
‘Making a Murderer’ Left Out Crucial Facts, Prosecutor Says - pavornyoh
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/05/arts/television/ken-kratz-making-a-murderer.html?module=WatchingPortal&region=c-column-middle-span-region&pgType=Homepage&action=click&mediaId=wide&state=standard&contentPlacement=1&version=internal&contentCollection=www.nytimes.com&contentId=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2016%2F01%2F05%2Farts%2Ftelevision%2Fken-kratz-making-a-murderer.html&eventName=Watching-article-click&_r=0
======
Robadob
I just finished watching this series last night, shortly after I noticed this
(potential spoiler) had appeared on twitter. It certainly adds credence to
their documentary if it is infact honest.

[https://twitter.com/TODAYshow/status/684373410038718464](https://twitter.com/TODAYshow/status/684373410038718464)

(In the video attached to the tweet, one of the creators of the documentary
claims they have since been contacted by one of the jurors from Steven Avery's
trial, who stated they felt he was innocent however voted guilty as they
feared for their personal safety.)

~~~
CamperBob2
_(In the video attached to the tweet, one of the creators of the documentary
claims they have since been contacted by one of the jurors from Steven Avery
's trial, who stated they felt he was innocent however voted guilty as they
feared for their personal safety.)_

Wow, that's not a statement to take lightly. Arguably, if a juror comes
forward with something like that, it's time to empanel a Federal grand jury to
investigate the judge and prosecutor.

------
chasing
What happened to Brenden Dassey was so egregious that I feel comfortable
describing anyone who helped put him in jail as either hopelessly corrupt or
stupid. (Or both.) Ken Kratz included.

So I'm disinclined to believe Mr. Kratz when it comes to the Avery case...

~~~
will_pseudonym
They are only human. Check out "Mistakes were made (but not by me)" \-- great
book about the impact of cognitive dissonance! They likely got a feeling and
stopped being completely rational. They wanted to prove themselves right and
avoid the psychological injury of admitting a mistake--for some people, their
entire identities are tied to them being great at their job, so that
particular psychological injury is existentially scary.

~~~
dantillberg
That is definitely a potential _reason_ for people in positions of authority
to act illogically and unfairly, but we never should allow that to be used as
an _excuse_. We hold civil servants to a higher bar because they wield so much
power yet are expected to be restrained in how they use it.

I do tend to agree perhaps that there are more likely explanations for their
actions than stupidity or corruption (as the GP suggested), but we should be
wary when it comes to looking for signs of the latter, as a skilled corrupt
civil servant / politician will always hide their malfeasance under the guise
of slowness, stupidity, miscommunication, etc.

~~~
will_pseudonym
Agreed. I hate the system and how badly it seems to be functioning for so many
disadvantaged people. I just wanted to share that lovely book. It kind of
humanizes the people who are "terrible" by giving color to why they kind of
turn to the dark side. Most/all think they're correct and holy (just like
most/all of the dark side does)...

------
bravo22
"The gun was confiscated when officers searched his trailer on Nov. 5, 2005,
and the bullet was found in the garage in March 2006, Mr. Kratz said. 'If they
planted it, how did they get a bullet that was shot from Avery’s gun before
Nov. 5?' he said."

To me the fact that the police had the gun for more than 5 months before the
bullet was found only reinforces the theory that the bullet may have been
discharged and planted by the police.

This is reinforced by lack of a bullet hole, or blood splatter in the garage
where the prosecution claims he shot her.

------
latkin
2 points from the defense that had a "checkmate" feel to them when first
presented in the show, but were then _never brought up again._ Anyone have a
pointer to details/followup/refutation on these? (Spoiler alert, obviously)

\- Colburn calling in the plates/make/model/year for the victim's car 2 days
before it was found

\- Victim's voice mail was checked at 8am the day after she was supposedly
killed

~~~
scriptproof
"Colburn calling in the plates/make/model/year for the victim's car 2 days
before it was found". Should be usual when someone disappears.

"Victim's voice mail was checked at 8am the day after she was supposedly
killed". By who? The family? The murder?

The series did not show the past of Avery before this affaire. Specially when
he burns alive a cat while laughing. Maybe there would be less watchers to
believe in his innocence! I am currently writing on this affaire and read of
lot of documents, and I have no doubt he is guilty. For the other idiot,
Dassey, it is less sure.

~~~
pmcpinto
I think that he was a teenager when he burned a cat alive. Usually teenagers
make stupid things. I know people that make things like that and worse in
their youth and they aren't murderers.

It's strange that they don't considered the possibility of Bobby Dassey and
Scott Tadych being the murderers or the "German" man:
[http://www.convolutedbrian.com/an-
alternative.html](http://www.convolutedbrian.com/an-alternative.html)

~~~
scriptproof
He is not a teenager when he bought a pair of handcuffs and iron legs. "This
was to try something new with my wife" he said, laughting. His wife is jailed
at the time. What a good surprise for her, when she is released. Not to
mention the project of a torture room he described to his inmates.

------
rogerb
I have a simple question: according to the prosecution, where was Teresa
murdered? In the garage by being shot or on the bed after a violent rape ? In
Stevens case it seems to be the former, in Brendan's case the latter. There's
virtually no evidence for either hypothesis.

~~~
napoleond
_> There's virtually no evidence for either hypothesis._

Indeed, there's even evidence _against_ them. Why on earth was so much of her
blood in the back of her vehicle if it wasn't used at all during the crime?

The show was so frustrating to watch.

~~~
rogerb
exactly - the options are - shot in the garage with a miracle cleanup (with
only blood on the bullet, but no splatters in garage) - killed on the bed with
no blood evidence at all. In both cases supposedly dragged to the car (why?),
to be then dragged out of the same car back to a burning pit, where only bones
from part of her body are found.

the case as presented truly defies any credibility or logical sense.

------
Tycho
All the reports along these lines seem to stem from what this prosecutor has
said. It would be more credible if other officials or trial participants
weighed in.

The omitted evidence he raised seem to me to fall under 2 categories:

1\. Evidence that was very ambiguous (eg. the accused calling the victim's
cellphone... suspicious until you remember he was doing business with her)

2\. Physical evidence closely related to physical evidence that was included.
My problem here is that if you think some of the physical evidence was
tampered with or planted, then there's no reason to believe the other evidence
is authentic. And if you don't believe it was planted, then you don't need any
other evidence.

~~~
bambax
This article obviously comes directly from Kratz with little to no challenge,
and that's why it fails to remember readers _why_ Kratz resigned in 2010.

"I am the prize"... Yeah, some prize, right.

------
bmh_ca
Spoilers; be warned.

It strikes me as relevant, but it is rarely mentioned that Steven Avery's
civil case for his first wrongful prosecution against the police and town was
denied coverage by the insurance companies. This means the individuals
involved in his first wrongful conviction (and who were implicated by the
documentary for wrongdoing in the second conviction) could have been found
personally financially liable. That would be a powerful incentive for most
people.

~~~
pmcpinto
Yes, and it is shocking that supposedly the Manitowoc County Police wasn't
allowed to be part of the investigation and they were everywhere during the
searches and so on...

------
legitster
I wanted to try this out but I haven't yet forgiven Serial for completely
wasting my time on a similar sounding premise. Is this better? Before I watch
it does it actually dig up new evidence or just rehash a cold case?

~~~
DanBC
You get to see a 16 year old person with low IQ (about 70, so borderline
learning disabled) get interrogated several times, by different people,
without a lawyer or parent present.

Some of that interrogation is clearly designed to get him to confess to a
crime, and doesn't seem to care whether the confession is true or false.

Some of that interrogation appears to be better designed, and seems to want to
get truth rather than a confession, but after several hours they get
frustrated that they're not getting a confession so they change tactics. (And
I think their frustration is because he'd confessed the day before, so why
isn't he confessing now, and the thought that maybe he's innocent doesn't seem
to occur to them.)

When there's a miscarriage of justice people often say "but why did he
confess?"

This documentary is now my example of why people confess to crimes they did
not commit.

There are some frustrating bits about it. The other person was wrongly
convicted of a violent crime, was cleared by very good, solid, DNA evidence.
We hear a few times from law enforcement who doubt the exoneration and the DNA
evidence, and there's a lack of challenge of those attitudes. It's a bit like
watching a slow motion train wreck - "what the fuck is that lawyer doing?!?"
(the lawyer for the young person makes a comment to the media that pretty much
torpedoes his client's case). There's some stuff around plea bargains that
isn't explored as much as it could be. A bunch of people accept plea bargains
not because they're guilty but because they don't want the extra penalties
from a risky court case. And it's a bit long - 10 programmes could have been
edited down to 5 without losing any information.

Worth watching though.

------
pmcpinto
Is there any legal possibility to Steven and Brendan have a new trial,
specially outside of Wisconsin state?

~~~
dogma1138
Normally not really as US law mandates that the the defendant should be judged
in the state and district where they crime has been committed.

The US/State attorney might step in if there is enough proof for misconduct
especially if the DA cannot be trusted to handle the case impartially.

Other than that the normal appeal process is still accessible they can appeal
to Courts of Appeals which is split to 12 regional circuits so this would
technically allow you to get judged "out of state" not sure how far it is, or
if you can appeal to be judged in another circuit.

Normally there isn't a way for people to be judged out of state mostly because
they are judged according to state and local laws which can't be upheld by a
different court unless the case is federal and then they go through the
federal court system. And there isn't really another way for this process to
work the defendant can't be expected to be able to choose where they'll be
tried because it basically allows them to choose how they will be sentenced or
even if they have committed a crime in the first place.

~~~
pmcpinto
Thanks for the clarification. So if it happens a "miracle" and they go to
trial again probably it will be again in Wisconsin

~~~
dogma1138
I'm not sure if this will go to another "trial" if there will be clear
evidence of prosecutorial misconduct they might hold another one, but they did
deny an appeal in 2008.

That said apparently the DA did act appropriately as there was a clear case of
conflict of interest they've delegated the case to the adjacent district which
handled the prosecution and most of the investigation. From what I've read
about the case this isn't just a clear cut case the documentary did present
quite a bit of evidence but it was very cherry picked I'm not entirely sold
what actually happened.

My biggest grief with this documentary isn't that it drives and agenda is that
it does it on an "active case" this is a sad story indeed but this should've
been done on a different case perhaps I would assume that there are plenty of
miscarriage of justice cases that are over which could've been used. I hope
there will be an investigation in this manner but even the most biased news
coverage of any criminal case doesn't formulate and opinion of the matter as
much as this docu did, and this can poison any potential future investigation
or trial for better or for worse.

~~~
pmcpinto
But the prosecutors also manipulated the public opinion with that public
conferences about that what Brendan and Steven supposedly made to the victim,
only based in a doubtful and manipulated confession of Brendan.

~~~
dogma1138
Again not claiming that this was handled even remotely appropriately but 2
wrongs do not make it right. I wouldn't want the media being used to institute
an opinion within the general public regardless if they are doing it for the
prosecution or the defense.

If anything should be taken from this and from many other public cases is that
we really need much more stricter ethical guidelines about how criminal and
civil cases are handled by the media. When the media can be used as a tool to
affect public opinion it can be used to affect potential outcome of trials and
that's very bad place to be.

Heck even pre-trial coverage can change the outcome of many cases then the
media reports that they caught a guy and builds a case that they are guilty
people would put less effort into doing due diligence the police might not
chase up on additional leads, people who might have had details are not less
likely to come forward because they caught the guy so why should they bother
and some of the witnesses that already came forward will start rehashing what
they've seen on the news even if only unconsciously.

Heck at this point you might be able to actually get out of guilty verdict by
getting some PR company to spam as much misinformation about the incident as
possible poisoning all the witnesses it only takes a handful of inaccuracies
between the initial statement and the trail deposition for the defense to rip
the witnesses apart.

~~~
pmcpinto
That's totally true

------
ikeboy
[https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/3ypbns/doc...](https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/3ypbns/documents_in_the_avery_and_dassey_cases/)

------
bertil
My reaction was probably one that is a lot more relevant to the Hacker News
community: between that and the incessant news about shootings (either by the
Police on African American, or by toddlers), the alarming ratio of car
accidents that cannot be prevented by driving safely (namely, the amount or
rear-ending at red-lights that the Google Car is victim of), there is no way
I’d like to work in the US. Seeing how bigoted so many jurors appear to be,
how indefensible are some of the lawyers… that makes it all too likely that
you go from commuting to a great job to a hell hole with no recourse. Any
private option (say, for health-related issues) is too likely to be tied to
employment, and getting fired after the incident and left in the cold sounds
also too likely.

Investors should really start considering the consequence those events have on
their companies’ ability to attract talent.

~~~
chasing
You're cherry-picking some of the worst the US has to offer and painting the
entire country with that brush. Which is an intellectually dishonest thing to
do. Or, at least, intellectually lazy.

~~~
bertil
I actually mostly followed the US news, check the New York Times: Trump daily
dose of blatant racist, Obama apparently the only one who wants to curb gun
violence, some cop murdered a African-American women and gets away with a slap
on the wrist, a story about systemic rape from a football team at a major US
university…

~~~
chasing
This is what I mean by "cherry-picking."

~~~
bertil
Then, please go and insult the editor-in-chief of the New York Times — not me.

What _I_ cherry-picked was how my brother left the US after an arrest in the
nearby house involved law-enforcement firing 12,000 rounds at a single
crouching suspect, and they had to leave because his wife and two kids
couldn’t sleep after that; how the CEO of the start-up I was working for was
mugged; how my closest friend was victim of an extreme-rendition at the border
_after_ he showed a hand-written letter by the Dean of Harvard inviting him to
teach; how my manager had his passport confiscated… I know work with a team
that is partially in Chicago: do I need to say more?

The twelve people the closest to me who went to the US all had beyond
traumatic experiences. Imagining anything involving a prosecutor like the one
portrayed there just sends shivers through my spine.

------
madaxe_again
I never cease to be amazed at how ready people are to believe a single
narrative, and once it's set in their mind, disregard all conflicting
information. Good old confirmation bias.

Free hat!

------
CPLX
It seems to me that the Ockham's Razor approach to this whole mess is to
conclude that Steven Avery killed her and then ditched her car and maybe her
remains somewhere else, and then the cops were worried he'd get away with it
so they planted it all back on his property.

But what do I know.

------
mgr86
It is very tough to resist making an ad hominem attack on Ken Kratz.

~~~
rhizome
Ad hominem doesn't invalidate an argument, it speaks to credibility.

~~~
foxhill
and credibility seeks proof through authority, i.e not a proof at all.

ad hominems have no place in rational debate.

~~~
rodgerd
Credibility has direct relevance to testimony, amongst other things.

I know this may shock you, but there's a world beyond high school debating.

~~~
dang
> _I know this may shock you, but there 's a world beyond high school
> debating_

Please don't make acerbic swipes in HN comments. Your comment would be a fine
one without that second sentence.

------
swagv
Why are we pretending binge-watching entertainment is the same as the judicial
process?

~~~
bertil
My understanding is that this is a documentary on the _failings_ of judicial
process in Wisconsin. I mean: it is not very entertaining, far less so than
fictions on Netflix.

If you take away the main case (admittedly murkier), there is nothing more
cringe-inducing that the details about the nephew’s case. It is just painful
to listen to; everything about it talks about how a mentally handicapped
relative, who had nothing to do with the case, was (on camera) abused by
authority figures, and then wronged at every step of the judicial process.
This is the least entertaining thing that I have seen all week (and I watched
videos on how to set-up Docker), by far. It seems to me that this part is a
highly relevant documentary on key failings of the process for younger or
uneducated people. That kind of description cannot be satisfied by fiction.
That kind of description is necessary to set up and improve the judicial
process.

