In 1985 a Manitowoc woman was the victim of a violent sexual assault committed by Gregory Allen. Steven Avery is wrongfully convicted of said assault and forced to spend 18 years in prison before new DNA testing finally exonerates him in 2003. One year after Avery is released from prison he files a civil lawsuit  for 36 million dollars; it seemed as though Avery was destined to cash in. However, only one year after Avery filed the lawsuit he was arrested — this time for the murder of Teresa Halbach, a business acquaintance of Steven's. Avery again stands trial, is convicted and sentenced to life in prison without parole. Interweaved throughout much of the documentary is the devastating story of Brendan Dassey, Steven Avery's nephew, who is also implicated and subsequently convicted of the murder. Dassey is a young man with (as some say) insufficient mental capabilities who undergoes emotionally traumatic experiences at the hands of those charged to defend him. The documentary ends with Steven and Brendan declaring their innocence and stating that the truth always comes out.

 

 

Directors / Producers Laura Ricciardi and Moira Demos have given us  an emotional documentary that painfully details how Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey's 2007 conviction came to pass.  One might not know it based on the success the filmmakers have achieved, but when Ricciardi and Demos first moved to Manitowoc to follow the story they were wholly amateur in their profession. In order to accommodate the laws of the land the in court filming was often done with multiple cameras taped to the courtroom walls. Luckily the final product is impressively polished and darkly seductive. Many walk away having seen a disturbing portrayal of 'CheckMate-Justice' playing out in Manitowoc County. The Avery family  (or any family for that matter) has no way to fight back when those operating the system long ago decide the outcome.

 

When you begin to look closely enough at this case you will see a pattern of motions, arguments, precedents and rulings presented in court - the rulings often favoring the prosecution. It almost seems as though a state entity warranted such action - devoting resources and (very specific) man power to manipulate the evidence, all the while assuring the lower courts that future appeals would be squashed and future threats of litigation either ignored or forced upon a state agent seen as 'disposable.'

 

In case you haven't figured it out yet - I operate under the firm belief that Avery and Dassey are innocent of murdering Teresa Halbach.

 

 

Familiar to anyone following the political landscape in the United States, when examining this case we should also be aware of how bias may have shaped the prosecution's case or, on the other hand, how bias may have shaped the documentary. How does one rely on the information relayed in the documentary when it is coming from a source we know to be biased? Evidence was left out. Plenty of it. As Laura and Moira have said on many occasions, editing a 30 year span of time into a cohesive and compelling 10 hours of footage automatically indicates the majority of the trial, investigative reports and recorded interviews would be left on the cutting room floor. However, indeed it is true, the majority of the evidence was left out. Did the filmmakers purposefully create a documentary they knew was not an accurate reflection of reality?

 

That is up to you.

 

As for me, I've said before and I say again: researching this case independently (and if I may say so - in incredible depth) has only solidified that horrifying feeling I felt upon my first viewing. Nothing of consequence was excluded from the documentary, nothing that, had it been included, would radically shift the opinion I formed on my first viewing of Making A Murderer.

 

Conversely, how does one verify the information submitted during the discovery process when it is coming from a source known to be biased? Most of the reports we have access to have been written by a bunch of officers who have shown to posses, without doubt, an enormous professional bias towards Avery and his family.

 

As we saw first hand in Making A Murderer, many salacious and often false details from these reports end up being broadcast to the state via the media. This, in my oh so humble opinion, is why most that saw Making A Murderer were far more alarmed by past allegations against Ken Kratz than they were past allegations against Steven Avery. Kratz, way back when, had an incredible amount of power. He had a kind of judicial influence over regular members of society. Avery had no such power. Avery was at the mercy of those in power.

 

Allowing the system to run unchecked is akin to inviting state officials to blur the lines of ethical behavior at their own behest. Look what happened when Kratz climbed high enough up the ladder. He was able to use his position to not only evade justice, but to target future victims. Now Kratz and the State of Wisconsin are stuck in this interesting stand off, each no doubt having enormous amounts of compromising information on the other (Fascinating to consider, no?).

 

Expanding on the argument of bias, in this case we all have discovered an absolutely terrifying truth - reports are not reality. Manitowoc / Calumet / DOJ officials write their experience in a report and that report counts as indisputable evidence. The problem with this type "record=reality" system is that anyone, innocent or guilty, anyone can be promoted as having traits in common with a killer. Even you.

 

How would you dispute a police report stating you were acting odd and evasive when you were attempting to appear open and honest..?

 

It is clear the details in these police reports are inconsistent with reality. While Avery has no doubt posed a threat to people in the past, I personally believe it is near insanity to assert the filmmakers are guilty of glorifying a murderer, especially in light of actions documented by agents of the state. It is a serious threat to society when multiple state departments only report on events that benefit their own perspective / agenda. That is why we are going to be shocked and horrified by season 2 of Making A Murderer - it will expose the vast difference between the reports and the reality.

 

I will not go so far as to say I know Avery will be released, but as far as everyone getting answers I believe Zellner, Ricciardi and Demos will deliver in a way that is impossible to refute. Those of us that have spent hours sifting through the available documents will no doubt be shaking upon viewing Making A Murderer season 2. Am I right or am I right? 'Guilters' and 'Truthers' alike. It will be an extremely unique experience for you all. When you watch season 2, a quick shot of a photo or mention of a name will be enough to tip you off to the direction of Zellner's theory.

 

　

 

• Kathleen Zellner (tweet) :So it's clear we are examining the prosecutorial violations first not the defense attorneys performance. #MakingAMurderer #StayingRealBusy.