ignorance of a few jurors. As mentioned the jury started with a majority not guilty and a few swayed the meek.

Sure Avery may have done it, but it was as pathetic a prosecutors attempt, in both court cases. Honestly embrassing legal and police work of historic proportions.

I was left with a few impressions:

The corruption in Wisconsin goes much higher than this show dared. I find it implausible that higher ups would tolerare the buffonery of the Monotowac circus over and over if not in on it. Why? And who?

A few police I absolutely think not only planted evidence but either knew who the real killer was, or were the real killers. I know dozens of cops, all great people, that crew in WI didnt act like cops and is clearly the result of hiring unethical people to act like cops, its a disgrace and really a sociopathic agency funded by tax dollars. I would not live in that county.

Would like to know more about the brother in law and Brendans brother, both came off exceedingly creepy.

I expect the details are far from over turning up. Should be fascinating what turns up over time.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: grady327
Brendan's brother did come off a bit angry at Steven. Or off to some degree. Kooter, what do you think about the brother and ex boyfriend of the victim?
 
grady327,
They seemed way too eager to blame and implicate Avery, and the show never went into why that was. Brendans brother also came off to me as a potentially manipulative mastermind compared to simpleton Brendan. Doesnt mean he did anything wrong but his acvounts didnt fit the timeline and he seemed too smart for thst to be a mistake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: grady327
grady327,
They seemed way too eager to blame and implicate Avery, and the show never went into why that was. Brendans brother also came off to me as a potentially manipulative mastermind compared to simpleton Brendan. Doesnt mean he did anything wrong but his acvounts didnt fit the timeline and he seemed too smart for thst to be a mistake.

I believe they did go in to why they were eager to blame and implicate Avery. It started with the argument/fight he had with his female cousin (who was married to a Sherrif officer) back in 1985. He ran her off the road and pointed a gun at her so he (the officer and his buddies) had it out for him. Then, after being exonerated of the rape conviction... he was due a massive pay day that the county of Manitowac was on the hook for since their insurance (for those types of settlements) said they wouldn't be liable be user of the circumstances. So, that added to fuel to the fire that was already there.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT