Author Topic: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]  (Read 3247 times)


Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #1 on: September 26, 2018, 05:23:57 PM »
https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2018/sep/25/making-a-murderer-to-return-for-a-second-season-in-october

Series 2 due.

Not sure it'll be as watchable this time, as s1 was a story that no one had really heard of. Now every second is big news.

Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #2 on: September 26, 2018, 07:49:46 PM »
Yeah, I was thinking the same. I managed to watch the first series without any knowledge of the outcome but have, like most I presume, kept checking on any subsequent updates.

FerriswheelBueller

  • Bautista with a drive, deep left-field!
    • I am antsy for baseball in the off-season.
Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #3 on: September 26, 2018, 08:16:16 PM »
I’m a bit suspicious of these things - Netflix was hardly going to make an explosive TV spectacle out of a case that was correctly prosecuted with all procedures followed. As a result, they have a bit of an unconscious bias towards sensationalizing the results so they may editorialize it more.

Maybe? I watched the first season and found it all a bit ghoulish tbh.

Replies From View

  • Rubbing linseed oil into the school cormorant.
  • Golden Member
  • *****
  • Gargoyles have milk bags.
Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #4 on: September 26, 2018, 09:13:37 PM »
I think they should put canned laughter on the second series.

Golden E. Pump

  • Basically Morris Day.
Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #5 on: September 27, 2018, 11:33:31 AM »
I hope Avery made everyone shit themselves in the prison cafeteria and they try to find out who done it.

Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #6 on: September 27, 2018, 12:31:32 PM »
He hasn't gone and not done another murder has he?

Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #7 on: October 22, 2018, 12:08:47 AM »
I’m a bit suspicious of these things - Netflix was hardly going to make an explosive TV spectacle out of a case that was correctly prosecuted with all procedures followed. As a result, they have a bit of an unconscious bias towards sensationalizing the results so they may editorialize it more.

Maybe? I watched the first season and found it all a bit ghoulish tbh.

I'm seven episodes into this new batch.

This series is a lot more evidence based, and based on what I've seen I'm happy he didn't do it. Having seen the first series, I found myself thinking he shouldn't have been convicted, though maybe he did do it, though I don't recall why. The new lawyer has gone about DESTROYING the previous evidence, making it quite clear that it was either planted, or tells a different story to what the prosecution would want it to, though I'm reading some stuff online that the documentary makers have been quite biased in their editing and there is stuff out there that contradicts the 'innocent' narrative they're trying to weave. Any idea what that might be?

FerriswheelBueller

  • Bautista with a drive, deep left-field!
    • I am antsy for baseball in the off-season.
Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #8 on: October 22, 2018, 12:30:08 AM »
Nothing really, but the staff must have been making choices about what to present and what not to present to the audience. I’d suggest the need to make something that resonates with people and creates social media buzz means they will (unconsciously or otherwise) lean towards “terrible miscarriage of justice” instead of a clear and concise statement of facts.

That may be complete cobblers, but that is my suspicion. And as I said, I found the first season a bit ghoulish (poor woman and her family, my god what in the fuck) so I’m not going to reward Netflix further by watching this.

BlodwynPig

  • R.I.P. The Waxwork René
Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #9 on: October 22, 2018, 03:54:50 AM »
Certainly Season 2 paints a picture of innocence. I just finished watching and if you take it on face value I don't understand anyone saying otherwise. I started reading comments and people decrying the documentary makers for being biased and sensationalist. But - it's all there in the body language and vocal tics - the coppers and lawyers and probably judges are bent as fuck. Bobby Dassey and Tadych are sick fuckers who may have done it. The ex-boyfriend is in on it. Shifty fuck.

"Yeh, but evidence"

Well, Kellner's done a pretty good job of fucking off any Avery evidence and giving reasonable room for doubt.

A traumatic trial for Avery's parents and Halbach's family.

Paging Biggy to come in and talk about flames.

Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #10 on: October 22, 2018, 10:18:32 AM »
Yeah, exactly. On face value all incriminating evidence has been dismantled as planted or supporting an alternative picture of her final moments.

I get that her alternative story may not carry all that much water, but it's not her job to prove the total guilt of another Denny suspect, rather than present a plausible story that doesn't involve Avery. From what I can tell, all the evidence does that. I read that they have cropped interviews, but recall her saying Avery never incriminated himself in interviews, so presumably maintained his innocence throughout, and Dassey's testimony is contradicted by the blood splatters in the car.

I get that there might be bias from the film makers, but find it hard to imagine a smoking gun existing that they have deliberately ignored. This series is essentially about his attorney constructing his case, so will inevitably be focused on this 'innocent' narrative. She's not going to present incriminating evidence, but from what I can see there is none left to use against him. The tests show that she didn't die in his garage, the splatter was caused by other means, his blood and the bullet were planted, the fire evidence can be torn apart, and it looks conceivable that she was killed on the neighbouring property and driven onto his, Dassey's testimony is shaky anyway, but isn't supported by the forensics, Avery passed the memory fingerprint thing. I just don't see what remains to incriminate him that can't be thrown into considerable doubt.

biggytitbo

  • WHAT ABOUT THE GODDAM JAFFA CAKES ASSWIPE
    • theunredacted
Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #11 on: October 22, 2018, 11:18:29 AM »
Not sure whether to bother watching this. I know Zellner's ever changing claims are absolutely ludicrous when presented against the real facts, but I also know how trivially easy it is for a documentary to manipulate the viewers into believing one thing through manipulation, distortion and selective use of facts. Exactly as they did in S1.


What I do know is he's never getting out ever, whilst the case is decided in a courtroom, where both side's evidence is giving equal scrutiny, rather than a tv documentary where they can weave whatever version of events they like.

Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #12 on: October 22, 2018, 11:42:15 AM »

Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #13 on: October 22, 2018, 11:47:18 AM »
It's annoying with biggy that the idea of a machine trying to protect itself totally works when it comes to the American government, the British army etc. but the legal system is 100% an enlightened, unbiased force, with no vested interest in not making itself look vulnerable by denying culpability, only when it comes to people named Steven Avery.

Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #14 on: October 22, 2018, 11:59:42 AM »
Go on, Biggy. I'm asking - what am I missing? My working is above as to why he seems innocent, but I'm reading that the film makers have been dishonest both from you and elsewhere but I'm not hearing how exactly.

biggytitbo

  • WHAT ABOUT THE GODDAM JAFFA CAKES ASSWIPE
    • theunredacted
Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #15 on: October 22, 2018, 12:06:19 PM »
It's annoying with biggy that the idea of a machine trying to protect itself totally works when it comes to the American government, the British army etc. but the legal system is 100% an enlightened, unbiased force, with no vested interest in not making itself look vulnerable by admitting culpability, only when it comes to people named Steven Avery.

Probably best to take it on a case by case basis, considering I have argued for a corrupt police and legal system in multiple other cases. Nor have I ever denied there was wrongdoing in this case.

The whole point with Avery is either he is incredibly guilty due to the vast overwhelming weight of the forensic and circumstantial evidence against him or he was the victim of the most elaborate and detailed frame up in criminal history. The problem with the latter proposition is it would have required a level of logistical control over the events and locations and a near supernatural insight into the thoughts and actions of those involved so off the scale in cunning and fiendishness I would struggle to attribute it to a comic book supervillain never mind the hick police featured in MaM.

Zelleners doing what any highly paid star lawyer does, she's throwing as much material at the wall as possible in the hope that something, anything, will stick. A 'documentary' based around her scattershot, ever changing gish gallop of nonsense is likely to be superficially convincing in the absence of someone properly challenging it (as would happen in a courtroom), that's the whole problem with these tv true crime things.

biggytitbo

  • WHAT ABOUT THE GODDAM JAFFA CAKES ASSWIPE
    • theunredacted
Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #16 on: October 22, 2018, 12:10:43 PM »
Go on, Biggy. I'm asking - what am I missing? My working is above as to why he seems innocent, but I'm reading that the film makers have been dishonest both from you and elsewhere but I'm not hearing how exactly.


I haven't watched it yet, I can only base it on Zellner's publicly stated claims. There's a thread on the reddit for making a murder with a list of the specific deceptions in the tv show though. It might be worth reading that for balance? Making a murder is essentially a trial where you only hear the defence case, hardly surprising it seems 'convincing' of his innocence.

BlodwynPig

  • R.I.P. The Waxwork René
Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #17 on: October 22, 2018, 02:51:28 PM »
Not sure whether to bother watching this. I know Zellner's ever changing claims are absolutely ludicrous when presented against the real facts, but I also know how trivially easy it is for a documentary to manipulate the viewers into believing one thing through manipulation, distortion and selective use of facts. Exactly as they did in S1.


What I do know is he's never getting out ever, whilst the case is decided in a courtroom, where both side's evidence is giving equal scrutiny, rather than a tv documentary where they can weave whatever version of events they like.

This is ludicrous Biggy Titbo PI.

BlodwynPig

  • R.I.P. The Waxwork René
Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #18 on: October 22, 2018, 02:52:47 PM »

I haven't watched it yet, I can only base it on Zellner's publicly stated claims. There's a thread on the reddit for making a murder with a list of the specific deceptions in the tv show though. It might be worth reading that for balance? Making a murder is essentially a trial where you only hear the defence case, hardly surprising it seems 'convincing' of his innocence.

Please watch the documentary and get back to my office with your report ASAP.

Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #19 on: October 22, 2018, 03:23:44 PM »
Yeah, like Blodders I don't see it. I will look at Reddit if that's where the info is, but while series 2 is essentially entirely from Zellner's perspective, she has done a fairly comprehensive job of demonstrating why all(?) the evidence against him is either dubious or planted. I don't think it takes an especially sophisticated plot on behalf of the police to conspire to do this either. It's not hard to deposit DNA, and his original attorneys didn't have the resources that Zellner does. The experts she brings in quite clearly demonstrate that there's been foul play, and it's not exactly sophisticated methods the police have used to smear his juice all over the place.

Who did it and how the body got there is another question, but it's not hard to imagine the local police (who he had previously made look like mugs) being in a frenzy over a body turning up on his yard, and making the evidence fit. Strong-arming a youth with learning difficulties into giving a statement and dumping evidence around the property isn't exactly NWO level stuff is it. It might not even be a conscious attempt to fit him up, but rather a strong conviction that they wouldn't get the right guy without that evidence and planting it was for the greater good. Still, watching this I'm certain that it was a stitch up (at various stages) for which he should never have been convicted, and I'm pretty certain that he never did it in the first place.

Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #20 on: October 22, 2018, 03:32:12 PM »
I loved the first series, especially the portrait of beautiful Northern WI contrasted with the sheer multitude of ugly inadequacies within local law enforcement authorities.

It was an amazing take on a fascinating case, without the shoehorned in sentimentality and victim/LE focus that ruins cheap landfill cable true crime.

Sadly I was not impressed with episode 1 of the new series. Pointless hagiography of Halbach at the start, as if the film makers were attempting to pander to critics of the first season by going way over the top.

Then whilst I respect Zellner and her amazing work for folks like Ryan Ferguson, the way they showed her car experiments made her appear less impressive. They should just have had the experts analyse the crime scene photos and court room evidence, where there should be plenty for the independent mind to tear apart in Avery's favour.

Hopefully the rest will pick up a bit, but I can't binge watch it right now like I did with S1 - many times over. I hope they revert to a dispassionate and non-intrusive style, with more thought and consideration given to the specific content they decide to include.

I guess it's unrealistic to expect S2 to achieve the brilliance of the first, as they know most viewers will have been following the case, so there's far less new information to include.

Hopefully there will be more content around the exceptional work Laura Nirider and Steven Drizen are doing with wrongful convictions of young people.

The Brendan Dassey element was always the most heart wrenching, and I've been sickened to hear Kratz in promoting his book, attempt to defend Dassey's absurdly unfair sentence by saying they offered him a 10 year plea deal (obviously contingent on testilying against Avery).

I also want to know what Ken Kratz did with the little girl he stole his voice from? She obviously won't be speaking up for herself!

BlodwynPig

  • R.I.P. The Waxwork René
Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #21 on: October 22, 2018, 04:18:30 PM »
Yeah, like Blodders I don't see it. I will look at Reddit if that's where the info is, but while series 2 is essentially entirely from Zellner's perspective, she has done a fairly comprehensive job of demonstrating why all(?) the evidence against him is either dubious or planted. I don't think it takes an especially sophisticated plot on behalf of the police to conspire to do this either. It's not hard to deposit DNA, and his original attorneys didn't have the resources that Zellner does. The experts she brings in quite clearly demonstrate that there's been foul play, and it's not exactly sophisticated methods the police have used to smear his juice all over the place.

Who did it and how the body got there is another question, but it's not hard to imagine the local police (who he had previously made look like mugs) being in a frenzy over a body turning up on his yard, and making the evidence fit. Strong-arming a youth with learning difficulties into giving a statement and dumping evidence around the property isn't exactly NWO level stuff is it. It might not even be a conscious attempt to fit him up, but rather a strong conviction that they wouldn't get the right guy without that evidence and planting it was for the greater good. Still, watching this I'm certain that it was a stitch up (at various stages) for which he should never have been convicted, and I'm pretty certain that he never did it in the first place.

and no small matter of the $36 million.

BlodwynPig

  • R.I.P. The Waxwork René
Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #22 on: October 22, 2018, 04:20:43 PM »
I loved the first series, especially the portrait of beautiful Northern WI contrasted with the sheer multitude of ugly inadequacies within local law enforcement authorities.

It was an amazing take on a fascinating case, without the shoehorned in sentimentality and victim/LE focus that ruins cheap landfill cable true crime.

Sadly I was not impressed with episode 1 of the new series. Pointless hagiography of Halbach at the start, as if the film makers were attempting to pander to critics of the first season by going way over the top.

Then whilst I respect Zellner and her amazing work for folks like Ryan Ferguson, the way they showed her car experiments made her appear less impressive. They should just have had the experts analyse the crime scene photos and court room evidence, where there should be plenty for the independent mind to tear apart in Avery's favour.

Hopefully the rest will pick up a bit, but I can't binge watch it right now like I did with S1 - many times over. I hope they revert to a dispassionate and non-intrusive style, with more thought and consideration given to the specific content they decide to include.

I guess it's unrealistic to expect S2 to achieve the brilliance of the first, as they know most viewers will have been following the case, so there's far less new information to include.

Hopefully there will be more content around the exceptional work Laura Nirider and Steven Drizen are doing with wrongful convictions of young people.

The Brendan Dassey element was always the most heart wrenching, and I've been sickened to hear Kratz in promoting his book, attempt to defend Dassey's absurdly unfair sentence by saying they offered him a 10 year plea deal (obviously contingent on testilying against Avery).

I also want to know what Ken Kratz did with the little girl he stole his voice from? She obviously won't be speaking up for herself!

Count the number of times Stimich says "finally give justice to Teresa's family" or words to that effect.

FerriswheelBueller

  • Bautista with a drive, deep left-field!
    • I am antsy for baseball in the off-season.
Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #23 on: October 22, 2018, 04:39:38 PM »
I’m really enjoying biggy’s hyperbole in this thread.

Replies From View

  • Rubbing linseed oil into the school cormorant.
  • Golden Member
  • *****
  • Gargoyles have milk bags.
Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #24 on: October 22, 2018, 04:49:57 PM »
Not sure whether to bother watching this.

“I hate being proved wrong so I shall give this a miss.”

biggytitbo

  • WHAT ABOUT THE GODDAM JAFFA CAKES ASSWIPE
    • theunredacted
Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #25 on: October 22, 2018, 05:01:42 PM »
Please watch the documentary and get back to my office with your report ASAP.


Does it contain anything she hasn't already made public in her various motions and appeals? Because if not then I don't think i really fancy 10 hours of what can most charitably be described as highly imaginive conjecture and tendentious factoids.

biggytitbo

  • WHAT ABOUT THE GODDAM JAFFA CAKES ASSWIPE
    • theunredacted
Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #26 on: October 22, 2018, 05:02:27 PM »
“I hate being proved wrong so I shall give this a miss.”

I don't think you prove things in Netflix shows mate, tends to happen in courts.


If she's nailed the overwhelming case against Avery why can't we hear it here?

biggytitbo

  • WHAT ABOUT THE GODDAM JAFFA CAKES ASSWIPE
    • theunredacted
Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #27 on: October 22, 2018, 05:15:43 PM »
Absoultely damning review of S2 here https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2018/10/making-a-murderer-part-2-season-2-review-netflix


Looks like it takes a leaf out of the frankly disgusting later Paradise Lost films, which had drunk their own koolaid to the point were they were content to recklessly ruin lives by tossing our half baked accusations like confetti.

FerriswheelBueller

  • Bautista with a drive, deep left-field!
    • I am antsy for baseball in the off-season.
Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #28 on: October 22, 2018, 05:35:43 PM »
Yeah, like Blodders I don't see it. I will look at Reddit if that's where the info is, but while series 2 is essentially entirely from Zellner's perspective, she has done a fairly comprehensive job of demonstrating why all(?) the evidence against him is either dubious or planted. I don't think it takes an especially sophisticated plot on behalf of the police to conspire to do this either. It's not hard to deposit DNA, and his original attorneys didn't have the resources that Zellner does. The experts she brings in quite clearly demonstrate that there's been foul play, and it's not exactly sophisticated methods the police have used to smear his juice all over the place.

Who did it and how the body got there is another question, but it's not hard to imagine the local police (who he had previously made look like mugs) being in a frenzy over a body turning up on his yard, and making the evidence fit. Strong-arming a youth with learning difficulties into giving a statement and dumping evidence around the property isn't exactly NWO level stuff is it. It might not even be a conscious attempt to fit him up, but rather a strong conviction that they wouldn't get the right guy without that evidence and planting it was for the greater good. Still, watching this I'm certain that it was a stitch up (at various stages) for which he should never have been convicted, and I'm pretty certain that he never did it in the first place.

This seems about right to me.

Re: Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]
« Reply #29 on: October 22, 2018, 05:47:24 PM »
This is linked from your article, and a few of the major points highlighted on there are dealt with in S2.

Dealing with the most pertinent points:

1. The DNA swab under the hood wasn't covered with cag as under-bonnet swabs might be ordinarily, and there was a load more DNA on the swab (was it 10x?) than there would normally be. There is the suggestion that officers took a swab from his gooch which was not officially requested, not recorded, and subsequently discarded by the nurse where an officer picked it up.

3. An expert on fire suggests that the body was not burned in the fire as it would not get hot enough, and would leave an obvious mark in the ashes where the body had been.

6. The bullet wouldn't have had the power to penetrate the skull twice (no exit wound), and there was evidence of cotton fibres on the bullet tip suggesting it was swabbed onto the case.

Can't speak for the other points, as at times I've drifted into half-watching it. Some of the stuff on that article is circumstantial/hearsay I suppose, but the above points are pretty compelling. Once it's evident the police have fabricated all sorts of other evidence, why would it be difficult to believe they have moved other pieces of evidence into his Avery's fire/burner?

The article you linked to is correct in critiquing the circus around it all, but I've watched it and am commenting on it now, so who am I to criticise?