Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 02:51:46 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Making a Murderer - Series 2 [split topic]

Started by holyzombiejesus, September 26, 2018, 02:00:49 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

DrGreggles

Nothing to add, other than something that gave me a big laugh today.

There was a You Tube video called something like 'If Steven Avery didn't kill Teresa Halbach, who did?' and the only comment was 'The McCanns'.

hedgehog90

I'm up to episode 7 now.
It's no where near as engaging as the first season it has to be said, and I really couldn't care less about Avery's personal life, but the investigative stuff is next-level great.

After being on-the-fence regarding Avery's innocence, I'm now very much convinced by the wealth of evidence presented that he was framed by the police department and almost certainly had no direct involvement in Halbach's murder.

Biggy, you've got to watch this.

c

Quote from: hedgehog90 on October 29, 2018, 05:49:54 PM
I'm up to episode 7 now.
It's no where near as engaging as the first season it has to be said, and I really couldn't care less about Avery's personal life, but the investigative stuff is next-level great.

After being on-the-fence regarding Avery's innocence, I'm now very much convinced by the wealth of evidence presented that he was framed by the police department and almost certainly had no direct involvement in Halbach's murder.

Biggy, you've got to watch this.

I'm on ep 3 and struggling to continue. It's FULL OF FILLER. You've made me want to persevere, but maybe I'll skip any talking head with a family member in it.

Dropshadow

Lots of filler in series 2, yes. If someone did a "fan edit" and cut out all the bits in which Avery's parents say "Uh?" to each other they'd easily save at least 2 hours. Liked the woman Zellner's slow-motion body language/gestures, but that's probably just rheumatism. Kratz seems to have adopted the haunted, Christ-they're-going-to-get-me mannerisms of the uniformed cop who featured prominently in the first series. Overall, not bad if you fast-forward through the filler.

Ja'moke

This season could have been much better if it was five episodes long (I still have the last episode to watch). So much filler. All the stuff focusing on Avery's family, like his mum going for leg surgery or whatever, just unnecessary. I started skipping that stuff in the later episodes.

The fact Bobby Dassey was never treated and questioned as a suspect is kind of shocking.

BlodwynPig

Quote from: Ja'moke on November 02, 2018, 03:54:31 PM
This season could have been much better if it was five episodes long (I still have the last episode to watch). So much filler. All the stuff focusing on Avery's family, like his mum going for leg surgery or whatever, just unnecessary. I started skipping that stuff in the later episodes.


Isn't that the meat and bone of documentaries, the incidental stuff?

Ja'moke

Quote from: BlodwynPig on November 02, 2018, 06:06:34 PM
Isn't that the meat and bone of documentaries, the incidental stuff?

Perhaps, but I just don't find the Averys particularly interesting or that likable.

The best part of the documentary was all the stuff related to the Brendan case and his lawyers putting together their arguments for the (multiple) appeal courts.

Ja'moke

Finished this now.

Here's something I need clearing up. In one of the earlier episodes, Zellner suggests that the DNA swabs that the arresting officers took from Avery at the hospital, before he was taken to the station for questioning, could have been used to plant the DNA in Teresa's car, right?

But according to the police transcripts, that DNA swab took place at the same night as the questioning, and by that point they'd already discovered his DNA in the car, right?

I get confused with all the timelines, but from what I gather, I believe that is correct. So what the hell is Zellner talking about?

BlodwynPig

Sweaty, sexting, disgraced Ken Kratz is how Zellner is now referring to Kratz. Accurate but rather infantile. Professionalism, please.

Ja'moke

Quote from: BlodwynPig on November 03, 2018, 04:29:05 PM
Sweaty, sexting, disgraced Ken Kratz is how Zellner is now referring to Kratz. Accurate but rather infantile. Professionalism, please.

Maybe a callback to how Kratz described Steven Avery in the first televised press conference? He talked about a "sweaty" Steven Avery meeting Teresa.

BlodwynPig

Quote from: Ja'moke on November 03, 2018, 04:39:51 PM
Maybe a callback to how Kratz described Steven Avery in the first televised press conference? He talked about a "sweaty" Steven Avery meeting Teresa.

ah, then LoL!

DrGreggles

Quote from: Ja'moke on November 03, 2018, 02:58:43 PM
Finished this now.

Here's something I need clearing up. In one of the earlier episodes, Zellner suggests that the DNA swabs that the arresting officers took from Avery at the hospital, before he was taken to the station for questioning, could have been used to plant the DNA in Teresa's car, right?

But according to the police transcripts, that DNA swab took place at the same night as the questioning, and by that point they'd already discovered his DNA in the car, right?

I get confused with all the timelines, but from what I gather, I believe that is correct. So what the hell is Zellner talking about?

Didn't Kratz claim that the DNA was from Avery's sweat?
Which isn't a thing.

Ja'moke

Quote from: DrGreggles on November 03, 2018, 05:29:38 PM
Didn't Kratz claim that the DNA was from Avery's sweat?
Which isn't a thing.

Yeah, Kratz is a dumbass.

It would have to be Touch DNA, like skin cells or whatever, not sweat, which can't be tested for.

Overall, this documentary didn't do a whole lot to change my opinion on this case. That I think Steven Avery was likely involved, but that there's enough reasonable doubt and police fuck ups that he shouldn't have been convicted. And that Brendan had no clue what he was talking about and that what he said happened (or coerced into saying happened) about the rape, throat slitting, stabbing, handcuffed to Steven's bed, is just preposterous.

steveh

Quote from: Ja'moke on November 03, 2018, 02:58:43 PM
Here's something I need clearing up. In one of the earlier episodes, Zellner suggests that the DNA swabs that the arresting officers took from Avery at the hospital, before he was taken to the station for questioning, could have been used to plant the DNA in Teresa's car, right?

I thought she was suggesting that the police switched swabs rather than planting DNA?

ersatz99

Barb Tadych: Why is she - why is she starting up with Scott and Bobby again?
Steven Avery: Well it's going wherever the - the evidence is going.
Barb Tadych: Yeah so she's going to take down my f'n family again.
Steven Avery: If that's where the lead is going to go, I don't know.
Barb Tadych: It'd better not because you'll have a dead sister.

Hmm why's that then Barb?

Quote from: steveh on November 05, 2018, 11:38:11 AM
I thought she was suggesting that the police switched swabs rather than planting DNA?

I took it as them having acquired his blood for inside the car, but the hood latch swabs were the ones that had been rattled round his bawbag and discarded by the nurse. The office took them from the bin and submitted them as being from the hood latch. There was the point that the swabs had much more dna on than they could otherwise emulate by swabbing a latch, and that the testers reported that the swabs were much cleaner than ones they normally see from a hood - suggesting it had never been near the car.

mojo filters

Quote from: drummersaredeaf on November 06, 2018, 11:17:36 AM
I took it as them having acquired his blood for inside the car, but the hood latch swabs were the ones that had been rattled round his bawbag and discarded by the nurse. The office took them from the bin and submitted them as being from the hood latch. There was the point that the swabs had much more dna on than they could otherwise emulate by swabbing a latch, and that the testers reported that the swabs were much cleaner than ones they normally see from a hood - suggesting it had never been near the car.

That was my interpretation too, though I'll admit it wasn't made explicitly clear. I wish they'd clarify a bit more about the aims and specific objectives of each team of lawyers, and dial back the quaint / class-porn portraits of the Avery family - especially the members we already know well.

I do think it's good we get to see Chuck and Earl this time around, but we still don't seem to get to find out much about them, not even why they were reluctant to appear in season 1?

I'm only up to episode 6 or 7, so maybe there's better things to come. Sadly so far it's had none of the urgency or gripping denouement that came at the end of each episode in season 1. I suspect they've really stretched the good stuff out, just to create another 10 episodes, where it could have been edited down to a tighter British style 6!

Crabwalk

Having watched and been enthralled by S2, I fail to see how any fair-minded individual would believe that Teresa's murder went down anything like the state's version of events. It was a sketchy and inconsistent tale in the first place but it's going to be turned to absolute dust when there's a hearing, isn't it?

Will be interesting to see how the new Democrat Attorney General approaches Avery's appeal. Presumably in a more fair-minded way than that awful bullshit-bastard Schimel.

biggytitbo

Quote from: Crabwalk on November 09, 2018, 12:01:18 AM
It was a sketchy and inconsistent tale in the first place but it's going to be turned to absolute dust when there's a hearing, isn't it?


No.

Crabwalk

What do you think is going to hold up strongly enough for there not to be a new trial ordered (if it's a fair hearing - which I concede is a big if)?

biggytitbo

From what I've seen of the American justice system, its usually incredibly difficult to reverse the conviction of people, even when they are definitely, provably innocent - like when they have cast iron DNA or someone else who did it in some cases.


I somehow doubt Zellner's thin confection of gossamer theories and factoids is going to convince any judges to award a new trial, its not like it is a trial where reasonable doubt is enough, that usual burden of proof is reversed and then some.




Crabwalk

You say it's usually incredibly difficult to reverse the conviction of people - and of course, that's true - yet it's happened once to Avery already and Zellner's managed it plenty of times elsewhere.

If you can't be arsed watching series 2 - and honestly, you should for what transpires in the second half - then the current situation from the defence perspective is well summarised in this q&a with Zellner https://www.thedailybeast.com/making-a-murderer-part-2-attorney-kathleen-zellner-on-the-murder-theory-that-could-free-steven-avery

DrGreggles

Quote from: Crabwalk on November 09, 2018, 04:32:00 PM
You say it's usually incredibly difficult to reverse the conviction of people - and of course, that's true - yet it's happened once to Avery already and Zellner's managed it plenty of times elsewhere.

If you can't be arsed watching series 2 - and honestly, you should for what transpires in the second half - then the current situation from the defence perspective is well summarised in this q&a with Zellner https://www.thedailybeast.com/making-a-murderer-part-2-attorney-kathleen-zellner-on-the-murder-theory-that-could-free-steven-avery

EVERY time she's tried.
I think she's 18 from 18 in terms of overturning dodgy convictions - including getting a couple of lads off death row.

Ferris

That Adnan Syed off of Serial got a new trial approved a few months back. The lesson here is if you are convicted of a crime, make sure it is interesting enough to turn into a ratings smash to ensure you get a full investigation.

thraxx

One thing I dont get is how it's possible for the new evidence and theories to be discussed in public. If this isnt already contempt of court, If there ever was a retrial how could it possibly be carried out fairly given the coverage of the two series and side show news stories?

BlodwynPig

Quote from: biggytitbo on November 09, 2018, 01:09:14 PM
From what I've seen of the American justice system, its usually incredibly difficult to reverse the conviction of people, even when they are definitely, provably innocent - like when they have cast iron DNA or someone else who did it in some cases.



Like Avery's first conviction, you mean????

BlodwynPig

Quote from: thraxx on November 09, 2018, 05:43:40 PM
One thing I dont get is how it's possible for the new evidence and theories to be discussed in public. If this isnt already contempt of court, If there ever was a retrial how could it possibly be carried out fairly given the coverage of the two series and side show news stories?

Biggy as juror, he hasn't seen the second season. LOL

Ja'moke

I just don't think any of Zellner's evidence/theories are strong enough to convince a judge to order a retrial.

Replies From View

Quote from: Crabwalk on November 09, 2018, 04:32:00 PM
You say it's usually incredibly difficult to reverse the conviction of people - and of course, that's true - yet it's happened once to Avery already and Zellner's managed it plenty of times elsewhere.

If you can't be arsed watching series 2 - and honestly, you should for what transpires in the second half - then the current situation from the defence perspective is well summarised in this q&a with Zellner https://www.thedailybeast.com/making-a-murderer-part-2-attorney-kathleen-zellner-on-the-murder-theory-that-could-free-steven-avery

Good luck getting titbo to change his mind about anything that he has given a quick skim on reddit.  When he's decided he is an authority on something, he's permanently immovable.

Crabwalk

I understand, but just trying to engage reasonably. Onlookers might get something from it, at least.