What are your thoughts after watching "Making a Murderer"?

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 06 Jan 2016 16:33:22 -0500

First I am not taking either side as I understand that this is made on more the defense side. I am from WI and remember as this case broke. As I watched documentry I was shocked at the police work by the Manitowoc sheriff's department. The questioning of the 16 year old, the lack of physical evidence, and horrible crime scene protection. Also it makes u take a look at the Reed way of interogation, as MPI I have gone through this technique. If u want to watch what not what to do, or just the lack of good judgment by the WI justice department I do suggest this. Again I can't imagine the pain of the family of Teresa, but as Law Enforcement our job is to find the truth.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 6 at 2016 4:44 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 06 Jan 2016 16:44:10 -0500

It was definitely thought-provoking.
Honestly, I don't know what they were thinking. Did they just want to find somebody to blame? Trying to make the facts fit the hypothesis?
Very shoddy work by several parties.

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 6 at 2016 4:51 PM

PO2 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 06 Jan 2016 16:51:49 -0500

I am also a federal law enforcement officer with the USCG and after watching that documentary there was way too mm any holes in that case for it to even have gone to trial. (Just in my opinion) I don't have much experience in interrogation beyond "Tactical Questioning" but to me the confession of Brandon was completely coworst. I found it weirdthat Brandon was found guilty on all three charges and Steven only on two. I also found problems with Brandon's pre-trial lawyer and how the judge dismissed the lawyer but did not dismiss the testimony from him and the investagator. Isn't that under fruits from a poisons tree type of thing?

Response by Capt Tj Feeley made Jan 6 at 2016 4:57 PM

Capt Tj Feeley — Wed, 06 Jan 2016 16:57:18 -0500

The "documentary" was intriguing. I was left with several nagging questions:

1-how the hell did Sgt Coburn call into dispatch and run her plate unless he was looking right at it or the car. If I do a registration search by name, it comes back with the plate, so what's the reason he did this? Shady

2-Lt Lenk is a highly suspicious individual. He first testifies that he was at the yard when they found the car at 6-7 pm. He then testified that he showed up around 2 which was conveniently before the crime scene log was started.

3-how is there none of her dna on the key when she touches the thing every day? Only avery's was on it...shady

4-the whole thing start to finish with Brendan was just wrong

5-Avery is smart enough to clean up all the blood from them cutting her throat and dragging her throughout the Mobil home (which is impossible by the way), but he isn't smart enough to clean this blood from her vehicle? He also has a car crusher on site and doesn't use it?Shady

6-Steve tadych's testimony is proven false and he struck me as a a possible suspect but was never even considered?

7-Jodi calls Avery from jail twice on the night Theresa was murdered. The phone conversations were recorded and Avery didn't sound like he was killing someone or just killed someone. He was more concerned with Jodi than anything else.

8-it took them over a year to test the semen on the rape victim for the earlier offense to exonerate him. It only took the fbi 2 weeks to turn around an EDTA test? A test that they had not done in over 10 years? Shady

9-manitowoc deputies were not supposed to be investigating but they are the ones who are finding all the "smoking gun" evidence? Evidence that was not found during multiple searches in the first place and only found months later? Shady

I'm not saying that Avery is innocent, he needs a new fair trial, but I honestly believe he got railroaded again.

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Jan 7 at 2016 1:59 AM

CAPT Kevin B. — Thu, 07 Jan 2016 01:59:16 -0500

Pretty much in the infomercial scripted pseudo reality TV category for me. The vast odds are the trial, appeals all the way up, etc. had it right. Spinning a big one sided yarn doesn't negate that.

BTW many viewers tend to be biting the bait that there's truthfulness everywhere. Bad place to be if you're trying to be even keeled.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 7 at 2016 11:31 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 07 Jan 2016 11:31:45 -0500

Too many inconsistencies and too many unanswered questions. They already wrongly accused him and took away 17 years of life. They kavetched at the monetary claim and the open-blood sample was suspicious. His defense atty suggested that the prosecution would find a reason to explain that sample.

And #5 particularly. It is shady all-around and the people investigating seemed to be convenient, as if they did not hear about the case. SSG Private RallyPoint Member

Response by PO1 Todd Cousins made Jan 7 at 2016 11:20 PM

PO1 Todd Cousins — Thu, 07 Jan 2016 23:20:58 -0500

It is incredibly one side. Many things are glossed over or not even mentioned. For one I still don't know the motive Avery had? This maters to me because no one else could be mentioned as apossible suspect by the defense because of a lack of motive but never heard what his was. We also didn't see the evidence that made him look guilty, the camera and other stuff in a burn barrel near his door as one example, so you have to take it in with knowledge that you aren't hearing the whole story here. That said the sheriff office there looks shady as hell to this old man.

Response by CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 20 at 2016 8:45 PM

CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 20 Jan 2016 20:45:16 -0500

Most addicting show ever created