EddScott

Anyone watched this? I've not finished it but is quite shocking.

Can't decide if he did it. And I think that's the point. Although the show is bias, it does seem to highlight there was reasonable doubt and if there is reasonable doubt how can you convict? And with public interest as was, how could he ever get a fair trial?

markjmd

iTrader: (11)

I haven't seen the series myself, but if this is to be believed, Netflix were pretty selective in some of the strong prosecution evidence that they chose to leave out of the series, which I suspect would have swung many if not most viewers in favour of thinking the guy guilty.

EddScott

Steven Avery does appear to be a fairly unlikable character and I guess there is the consideration that it's a good thing he is behind bars but the documentary is more to do with innocent until proven guilty and there are so many issues surrounding the case that there is an element of doubt, at least in my mind. Although what the alternative is, I don't know.

His nephew on the other hand was treated quite badly by the authorities. His initial interview demonstrates that anything he says just can't be trusted. Not because he isn't trustworthy but with an IQ of 73 and having admitted quite a terrible crime asks when he can go home, it shows he doesn't really understand what he's saying.

AS Performance

iTrader: (4)

never seen the show but from some brief reading it appears he's so "unlucky" he has been convicted TWICE of crimes he didn't commit???

TECHNOPUG

iTrader: (1)

Or he's been framed TWICE by the same Sherriff's department - the same one who he was sueing for $36m for framing him the first time, when they convicted him the second time....

AlecG51

I've just finished episode 8, it's pretty tense stuff, as well as addictive!

TECHNOPUG

iTrader: (1)

If you enjoy this, I strongly recommend "The Jinx - the life and deaths of Robert Durst"

Kwik

iTrader: (10)

I'be just watched episode 4.
It's obviously set up to be bias towards avery's innocence but even if there was an overwhelming amount of evidence to say he did it then the amount of tampering, coercing and lack of certain evidence should be enough for 'reasonable doubt'.
Great series though...