Making a Murderer - Netflix

Finished this and was an entertaining watch, so addictive. So much unproved unbelievable, I just feel sorry for nearly everyone involved.

Two daft things stood out to me: Ken Kratz reminded me of Percy Pringle aka Paul Bearer of WWE fame (big man with girls voice) & the victims brother criticising Avery for not taking the stand and speaking more on the mic as he implies he loves the limelight, that's rich coming from Him, he who shows no emotion whatsoever and jumps at the chance to give interviews to the press, like its the normal thing to do, once your sisters been brutally murdered (he was well weird).

Just watching episode 9. flying through these

Someone on Facebook made this observation.

Similarly.

Having finished this in utterly shocked at the outcomes given what was blatant corruption and evidence tampering. Whether Steven is guilty or not I can't be sure,

I'm leaning toward him being innocent but that leaves more questions.

But for me the way Brendan Was treated is despicable . He was a low intelligence kid who was repeatedly bullied into saying what they wanted to hearing his own lawyer screwed him over in the worst possible way.

The fact he was convicted on the basis of his "confession" without a single scrap of physical evidence to support his multiple varying and differing accounts is shocking!

What does the police community think of the documentary, Daz? Just that those few cops were corrupt and others had to back them up?

Anyone read the theory that he was framed by two/three separate parties, independently of each other?

It makes a lot of sense. Scott Tadych and Bobby Dassey kill and burn her at the quarry, then dump the bones in the burn pit, and hide the car at the back of the car lot.

The brother - and this is why he is shifty - knows she was last seen at the scrap yard, so they sneak in and find the car. This is why a separate member of the search term goes straight to it.

They bring in Colborn for help/advice, and it's at this point that he makes the mistake of calling in the car licence plates before it's 'missing'.

So the Police actually believe he did it, based on the bones and the approx timeline (ie her last known location) and plant the key and the blood evidence to shore up the story.

Tadych and Bobby Dassey can't believe their luck when blood and the key show up. This is why Tadych describes the verdict as the best thing that has ever happened.


This makes so much sense. It beats the idea that the Police killed Teresa, or that they were framing an innocent man. They just thought they were planting evidence to ensure the conviction of a guilty man.

I think there's got to be something in deleting her messages though..

Maybe her ex left her an angry message and then gooseberry fool himself when she went missing so deleted it so he wouldn't be a suspect?

Ken Kratz has been doing the media rounds in a variety of interviews. This one is quite unexpected...

Poser wrote:Anyone read the theory that he was framed by two/three separate parties, independently of each other?

It makes a lot of sense. Scott Tadych and Bobby Dassey kill and burn her at the quarry, then dump the bones in the burn pit, and hide the car at the back of the car lot.

The brother - and this is why he is shifty - knows she was last seen at the scrap yard, so they sneak in and find the car. This is why a separate member of the search term goes straight to it.

They bring in Colborn for help/advice, and it's at this point that he makes the mistake of calling in the car licence plates before it's 'missing'.

So the Police actually believe he did it, based on the bones and the approx timeline (ie her last known location) and plant the key and the blood evidence to shore up the story.

Tadych and Bobby Dassey can't believe their luck when blood and the key show up. This is why Tadych describes the verdict as the best thing that has ever happened.


This makes so much sense. It beats the idea that the Police killed Teresa, or that they were framing an innocent man. They just thought they were planting evidence to ensure the conviction of a guilty man.

It makes no sense at all, why do two complete strangers get together and kill her.

Everyone loves a conspiracy.

Captain Kinopio wrote:

Poser wrote:Anyone read the theory that he was framed by two/three separate parties, independently of each other?

It makes a lot of sense. Scott Tadych and Bobby Dassey kill and burn her at the quarry, then dump the bones in the burn pit, and hide the car at the back of the car lot.

The brother - and this is why he is shifty - knows she was last seen at the scrap yard, so they sneak in and find the car. This is why a separate member of the search term goes straight to it.

They bring in Colborn for help/advice, and it's at this point that he makes the mistake of calling in the car licence plates before it's 'missing'.

So the Police actually believe he did it, based on the bones and the approx timeline (ie her last known location) and plant the key and the blood evidence to shore up the story.

Tadych and Bobby Dassey can't believe their luck when blood and the key show up. This is why Tadych describes the verdict as the best thing that has ever happened.


This makes so much sense. It beats the idea that the Police killed Teresa, or that they were framing an innocent man. They just thought they were planting evidence to ensure the conviction of a guilty man.

It makes no sense at all, why do two complete strangers get together and kill her.

The two strangers that were confirmed to be passing at the exact time, and who gave each other an alibi?

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/making-a ... 48104.html

That's the theory in full.

When were they passing each other at the same time? and even if they did they'd still be strangers.

Shadow wrote:What does the police community think of the documentary, Daz? Just that those few cops were corrupt and others had to back them up?

Can't speak for everyone but most people I've spoken to agree that Lt lenk and Sgt Colburn were blatantly planting evidence and corrupt as they come. In fact I very much think most of the manitowec county sheriffs department were complicit in the cover up. The sheriff clearly held a grudge after the 85 incident still refusing to accept he was innocent despite the DNA proving him 100% innocent.

I feel the officers from the other county who came to deal probably weren't involved but at the same time probably weren't told why manitowec shouldn't be involved. Therefore they wouldn't have been watching them closely or even contemplating the notion of evidence tampering.


But like most police throughout the world I don't believe in coincidence. It's far too convenient that when Avery was on the verge of a big civil lawsuit that would have personally affected many of the local officers, that those very same officers should find themselves at the centre of the investigation and being involved in "key" evidence which effectively ended his civil lawsuit and left them in the clear.

Now I don't believe the police would go as far as murder to save themselves but it's clear they were pushing the investigation toward Avery.

FatDaz wrote:Now I don't believe the police would go as far as murder to save themselves but it's clear they were pushing the investigation toward Avery.

That's pretty much where I am. I don't believe at all that the police would murder somebody just to frame Avery, but I think there's a good chance they used an existing crime in order to "get him". That doesn't make Avery innocent (he might have done it and they just ensured there was enough evidence) but it does make the conviction unsafe. Brandon was in the wrong place at the wrong time, I don't believe he did anything at all. All imo of course.

Moggy wrote:

FatDaz wrote:Now I don't believe the police would go as far as murder to save themselves but it's clear they were pushing the investigation toward Avery.

That's pretty much where I am. I don't believe at all that the police would murder somebody just to frame Avery, but I think there's a good chance they used an existing crime in order to "get him". That doesn't make Avery innocent (he might have done it and they just ensured there was enough evidence) but it does make the conviction unsafe. Brandon was in the wrong place at the wrong time, I don't believe he did anything at all. All imo of course.

To my knowledge there was not a scrap of physical evidence against Brandon. His "confession"
Changed multiple times and his timeline was all wrong. There was nothing but his own word that found him guilty and that was bullied out of him both by police and his own defence team. As bad as it is for Avery, there was at least physical evidence (albeit dodgy and dubious) but poor Brandon got swallowed up by a system he didn't understand and when he did it was too late.

FatDaz wrote:

Moggy wrote:

FatDaz wrote:Now I don't believe the police would go as far as murder to save themselves but it's clear they were pushing the investigation toward Avery.

That's pretty much where I am. I don't believe at all that the police would murder somebody just to frame Avery, but I think there's a good chance they used an existing crime in order to "get him". That doesn't make Avery innocent (he might have done it and they just ensured there was enough evidence) but it does make the conviction unsafe. Brandon was in the wrong place at the wrong time, I don't believe he did anything at all. All imo of course.

To my knowledge there was not a scrap of physical evidence against Brandon. His "confession"
Changed multiple times and his timeline was all wrong. There was nothing but his own word that found him guilty and that was bullied out of him both by police and his own defence team. As bad as it is for Avery, there was at least physical evidence (albeit dodgy and dubious) but poor Brandon got swallowed up by a system he didn't understand and when he did it was too late.

Yep, 100% this.

Brandon's case just made no sense. I think he happened to be in the interview room at the wrong time and the police just decided to question him not as a potential witness but as a suspect. It was very easy to get him to say anything that they wanted. Poor kid.

I can only assume with Brandon's case that there was far more damning stuff in his interviews than the documentary shows. To look simply at what was presented to us it seems obvious that he was pushed into the confessions the police wanted him to make and you'd imagine a jury would come to the same conclusion. In my mind there just has to be more in the early interviews for the jury to return a unanimous guilty verdict.

I also don't think allowing him on the stand did him any favours. The whole 'I read it in a book' thing came across like bullshit regardless of whether it was actually true.

Captain Kinopio wrote:When were they passing each other at the same time? and even if they did they'd still be strangers.

At that bit in the programme when they mentioned that exact thing. Also, I doubt they're strangers, given that one is the step-father of the other.

http://fusion.net/story/249427/netflix- ... -theories/

According to this link, they were also on the Avery property at the same time as Teresa.