Making a Murderer Season 1 (2015-)
Watch Making a Murderer
Written & Directed by: Moira Demos & Laura Ricciardi
Starring: Steven Avery, Danielle Ricciardi, Laura Ricciardi
Plot:
Stephen Avery is freed after eighteen years in jail for a crime he didn't commit. While he's in litigation with the Manitowoc Sheriffs Department, suing them for ignoring other suspects and wrongful imprisonment, he's arrested on murder charges.
Watch Making a Murderer
Written & Directed by: Moira Demos & Laura Ricciardi
Starring: Steven Avery, Danielle Ricciardi, Laura Ricciardi
 |
| Making a Murderer - Sometimes the legal system has shortcomings. |
Plot:
Stephen Avery is freed after eighteen years in jail for a crime he didn't commit. While he's in litigation with the Manitowoc Sheriffs Department, suing them for ignoring other suspects and wrongful imprisonment, he's arrested on murder charges.
Verdict:
Despite how you feel about Avery, justice has been obstructed. That's what provides the drama in this series. Some people are going to think, like the cops, that Avery should be locked up and the ends justify the means. Despite how guilty Avery may or may not be, he deserves a fair trial.
This show outrages and stuns in equal measure. We see cops contradicting themselves in depositions and strong indications of tampered evidence. I wasn't sure where this season was going to go after episode one. I felt they had told us the story, but the story this season tells is what happens after he gets out.
Review:
This show was made to be binged. Every episode ends with a teaser, compelling you to keep watching. Regardless of how you feel about Avery, the shortcomings of the justice system are infuriating and bewildering.
The show glosses over the fact that Avery had been arrested before for smaller crimes. The 'cat incident' Avery mentioned was dousing a cat in gas and setting it afire. What led to Avery running a woman off the road and holding her at gunpoint? His claim is that she was spreading rumors. None of these events excuse what the Sheriff's Department did in trying to convict Avery. I can understand the cops wanting to lock him up, but in no way am I defending what they did, they obstructed justice, but this show skews to showing Avery in the best possible light.
From the start the department had it out for him. Judy Devorak, a clerk in the sheriffs office tells a witness, Penny Beernstein, "That looks like Stephen Avery." That's called leading a witness. Avery doesn't even fit Penny's description. The office draws a composite based on Avery's old mugshot, tells Penny it's Avery, then do a lineup. Of course Penny picks Avery. I couldn't believe how crazy this was and that was only twenty minutes in to episode one.
Cops and women in the District Attorney's office tell the Sheriff that Greg Allen committed the crime, but the Sheriff ignores it.
In 2003, a DNA match to Allen is obtained from the evidence that convicted Avery. Not only that, but in Avery's file is a complaint against Allen that occurred on the same beach where Avery allegedly committed the crime that got him convicted. It's more than coincidence that report was in Avery's file. The first episode had one bombshell after another and some amazing stock footage. How did the filmmakers get court footage? I wondered what could happen after episode one. The answer is a LOT! The episode ends with a teaser question, could bringing a lawsuit against the Sheriffs Department, result in murder charges? The answer in episode two is yes.
Something the show didn't answer is what happened to Stephen's wife and his kids. We see the kids in photos, and I assume she left him. He did write threatening letters to her while in jail. This 'documentary' quickly passes over some of the more sordid details about Avery. Despite his past, to know he's innocent and see him age in photographs while incarcerated for eighteen years, it's an outrage.
The deposition footage is amazing and infuriating. The witnesses have been coached. Dvorak doesn't remember what derogatory things she said about Avery, how convenient. She even states "I don't remember saying this but I know I didn't say that." When she is confronted with a report that she did malign Avery, she retorts she wouldn't have said it like that.
The gall Kuche, the composite drawer from 1983, displays claiming he doesn't know if Allen was the one described, yet Allen is confirmed as the culprit. Who did Kuche draw? Wasn't it supposed to be the suspect? Kuche posits the DNA evidence could be fabricated to charge Allen, and additionally states his drawing is evidence while admitting his drawing looks more like Avery than Allen. Not only that but the sketch looks like Avery's old mugshot on file and Kuche is arguing it's valid.
While Avery's appeal occurred in '95, Colburn got a call from a detective indicating they had someone in custody admitting to the crime for which Avery was convicted. Colburn does nothing. NOTHING. Colburn tells his superior Lenk about the call the day after Avery gets out, eight years later. It's amazing the footage this series has as it does not display the Sheriff's Department in a positive way.
During Avery's lawsuit against the Department, Teresa Halbach's car is found at Avery's salvage year, the key to the car is found in his bedroom, and human remains are found. This was after an eight day search. On record a cop says the key wasn't there the first time they searched the house. Detective Lenk 'find's a key eight days later. Avery is charged with murder.
Lenk and Coburn find nothing when they searched the property with Calumet County. On their own they find the key.The only DNA on Teresa's key is Avery's. How is Teresa's DNA not on her own key? There is reasonable doubt all over this case.
The investigators help Avery's cousin Brendan Dassey craft a convenient though very odd story implicating Avery. Brendan was a minor and never had a lawyer in any interview.
Brendan draws a picture of how Teresa was restrained with chains. I immediately thought, look at the bed frame, it would be scarred. Wouldn't there be chains somewhere? These details aren't covered in the series. In a phone call to his mom, Brendan talks like he did it, unless he was just mixed up. That seems very likely, as none of his statements are congruous.
Avery's attorney's go back to the '85 case evidence and find a hypodermic needle puncture in the vial of blood collected from Avery. It's crazy. The unsealed evidence alone should have shut the case down.
I can't help but think of the Milgram Experiment. People will harm others if they think it's for a worthwhile purpose. This has to be what's happening in the Sheriff's Department.
The police find Avery's blood in the car, but none of Teresa's DNA is in the house, garage, or anywhere on the property. None of Brendan Dassey's DNA is found in the house or on the property and he admitted to aiding in the assault and murder. The only place where Teresa's DNA is found is on a bullet from the garage.
The test that found the DNA on the bullet was compromised. The standard protocol is to throw the test out completely. DA Kratz argues common sense dictates you don't throw it out, but that's against policy. Why was the test not even noted as compromised? How is this not reasonable doubt?
Brendan Dassey's trial is ridiculous. A cousin comes forward and states she made up the story she told the cops about Brendan. Was she coerced? Brendan corroborates his story is made up. When asked how he made up such lurid details, he states he got it from the book Kiss the Girls. It's a brilliant reply, which by that very fact means his attorney fed him that line. I feel bad for Dassey as his lawyer is building a case on Brendan being dumb.
In the concluding episode, Dassey goes to prison for life. Avery is convicted, having served 28 of his 53 years in jail. The episode also reveals sexual harassment allegations against DA Kratz. I get that it speak to his character, but does it really have any bearing on the Avery-Dassey case? It seems more as a ploy to make the viewer sympathetic for Avery and Dassey.
I was a juror for a small crime. and while a crime had been committed and most of the jurors thought the accused did it. Our burden of proof was beyond a shadow of a doubt so we had to acquit. What was the burden of proof for this jury? How did they reach the conclusions they did?
This series has many parallels to the documentary The Thin Blue Line. While that was a reenactment, you have a drifter who catches a ride with a guy, they hang out, then the drifter is convicted or murder. The other guy was in the middle of a crime spree and is later put on death row for unrelated crimes. The drifter was finally freed because of the documentary. The reason behind the frame up was that the judge wanted the death penalty and the guy who committed the crimes was too young.
How often does this happen? More often than it should. I can't help but feel the filmmakers had an agenda in mind. Maybe they thought revealing the truth about Avery would hinder the fact that the Sheriff's department obstructed justice. If anything, it helps their cause. The Sheriffs went after Avery specifically because of his record. They found someone they wanted off the streets, and they thought they could make that happen.
The show glosses over the fact that Avery had been arrested before for smaller crimes. The 'cat incident' Avery mentioned was dousing a cat in gas and setting it afire. What led to Avery running a woman off the road and holding her at gunpoint? His claim is that she was spreading rumors. None of these events excuse what the Sheriff's Department did in trying to convict Avery. I can understand the cops wanting to lock him up, but in no way am I defending what they did, they obstructed justice, but this show skews to showing Avery in the best possible light.
From the start the department had it out for him. Judy Devorak, a clerk in the sheriffs office tells a witness, Penny Beernstein, "That looks like Stephen Avery." That's called leading a witness. Avery doesn't even fit Penny's description. The office draws a composite based on Avery's old mugshot, tells Penny it's Avery, then do a lineup. Of course Penny picks Avery. I couldn't believe how crazy this was and that was only twenty minutes in to episode one.
Cops and women in the District Attorney's office tell the Sheriff that Greg Allen committed the crime, but the Sheriff ignores it.
In 2003, a DNA match to Allen is obtained from the evidence that convicted Avery. Not only that, but in Avery's file is a complaint against Allen that occurred on the same beach where Avery allegedly committed the crime that got him convicted. It's more than coincidence that report was in Avery's file. The first episode had one bombshell after another and some amazing stock footage. How did the filmmakers get court footage? I wondered what could happen after episode one. The answer is a LOT! The episode ends with a teaser question, could bringing a lawsuit against the Sheriffs Department, result in murder charges? The answer in episode two is yes.
Something the show didn't answer is what happened to Stephen's wife and his kids. We see the kids in photos, and I assume she left him. He did write threatening letters to her while in jail. This 'documentary' quickly passes over some of the more sordid details about Avery. Despite his past, to know he's innocent and see him age in photographs while incarcerated for eighteen years, it's an outrage.
The deposition footage is amazing and infuriating. The witnesses have been coached. Dvorak doesn't remember what derogatory things she said about Avery, how convenient. She even states "I don't remember saying this but I know I didn't say that." When she is confronted with a report that she did malign Avery, she retorts she wouldn't have said it like that.
The gall Kuche, the composite drawer from 1983, displays claiming he doesn't know if Allen was the one described, yet Allen is confirmed as the culprit. Who did Kuche draw? Wasn't it supposed to be the suspect? Kuche posits the DNA evidence could be fabricated to charge Allen, and additionally states his drawing is evidence while admitting his drawing looks more like Avery than Allen. Not only that but the sketch looks like Avery's old mugshot on file and Kuche is arguing it's valid.
While Avery's appeal occurred in '95, Colburn got a call from a detective indicating they had someone in custody admitting to the crime for which Avery was convicted. Colburn does nothing. NOTHING. Colburn tells his superior Lenk about the call the day after Avery gets out, eight years later. It's amazing the footage this series has as it does not display the Sheriff's Department in a positive way.
During Avery's lawsuit against the Department, Teresa Halbach's car is found at Avery's salvage year, the key to the car is found in his bedroom, and human remains are found. This was after an eight day search. On record a cop says the key wasn't there the first time they searched the house. Detective Lenk 'find's a key eight days later. Avery is charged with murder.
Lenk and Coburn find nothing when they searched the property with Calumet County. On their own they find the key.The only DNA on Teresa's key is Avery's. How is Teresa's DNA not on her own key? There is reasonable doubt all over this case.
The investigators help Avery's cousin Brendan Dassey craft a convenient though very odd story implicating Avery. Brendan was a minor and never had a lawyer in any interview.
Brendan draws a picture of how Teresa was restrained with chains. I immediately thought, look at the bed frame, it would be scarred. Wouldn't there be chains somewhere? These details aren't covered in the series. In a phone call to his mom, Brendan talks like he did it, unless he was just mixed up. That seems very likely, as none of his statements are congruous.
Avery's attorney's go back to the '85 case evidence and find a hypodermic needle puncture in the vial of blood collected from Avery. It's crazy. The unsealed evidence alone should have shut the case down.
I can't help but think of the Milgram Experiment. People will harm others if they think it's for a worthwhile purpose. This has to be what's happening in the Sheriff's Department.
The police find Avery's blood in the car, but none of Teresa's DNA is in the house, garage, or anywhere on the property. None of Brendan Dassey's DNA is found in the house or on the property and he admitted to aiding in the assault and murder. The only place where Teresa's DNA is found is on a bullet from the garage.
The test that found the DNA on the bullet was compromised. The standard protocol is to throw the test out completely. DA Kratz argues common sense dictates you don't throw it out, but that's against policy. Why was the test not even noted as compromised? How is this not reasonable doubt?
Brendan Dassey's trial is ridiculous. A cousin comes forward and states she made up the story she told the cops about Brendan. Was she coerced? Brendan corroborates his story is made up. When asked how he made up such lurid details, he states he got it from the book Kiss the Girls. It's a brilliant reply, which by that very fact means his attorney fed him that line. I feel bad for Dassey as his lawyer is building a case on Brendan being dumb.
In the concluding episode, Dassey goes to prison for life. Avery is convicted, having served 28 of his 53 years in jail. The episode also reveals sexual harassment allegations against DA Kratz. I get that it speak to his character, but does it really have any bearing on the Avery-Dassey case? It seems more as a ploy to make the viewer sympathetic for Avery and Dassey.
I was a juror for a small crime. and while a crime had been committed and most of the jurors thought the accused did it. Our burden of proof was beyond a shadow of a doubt so we had to acquit. What was the burden of proof for this jury? How did they reach the conclusions they did?
This series has many parallels to the documentary The Thin Blue Line. While that was a reenactment, you have a drifter who catches a ride with a guy, they hang out, then the drifter is convicted or murder. The other guy was in the middle of a crime spree and is later put on death row for unrelated crimes. The drifter was finally freed because of the documentary. The reason behind the frame up was that the judge wanted the death penalty and the guy who committed the crimes was too young.
How often does this happen? More often than it should. I can't help but feel the filmmakers had an agenda in mind. Maybe they thought revealing the truth about Avery would hinder the fact that the Sheriff's department obstructed justice. If anything, it helps their cause. The Sheriffs went after Avery specifically because of his record. They found someone they wanted off the streets, and they thought they could make that happen.
No comments :
Post a Comment