Author Topic: Netflix's Making a Murderer (some posts have spoilers)  (Read 4013 times)

saltine

  • Administrator
  • Godfather
  • *****
  • Posts: 9291
Netflix's Making a Murderer (some posts have spoilers)
« on: December 28, 2015, 09:20:03 PM »
If you haven't binge-watched this 10 part true crime documentary on Netflix. you should do it now.

Then, if you haven't thrown your TV or computer through the window by the end of it, let's discuss it.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2015, 03:37:23 AM by saltine »
Texan Down Under

1SO

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 28410
  • Marathon Man
Re: Netflix's Making a Murderer
« Reply #1 on: December 28, 2015, 10:37:05 PM »
Then, if you haven't thrown your TV or computer through the window by the end of it, let's discuss it.
This is why I'm not watching it.

The Deer Hunter

  • Elite Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1220
Re: Netflix's Making a Murderer
« Reply #2 on: December 29, 2015, 01:22:06 AM »
Never heard of it until now but i will definitely be checking it out.

Bondo

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 19804
Re: Netflix's Making a Murderer
« Reply #3 on: December 29, 2015, 01:42:48 AM »
All the spoilers are in my post...we're spoiling this, right?

In my paralegal class last semester, my professor stressed that the legal code of ethics is the MINIMUM standard of practice. One shouldn't want to figure out how to meet the standard by the least amount possible to achieve their result. Many of the people involved here on the prosecution side (and in the case of Brenden, his own defenders initially) fail miserably. The fact that they apparently get by shows how much that the system is rigged depending on where you are. On twitter I said that if you are outraged by this show, keep in mind that the judges and the prosecutors here were probably elected or appointed by Republicans. Elections matter and as much as we treat the judiciary as isolated from politics, that isn't how it is practiced. Ideology affects results in the legal system.

It isn't as relevant to this case because ultimately the police weren't on trial (though they probably should have been), but both with cases of police misconduct and with rape cases, I'm wondering if our system that gives government the monopoly of prosecution is a failure. It's nice that the government is there to put its heft behind prosecution, but when they aren't committed to getting a guilty verdict (Tamir Rice), it would be nice if a victim (or their family) could put money behind making sure a case goes forward properly. These prosecutors can choose not to even try things, or if they try them, can basically sabotage the case to keep it from going to trial.

Aside from my general thoughts about the legal system (this career I'm getting into is gonna kill me, huh?) if I were a juror, and assuming the show is relatively fair in its editing, there's no way I don't see reasonable doubt in the case. Where's motive? How do the established facts, if taken at face value, lead to a logical crime (it was powerful to me when they ask why she'd be transported in the vehicle if he was apparently hurting her in the house, killing her in the garage and burning her right outside of both. And where is the blood if any of this happened. It's a weak case even without the framing potential. The case against Brendan is even weaker. For me the moment they start suggesting what happens I disregard the entire confession. Gotta teach these cops how to do their job by assuring they never get prosecutions when they don't do it properly.

Yeah, pretty pissed and pessimistic, but that's why I want to get into this business, to do my little part to hopefully help.

saltine

  • Administrator
  • Godfather
  • *****
  • Posts: 9291
Re: Netflix's Making a Murderer (some posts have spoilers)
« Reply #4 on: December 29, 2015, 03:49:43 AM »
Bondo, are you listening to Oral Argument podcast?  It's quite informal; two law profs (young by the sound of their voices) talk and argue points of law, legal cases, and how the law affects everyone of us. 

Re: the series (SPOILERS)
Some info is coming out regarding the editing, but nothing in all I've read (and I'm trying to keep up with what's online) has carried much weight with me to make me think differently than I do about this case being poorly and improperly prosecuted and the wrongful imprisonment of two men. 

If anyone finds a good article on the film edits that would change my mind, I'd love to read it.

Here are the articles I read today.  The comments are as enlightening as the articles:


Evidence 'Making a Murderer' Didn't Present in Steven Avery's Murder Case


What Was Left Out of Making a Murderer Episodes 2–4


Making a Murderer’s Prosecutor Is Getting Absolutely Dragged on Yelp


The Lawyers From Netflix’s ‘Making A Murderer’ Are Getting Ravaged By The Internet

Q&A: Attorney Dean Strang still haunted by aspects of the Steven Avery case

Netflix's Making a Murderer is grim, riveting, and satisfying true crime TV
« Last Edit: December 29, 2015, 02:43:08 PM by saltine »
Texan Down Under

Bondo

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 19804
Re: Netflix's Making a Murderer (some posts have spoilers)
« Reply #5 on: December 29, 2015, 09:43:29 AM »
Biggest things after reading those:

I remember them talking about Avery basically driving a woman off the road and threatening her with a gun. I believe that situation, and her relation to police officers, is hinted as the reason they were so eager to pin the first crime on him that kind of got this going. I don't remember them, aside from noting he was charged for illegal possession of a firearm, talking about him having a gun at the time of the murder or whether it squares with the bullet that was eventually found. That he did and it does makes that less baffling at least.

Apparently Ken Kratz's law firm is getting hit with bad ratings on Yelp, which begs the question, how does this guy have a law firm. You'd think what he did to women whose abuse he was prosecuting would be enough to lose his law license.

Also, added that podcast to my queue.

jswysin

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 241
Re: Netflix's Making a Murderer (some posts have spoilers)
« Reply #6 on: December 29, 2015, 04:32:56 PM »
Blazed through this in a couple of rage-fueled days.  Everyone's talking about Transparent as the late in the year contender for top ten lists but this series is the one I'm begging people to watch. 

sdb_1970

  • Elite Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2206
Re: Netflix's Making a Murderer (some posts have spoilers)
« Reply #7 on: December 29, 2015, 06:34:00 PM »
This is quite a coincidence.  A few years back, I asked oad if she'd ever considered writing a screenplay, because if I had ever considered doing so, I found a story that really compelled me.  (In my fantasy world, I could even imagine a director like Lynne Ramsay directing it.)  The funny thing is that it wasn't the Steven Avery story, which is now told in, what is IMHO, this serial-bandwagon, padded-out multi-episode, Jinx-style gotcha documentary.  Rather, it was the far more interesting - psychologically and philosophically - story (to me anyway) of Penny Beernsten - as told on NPR's 24-minute segment of Radiolab, "Reasonable Doubt".
« Last Edit: December 29, 2015, 06:35:36 PM by sdb_1970 »
[insert pithy expression of false modesty here]

jdc

  • Godfather
  • ******
  • Posts: 5924
  • Accept the mystery
Re: Netflix's Making a Murderer (some posts have spoilers)
« Reply #8 on: January 03, 2016, 04:59:10 AM »
If you haven't binge-watched this 10 part true crime documentary on Netflix. you should do it now.

Then, if you haven't thrown your TV or computer through the window by the end of it, let's discuss it.

Will finish the last 3 episodes tonight and then come back to this thread
"Beer. Now there's a temporary solution."  Homer S.
“The direct use of physical force is so poor a solution to the problem of limited resources that it is commonly employed only by small children and great nations” - David Friedman

Bondo

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 19804
Re: Netflix's Making a Murderer (some posts have spoilers)
« Reply #9 on: January 03, 2016, 07:55:04 AM »
Bondo, are you listening to Oral Argument podcast?  It's quite informal; two law profs (young by the sound of their voices) talk and argue points of law, legal cases, and how the law affects everyone of us. 

Listened to a few episodes of this now and I'm mostly on board. They share my relative disdain for intellectual property protection.

 

love