one incident means you like fire? an unloaded gun, which is weird yes, but that same blood put him in jail for 18 years for a crime he didnt commit
No. The police department did. And you don't know the family story nor do I. But Avery in my opinion had all the traits of a murderer. A family pet via bonfire. That's sick. So sick that murdering a human doesn't seem out of this realm.
Agreed, he had the traits. But the proof just wasn't there or conclusive enough. You cannot overlook Colborn finding the car after Nov 1, but before it went missing. They knew what happened. All conclusive evidence showed was that Avery was being framed, and the real murderer is at large.
I need to rewatch a bit. I couldn't put two in two together the first time through. Once again, he should have never been convicted. So many things just didn't make sense. Sadly, I think in a yes or no world. The jury got it right. In our world, he should be not guilty.
Uhh, did you also miss the part of the documentary where the veteran detective said the same thing? I'm beginning to think the only part you watched was the part about the cat. You love cats, we get it, but it doesn't mean someone should be convicted of murder decades later.
It's a family pet. I'd feel the same if it was the family lizard. You realize this guy pulled a gun on his own family. He also harassed the same girl he murdered before hand. You act like some Saint got put behind bars. I didn't miss that part, I just choose to focus on the facts. And the facts are that he seemed to make bad choices consistently. If I had to make a call I would say a sick human being got more sick once locked in a cage for 18 years. There's more to the story than what most people believe to be the full story.
Or not base assumptions based off the documentary! Marky already released one article on it. Doesn't take much of course what I said isn't wrong.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">'Making a Murderer' prosecutor says Netflix series "wasn't a documentary at all." <a href="https://t.co/Vy1TiChcGU">https://t.co/Vy1TiChcGU</a> <a href="https://t.co/hqtA9sSZzJ">pic.twitter.com/hqtA9sSZzJ</a></p>— ABC News (@ABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ABC/status/684465047343620096">January 5, 2016</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
But you ARE making a very big assumption on his guilt based on him killing a cat decades earlier. Yes, the article that mentions how the police found p*rn at his compound and that he answered the door in his towel once. Riveting stuff. You are basing your opinion of his guilt for THIS crime based off of things he did in his past and served time for.....which IS wrong.
Seems to mention a couple of the points made in article posted earlier. Avery knew her and requested her and *67'd her a couple of times. Apparently they think that's compelling stuff. Type of stuff that would have made me a murderer as a young kid apparently. Amongst all the talk about how random some of the evidence is (timing, where and when found, how clean, etc) I'll note the part I remembered from the first episode that i did watch. These aren't exactly the cream of the crop type people from an IQ perspective. Frankly not even average. Closer to the bottom right. Not truly r****ded or anything but you get the drift. None of which means he didn't do it. But clearly the cops planted evidence and whatever happened absolutely wasn't in the way he/they were convicted of.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Whoa. Dean Strang and Ken Kratz going head to head on Fox News right now. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MakingAMurderer?src=hash">#MakingAMurderer</a> <a href="https://t.co/9TYyLuxf7C">pic.twitter.com/9TYyLuxf7C</a></p>— Elliott Schwartz (@elliosch) <a href="https://twitter.com/elliosch/status/684564548049879040">January 6, 2016</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
That's an interesting accomodation for a prosecutor, but it's probably not a bad campaigning strategy from the perspective of the county voters.
If they find a decapitated, incinerated girl on your property, then yeah. I'm sorry, but something happened near or around there and he'd seen and requested her for an otherwise routine interaction. I really can't fault a DA or jurors for trying to rectify an overtly strange and terrifying incident in a small enough community for it to happen to one of them.
Absolutely none of that would make me a murderer. Suspect - yes. One of the jurors apparently was more concerned about being framed himself then putting away a murderer in his community. That and more GREAT and intelligent commentary from the directors in this interview. http://time.com/4167915/making-a-murderer-steven-avery-juror/
