Making a murderer

[dragonflyinn10]

For those who watched making a murderer part 2 is on Netflix now x

InfiniteSheldon is it a lie that nothing was found in the burn barrels on initial searches and the bones were only found on a later search and after bones had been found on the other property?

As for BD and knowing details only the killer would know. Well only the killer might know about still breathing after the throat was cut but since this cannot be independently verified it is not much use here. I wonder what non-circumstancial details he knew and that he entirely volunteered off his own back without prompting or because he had cycled through several answers first but they kept asking him until he came out with the right answer.

I mean specific and direct things.

I found the confession video on YouTube and have seen the first hour or so. Maybe things will change later on but so far I agree with the judge who described it as like watching death by a thousand cuts. So far they are leading and feeding and suggesting, and if he gave the "wrong" answer they would start in with their "now Brendan you need to be honest with us. We can't help you unless if you are fully honest. We already know everything and you need to tell us the truth" spiel. He would then try a different answer and if this time it was "correct" they moved on, if not then more spiel. But again, maybe things change later on.

Anyway, just wanted to say that I disagree with the male lawyer who says that they only gave vague assurances that mentioned no specific benefit.

About 10m in one says "honesty's the only thing that'll set you free"

and at about 50m "Let's get it all out today, this will be all over with" (and once again, this comes in response to him not giving them the "correct" answer)

I think one of the judges said that no specific benefit was even implied. 'Tell us what we want to hear and it'll all be over' is quite specific I'd say.

The confession is very uncomfortable listening but after listening to it I believe he helped kill TH and dispose of the body. The detectives have a job to do, only one judge out of the many who reviewed/heard the case was of the opinion it was 'death by a thousand cuts' the rest all upheld its use.

Only one might have used that phrase but I make it that six judges have voted yay, six have voted nay. I thnk that alone tells us that there is 'an issue'.

I think it's around eighteen judges that have looked at the case and one that thinks it's in need of review

I don't think Brendan realised that when they said about getting it over with today that it mean going back to the cells. I would say he would think he meant he would get to go home.

Why wasn't the RAV key hidden? Why would it have been slung in the floor?

KZ blood spatter testing was interesting as was the hood latch evidence and what about the headlight?

I always thought the random blobs of his blood in the car was a bit weird. BUT I find the idea that someone collected his blood from the sink kind of ludicrous.

Steven Avery is clearly a wrongun so don't find it that hard to believe he would do this, but they so are a lot of the males on that property!

I've listened to Rebutting a Murderer now and it does, at least, present a less one-sided view. However, I think that, whether SA and BD are guilty or not, at least some evidence was planted and there is definitely reasonable doubt about their guilt.
I must say that the recorded telephone conversation of BD 'confessing' to his mum really troubles me, though. It does sound as though he is speaking truthfully and why would he feel a need to keep up the pretence to his own mum (even if he was only telling the investigators what they had fed him/they wanted to hear)?

see this is interesting isn't it when she did the blood evidence in the car all I could think was how bloody ridiculous obviously if you were bleeding you be trying not to get blood everywhere you be holding your hand up I thought it was exactly where you'd expect to find blood from somebody doing and I thought her blood evidence actually worked against her when she put it in all the motions that's exactly what the court thought as well so I think she actually managed to prove that the blood was exactly where you'd expect it to be.
I can't quite remember but I've got a feeling that the headlight actually incriminates Brendan because he in his confession he knew it was broken when he shouldn't have and said it was because it had got broken when him and S A grow back from the quality after failing stuff body on the Pond.

it's very incriminating that the blood evidence shows Theresa was in the car and then out of the car and that the car drove to the quarry and back again and the only timeline that perfectly explains it is the one BD gives in his confession.

BD does have a low IQ. But it's only on the very low end of normal and he was in the school in normal classes. you feel well when you raped murdered and destroy someone's body you're not going to go home. He wanted it over 3 months of uncontrollable sobbing and crying and a 40 pound weight loss, heroes exhibit extreme distress I think if you really watch that confession he just wants to tell what happened. its standard in interviews to ask false questions to see if the interviewee is saying what you want them to say all of the false questions they ask Brendan for example if TH had a tattoo on her stomach he didn't confirm it he kept saying I didn't see one because he knew she didn't have one when he saw her tied up naked and helpless before he helped kill her.

*Drove back from the quarry after failing to hide the body in the pond

I must say that the recorded telephone conversation of BD 'confessing' to his mum really troubles me, though. It does sound as though he is speaking truthfully and why would he feel a need to keep up the pretence to his own mum (even if he was only telling the investigators what they had fed him/they wanted to hear)?

Didn't it show him being pressured into confessing to his mum? He was hugely reluctant to do this ('but I didn't do anything') and the guy gets stern and is telling him how important it was he stop lying and he must do this.

If I remember correctly there was comments that they pressured him into confessing over the phone to his mum because they knew this would be recorded and could then be used as additional ammo.

Well unless if my memory has gone haywire I remember all this in Part 1.

If I remember correctly there was comments that they pressured him into confessing over the phone to his mum because they knew this would be recorded and could then be used as additional ammo...

Because of course by that time he was recanting the first confession. And a face-to-face with his mother would not be recorded.

As for the judges and BD's confession, the first judge allowed it, the appeal judge disallowed it. Then we had votes of 2-1 and 4-3. That is six judges each for allowal or disallowal. What other judges are there I have not counted?

The sad thing is that we will never know the truth and TH suffered so much and her murderers could possibly get away with it.

One thing that I cannot get my head around. Is, where is all the blood? Where is it? When you stab someone repeatedly on a bed there will be blood. I mean no disrespect here (my house isn’t greatly tidy at the moment) but their home isn’t exactly the cleanest or the tidiest is it? So, where is the blood? They certainly didn’t manage to clean it all away, how could they? And if they did, why didn’t they clean the car? It doesn’t add up. I will add though, I’m not as smart as many on here and I’m not too great at recalling small details. If I’ve messed up on something please do correct me.

Porridge I can't get my head round that either. I just can't believe that those 2 would have been able to forensically clean a bedroom (or garage) so thoroughly as to leave not a single trace?!?

I struggle with that too but.... Was she stabbed repeatedly? Was she raped and stabbed once tsken to the garage and shot. the bed linen burnt?

I can't believe it's just a coincidence that the garage was cleaned that afternoon/night. And Brendan was 100% involved in the clean up they have his jeans with bleach stains witnesses etc.

Is the huge fire that BD and SA lit and tended to the small hours just a coincidence too? Even supposing you believe the police found TH bones and ignored the real killer to plant the bones in that coincidental fire did they then remove some of them and burn them again with the electronics? The forensic evidence is damning.

His initial story was that his uncle called him over to help clean up some oil spill or similar from a car SA had been working on. And the fire was intended as a bonfire for Halloween night that night.

And according to the documentary at least, nothing was found in those barrels on the first search of them. Don't know how accurate that is.

It's so interesting hearing the different viewpoints!

Surely we can all agree that ken kratz is a fucking pillock though.

Also that car key was definitely planted right? Surely.

They so exhausted themselves cleaning up the house and garage they just plain forgot to clean up the bllood in the car.

Having seen the interview BDs story changes several times but in the final version he was getting the mail when he heard female screams coming from SA's house. He knocked on the door and SA took several minutes to answer and the screams continued throughout this. Then BD went in and it escalated from there, and still with the screaming and crying out continuing.

Seems odd that SA apparently was unconcerned about prolonged loud screaming that could be heard by anyone passing by was coming from his house.

The trailer BD lived in was next to the trailer SA lived in the next house was 2 miles away at the end of Avery Road. I was astonished at the size of the Avery property
One thing I can't fathom is why he didn't crush the car, he had cleaned it that's why his blood was only found on the hood latch but why dump it not crush it?

But both BD and at least one sibling were meant to have been home. And who can say who else might come back or come up to visit either property. It is just a weird detail. But then of course it might not be correct. It is just one of several versions of events that can be put together from all of BDs one word or one sentence answers and their later changes

The problem is if you want to believe BD is innocent you need to believe in a huge number of coincidences. BD confession fitted the forensic evidence police already had and was confirmed with further forensics found because of his confession (SA DNA under the hood latch). Was it coincidence that BD said they'd driven the RAV off the Avery property and back on, put her body in the boot and taken it out on Avery property. It was a incredibly unlucky thing for BD to make up if he did, as the police couldn't work out why the forensics showed such an unlikely sequence and didn't understand it til BD explained about the pond. That portion of the interview isn't promoted, isn't fed to him and time and time again judges and independent reviewers have found the confession sound.