Making a Murderer-Netlfix

This was an "entertaining" series. I'm a little worried it will be the start of a new genre where people are shown a "documentary" which is biased in a certain direction whilst masquerading as the whole truth. stuff could get left out if it intereferes with the narrative of the "entertainment"

We didn't see the whole evidence on the TV SHOW so shouldn't be forming strong opinions of who did or did not commit the crime.

I feel very sorry for the victim's family because this whole bloody affair has been put up for the viewing pleasure of the world. pretty sad and tragic IMHO

In Wisconsin the max a private attorney can bill the Public Defender's Office for an entire year is about $80,000. Avery had virtually unlimited resources in this case. He was better financed than 99% of all those who go through the justice sytem here.

If they had uncovered virtually anything that would have connected another person to this crime it would have come in. The burden to introduce "Denny" evidence is not very high here. They came up with nothing. There was not an unlimited group of other potential suspects. In a court filing the defense attys identified a total of 4 people. Just 4.

Wisconsin law does not allow a defendant to come into court and accuse other people of committing crimes without at least SOME evidence they did it. Here there was no evidence anyone else did it. None.

well, If Dassey had never talked with police, then it would have been even more difficult to pin anything on Avery, there just was not very much evidence other than circumstantial. So it would be hard to get anything other than circumstantial on anybody else.

250,000 may be more than most defendants have, but it hardly qualifies as "virtually unlimited resources" when you are talking about defending a murder charge. How does it compare to the amount of money the police and prosecutors spent on the case?

For all on this thread that have an interest, this is a link to a New Yorker article five years ago on a completely separate case. It is equally fascinating on how a trial and a retrial can yield opposite outcomes, and then later on another horrifying twist emerges in the case. I won't ruin it for you, except to say that sometimes criminals are very cunning and can outsmart almost anyone.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/11/14/three-trials-for-murder

Thank you. That was kind of you.

Mr. Obvious wrote:

250,000 may be more than most defendants have, but it hardly qualifies as "virtually unlimited resources" when you are talking about defending a murder charge. How does it compare to the amount of money the police and prosecutors spent on the case?

It was enough to hire 2 of the top defense attorneys in the entire state, hire forensic experts, hire investigators, have DNA reviewed.

I have no idea how much the state spent. It is frankly hard to give a number on that side as it is hard to figure out what you would include in that figure - salaries of the DA? Salaries of cops? Expenses like those are already being paid. No question the state spent a large amount, I just don't know how to come up with a number. The state will almost always be able to outspend the defense.

The initial jury poll after the trial was 7 innocent, the rest guilty. Some of the jurors admitted that they were intimidated to change their votes.

Dassey to be released!

Pretty vicious cycle.

Avery spent nearly 20 years in jail for a crime he didn't commit.

Then gets charged and convicted for murder ans spent an additional 10 years in jail.

Maybe he was guilty the second time. People have strong views either way.

But now, through the same system, his nephew has spent 10 years in jail for confessing to a crime in order to stop to the interrogation.

And he is being released because of those improper interrogation techniques.