Posted on 12/24/2015 5:28:10 AM PST by stylecouncilor
"Making a Murderer," Netflix's new true-crime documentary, is as unnerving as it is addictive, in part because it is so addictive.
Over the course of 10 hours. writers-directors Laura Ricciardi and Moira Demos tell the story of Steven Avery, a Wisconsin man who served 18 years for a sexual assault he did not commit before being exonerated by DNA evidence. Then, just as he prepared to sue the county and police department that had put him in jail in the first place, Avery was accused and later convicted of a horrific kidnapping and murder that he insists he did not commit.
With painstaking, and often painful, detail, "Making a Murderer" reconstructs how all of this came to pass. What emerges, at least from the four hours Netflix made available, is a disturbing portrait of tribal politics in small-town America and a chilling reminder that the criminal justice system has many more sides than scripted television's carefully curated tales of "law and order."
(Excerpt) Read more at charlotteobserver.com ...
ping
Question: was he actually exonerated or, as is much more common, was it just that enough new evidence was found to create reasonable doubt that would make a new trial unwinnable?
He was exonerated the first time after serving 18 years.
Also, are the documentarians claiming that his time in prison made him a murderer?
Because the guy held up a bar, assaulted a female relative, and deliberately set a cat on fire before he was convicted of the other assault.
He was one sick piece of work before that conviction.
Is there something ambiguous about, “was exonerated by DNA evidence”?
While philosophically in fave of the death penalty for some crimes, shit like this has convinced me that life in prison is often a better option.
Until law enforcement officials and prosecutors start going to prison for long periods of time for obstruction of justice and conspiring to violate the constitutional rights of accused persons, I would hesitate to sentence someone to death.
I think we’re on episode 4 or 5. I’m surprised you’re that deep in and thinking not-guilty so I’m really looking forward to watching more.
Not in this case. He really did not commit the crime of which he was committed and sent to prison for. It was a classic small-town railroading and the cops, prosecutor and judge were dirty as hell. They all got away with it too.
DNA can prove someone was present at a location, it cannot prove that he wasn't.
If you can prove someone else was present, it creates reasonable doubt.
It doesn't mean the first person is innocent: it simply means they are unconvictable.
To "exonerate" is to prove someone innocent - which DNA evidence alone rarely does.
Added it to my list...
I agree with your point generally speaking. In this instance the DNA is as close to definitive as possible because it positively identified another man who just so happened to be a known sexual predator who had attacked another woman on the same beach a few years earlier.
I highly recommend River on Netflix.
We drove by the Avery salvage yard once - pure evil coming from that place. Wouldn't let my husband stop the car.
As for Avery, I think so far, it's less clear. I do believe that evidence could be planted, but I can't imagine any other way the girl's body ended up in the fire pit, except by Avery. The whole thing is fishy, to be sure. The overall lack of evidence, except for the body is puzzling. As for Brendan's conversion, I regard that as pure fiction, coerced by lawyers on both sides. His first lawyer, Len Kachinsky, comes off as a total slimeball.
“He was one sick piece of work before that conviction.”
I do know that our justice system is supposed to pretty much ignore prior behavior...on the other hand, I do have trouble getting worked up about a beast like that spending most of his life in the cooler.
Prior behavior can, and should be, considered at sentencing.
I know the victim. She and her family were devastated when he was exonerated by the DNA. She and her husband are two wonderful people and she was wracked with guilt over having him spent 18 years in prison based on her testimony.
After he was charged with murder, she was victimized again because she felt like she may have been partially responsible for creating the monster who is Steven Avery. He was a bad guy before he went to prison for a crime he did not commit, he came out after 18 years even worse.
Nobody who I know from Manitowoc County has any doubts that he committed the murder.
I have watched a couple of episodes this morning; from what I am seeing, he was innocent of the rape he went to jail for.
I haven’t got into the episodes about the murder yet.
Innocent. There was a pubic hair on the rape victim from a known sexual assaulter. Nothing from Mr. Avery.
The railroading that went on; the coverup are despicable.
When people in power abuse it in such a way that someone suffers as this man did; they need to suffer the consequences they made their victim suffer. Time for some prison for some people in this story.
The body language from Eugene Kusche makes my skin crawl.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.