Making A Murderer - Season 2

edited October 10 in Other TV


I had no idea there was going to be a second season, it's coming out October 19. I loved the first season, but I wonder if part 2 is necessary or even if they can make it half as interesting as the first one. Based on this trailer it looks like it's going to be about trying to overturn the conviction, which, if it had been successful, would have been all over the news. So isn't the whole thing "spoiled" by knowing that they weren't able to overturn it? I'm definitely going to watch it but I'm kinda stumped why they made this. What do you guys think?
«1

Comments

  • I’m excited but now my Wife is going to be awake til 3am trying to solve the murder every night.


  • Reni said:


    I had no idea there was going to be a second season, it's coming out October 19. I loved the first season, but I wonder if part 2 is necessary or even if they can make it half as interesting as the first one. Based on this trailer it looks like it's going to be about trying to overturn the conviction, which, if it had been successful, would have been all over the news. So isn't the whole thing "spoiled" by knowing that they weren't able to overturn it? I'm definitely going to watch it but I'm kinda stumped why they made this. What do you guys think?
    Isn’t it still in the appeals process? Thought it was closed yet.
  • Hatorian said:
    Isn’t it still in the appeals process? Thought it was closed yet.
    I'm really not sure, but then why put out an entire season if there's no resolution either way? I'll just have to watch it to see how I feel about this.
  • HunkuleseHunkulese Québec, Canada
    Reni said:


    I had no idea there was going to be a second season, it's coming out October 19. I loved the first season, but I wonder if part 2 is necessary or even if they can make it half as interesting as the first one. Based on this trailer it looks like it's going to be about trying to overturn the conviction, which, if it had been successful, would have been all over the news. So isn't the whole thing "spoiled" by knowing that they weren't able to overturn it? I'm definitely going to watch it but I'm kinda stumped why they made this. What do you guys think?
    Aren't all true crime documentaries spoiled since they're based on true crimes?

    I thought the first season was great until I did a bit of research on my own and then was deeply disgusted by the whole thing. It's borderline fiction what was actually released to Netflix since they straight up just ignored everything that didn't fit exactly with the narrative they wanted to tell.
    DeeCretanBull
  • Doctor_NickDoctor_Nick Terminus
    edited October 10
    Yeah, from what I remember when I looked into it after the documentary, Avery’s case actually appears extremely problematic for innocence. from what I remember there were even some troubling parts of Brendan Dassey’s confession that weren’t quite as led by the nose as I first thought. I thought for sure Dassey was just collateral damage when I saw the original documentary. 

    It seems like an unfortunate problem with True Crime that the end goal is the story that is measured in ratings and that inducement is so strong that it supersedes real balance. Particularly when makers having access to the accused is part of the equation. 

    Hunkulese said:
    Reni said:


    I had no idea there was going to be a second season, it's coming out October 19. I loved the first season, but I wonder if part 2 is necessary or even if they can make it half as interesting as the first one. Based on this trailer it looks like it's going to be about trying to overturn the conviction, which, if it had been successful, would have been all over the news. So isn't the whole thing "spoiled" by knowing that they weren't able to overturn it? I'm definitely going to watch it but I'm kinda stumped why they made this. What do you guys think?
    Aren't all true crime documentaries spoiled since they're based on true crimes?

    I thought the first season was great until I did a bit of research on my own and then was deeply disgusted by the whole thing. It's borderline fiction what was actually released to Netflix since they straight up just ignored everything that didn't fit exactly with the narrative they wanted to tell.

  • VERY excited for this. Making a Murderer was the show that gave me the True Crime bug. 
  • Avery is guilty AF.  His nephew is probably guilty, but also probably wasn't give a fair trial and should walk.


    Deerusskelly
  • Avery is guilty AF.  His nephew is probably guilty, but also probably wasn't give a fair trial and should walk.


    I don’t know if I’m convenced Steven did it, but I’m fairly certain that someone who lives on the Avery property did, or is at least involved in some way. 
    I think Brendan’s confession was obviously coerced, and is entirely fictional. 

    Neither of these are new deductions, but I figured why not put them out there. 
    CretanBullDoubleA_Ron
  • Avery is guilty AF.  His nephew is probably guilty, but also probably wasn't give a fair trial and should walk.


    I don’t know if I’m convenced Steven did it, but I’m fairly certain that someone who lives on the Avery property did, or is at least involved in some way. 
    I think Brendan’s confession was obviously coerced, and is entirely fictional. 

    Neither of these are new deductions, but I figured why not put them out there. 
    I don't know if Brendan's confession was fictional, but he shouldn't have spoken to the police without legal representation and someone who is developmentally challenged shouldn't have been allowed to waive that right.  When he finally did get a lawyer, I'm not convinced that lawyer had his best interests in mind.
    BrandonTheBard
  • When he finally did get a lawyer, I'm not convinced that lawyer had his best interests in mind.
    That dude was such a dirtbag. He definitely didn’t give a shit about that kid. He didn’t try to fight for Brendan at all. He just wanted a quick and easy case. 
  • Doctor_NickDoctor_Nick Terminus
    edited October 11
    Dassey's lawyer was terrible because he didn't get any assurances about what the DA was going to do for Brendan before letting everybody loose on his client.  That being said, the proper move almost certainly was to throw Steve Avery under the bus and cooperate with the prosecution.
    BrandonTheBardCretanBull
  • Avery is guilty AF.  His nephew is probably guilty, but also probably wasn't give a fair trial and should walk.
    No chance that hillbilly killed her in that messy garage, cleaned out all of the schmutz, and then reassembled his giant mess.  If he did it, it wasn't how the state presented it.

    I'm aware of some of the things that have come out since the documentary.  It will definitely be worth watching if you haven't seen much since.
    rhcoop
  • CretanBullCretanBull Toronto
    edited October 11
    bennytube said:
    Avery is guilty AF.  His nephew is probably guilty, but also probably wasn't give a fair trial and should walk.
    No chance that hillbilly killed her in that messy garage, cleaned out all of the schmutz, and then reassembled his giant mess.  If he did it, it wasn't how the state presented it.

    I'm aware of some of the things that have come out since the documentary.  It will definitely be worth watching if you haven't seen much since.
    It's difficult to speculate about the details of the crime...you're assuming that the garage would have been a mess etc I don't to get into a giant debate about it but it's entirely possible that steps could have been taken to avoid such a mess etc.

    He called her to his house, he'd been creepy with her before in the past, her bones were discovered in his fire pit, her car was found hidden on his property, his blood DNA was in her car, his sweat DNA was found on her car key and the hood latch of her car (the nephew testified that Avery pooped the hood of the car, the fact that DNA was found there confirms his account) etc.  the minutiae details of the theory of the crime only distract from the basic facts of the case - which all point to his guilt.



  • The prosecution's theory of the crime doesn't have to be correct.


  • Some bones were in the fire pit.  The keys were found on the 9th search of the room.  Someone had pulled his old dna/blood from the evidence room from a previous crime.  He is creepy as fuck, and not a good guy.  (I think he burned a cat alive, if I remember right.)  But the way I see the evidence points toward being framed rather than as the actual killer.  <<shrug>>
  • Last person to see her alive, her bones in his fire pit, his blood and DNA in her car, the car on the property, the keys in his trailer. He’d have to be the unluckiest guy ever. I doubt the Manitowoc Sherriff’s department could do the job that well. 
  • I’m in for Season 2, though I reserve the right to hate it if it’s pointless.

    The possible tampering with the previous blood evidence while it was in police custody casts doubt on the DNA/blood evidence. I’ve seen justification that the vial was filled by syringe causing the hole, but that doesn’t make sense unless the vials are vacuums while empty as filling it full of blood through a sealed cap would cause the cap to pop-off under pressure otherwise.

    Documentry was certainly driving a narrative, which is part of why it was so compelling, and Avery is no Boy Scout. The workings of the system were also quite flawed and this documentary did a lot to raise the issue of systemic problems to the public’s awareness which is a good thing.

    If the cops and prosecutor believe that you’re guilty, whether for valid or invalid reasons, there are a lot of levers they can pull to make sure you’re found guilty. They have all the power if you can’t hire a good legal team to defend you and even the level of railroading that takes place with truly guilty people can be pretty alarming.
  • DeeDee Adelaide
    bennytube said:
    Avery is guilty AF.  His nephew is probably guilty, but also probably wasn't give a fair trial and should walk.
    No chance that hillbilly killed her in that messy garage, cleaned out all of the schmutz, and then reassembled his giant mess.  If he did it, it wasn't how the state presented it.

    I'm aware of some of the things that have come out since the documentary.  It will definitely be worth watching if you haven't seen much since.
    It's difficult to speculate about the details of the crime...you're assuming that the garage would have been a mess etc I don't to get into a giant debate about it but it's entirely possible that steps could have been taken to avoid such a mess etc.

    He called her to his house, he'd been creepy with her before in the past, her bones were discovered in his fire pit, her car was found hidden on his property, his blood DNA was in her car, his sweat DNA was found on her car key and the hood latch of her car (the nephew testified that Avery pooped the hood of the car, the fact that DNA was found there confirms his account) etc.  the minutiae details of the theory of the crime only distract from the basic facts of the case - which all point to his guilt.



    Agreed. I don’t buy that he was set up - he had history with her and was creepy as hell towards her. If he didn’t do it, then who the hell did? 

    Fuck that guy - he can rot in prison. And fuck the doco makers for trying to turn a guy who murdered a woman (and threw a cat on a fire - we all know what torturing animals is a sign of) into a martyr. 
    CretanBullrusskelly
  • Doctor_NickDoctor_Nick Terminus
    edited October 11
    The most popular blood draw system since the 1940s is literally called the Vacutainer system -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacutainer?wprov=sfti1. It fills by vacuum once you slide the test tube into the receptacle and the top is pierced by the needle in the receptacle. Therefore the blood drawer does not need to mess with drawing into a syringe and transferring to individual tubes. 

    LordBy said:
    I’m in for Season 2, though I reserve the right to hate it if it’s pointless.

    The possible tampering with the previous blood evidence while it was in police custody casts doubt on the DNA/blood evidence. I’ve seen justification that the vial was filled by syringe causing the hole, but that doesn’t make sense unless the vials are vacuums while empty as filling it full of blood through a sealed cap would cause the cap to pop-off under pressure otherwise.

    Documentry was certainly driving a narrative, which is part of why it was so compelling, and Avery is no Boy Scout. The workings of the system were also quite flawed and this documentary did a lot to raise the issue of systemic problems to the public’s awareness which is a good thing.

    If the cops and prosecutor believe that you’re guilty, whether for valid or invalid reasons, there are a lot of levers they can pull to make sure you’re found guilty. They have all the power if you can’t hire a good legal team to defend you and even the level of railroading that takes place with truly guilty people can be pretty alarming.

    BrandonTheBard
  • The most popular blood draw system since the 1940s is literally called the Vacutainer system -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacutainer?wprov=sfti1. It fills by vacuum once you slide the test tube into the receptacle and the top is pierced by the needle in the receptacle. Therefore the blood drawer does not need to mess with drawing into a syringe and transferring to individual tubes. 

    LordBy said:
    I’m in for Season 2, though I reserve the right to hate it if it’s pointless.

    The possible tampering with the previous blood evidence while it was in police custody casts doubt on the DNA/blood evidence. I’ve seen justification that the vial was filled by syringe causing the hole, but that doesn’t make sense unless the vials are vacuums while empty as filling it full of blood through a sealed cap would cause the cap to pop-off under pressure otherwise.

    Documentry was certainly driving a narrative, which is part of why it was so compelling, and Avery is no Boy Scout. The workings of the system were also quite flawed and this documentary did a lot to raise the issue of systemic problems to the public’s awareness which is a good thing.

    If the cops and prosecutor believe that you’re guilty, whether for valid or invalid reasons, there are a lot of levers they can pull to make sure you’re found guilty. They have all the power if you can’t hire a good legal team to defend you and even the level of railroading that takes place with truly guilty people can be pretty alarming.

    I’m familiar with that system, but I don’t know if law enforcement does things differently than your typical blood draw. The evidence seal on the box was also broken, explained by the DA saying that he broke it legitimately earlier which would fit either side, and the hole legit or not could also be used to extract blood without creating a new one.

    Maybe the second season will address questions raised about the way the first season presented the story? That would be interesting.
  • guys guys. i went to a psychic tarot reader. She said it was a young man, who knew her, was in love with her and had anger issues. 

    so obviously that eliminates 99% of the suspects. leaving us with only 1 real suspect. the ex-boyfriend....
  • DoubleA_RonDoubleA_Ron San Diego
    edited October 13
    I’m certain everyone in this thread already has, but anyone who hasn’t listened to the Bald Move TV podcast on the first season really should... it’s one of my all-time favorite BM podcasts because The organic discussion is so engaging and fascinating.

    http://baldmove.com/tv-podcast/making-a-murderer/

    I was disappointed awhile back on Lunch when A.Ron said he wasn’t super-keen on true crime documentaries (seemed to put the kibosh on any possibility of S2 coverage), and I was equally as surprised when he later said that he now kinda thought that Avery might be guilty.  Would have loved to hear some follow-up on that.
    BrandonTheBard
  • edited October 19
    One episode down! I’m watching them all as soon as they drop. 

    Kathleen Zellner gives me the creeps, but I like her. I think she’d be more than willing to admit that Steven guilty in the event that she uncovered evidence that she believed prove him guilty. 

    Now for episode 2... 

    Sorry folks, I feel shame about how excited I am about this. 
    HatorianFlukes
  • Hell yea! I can’t wait. Stupid me scheduled an upgrade of my fibre today so I’m waiting for them to finish installing everything before I can watch it. 
    BrandonTheBard
  • This makes a nice companion to the current season of Serial, despite getting bogged down in mundane details. I did appreciate showing the effect this has had on the Dassey and Avery family. My mother is 77 and has chronic lower back pain and it broke my heart watching his mother struggle just to get out of car or use a stove. 


    DoubleA_Ron
  • The stuff they found on the computer really makes me think SA might have not done it. I wonder why that wasn’t grounds for a retrial? I’m no lawyer but I thought you can get a retrial if new evidence is found and the computer search history certainly seems like compelling new evidence. One of the most important witnesses of the original trial that placed Theresa at SA house just so happens to have a computer full of rape and murder images/information. 
    BrandonTheBard
  • Hatorian said:
    The stuff they found on the computer really makes me think SA might have not done it. I wonder why that wasn’t grounds for a retrial? I’m no lawyer but I thought you can get a retrial if new evidence is found and the computer search history certainly seems like compelling new evidence. One of the most important witnesses of the original trial that placed Theresa at SA house just so happens to have a computer full of rape and murder images/information. 
    This is what I thought! Weird porn is one thing, but this dude was looking up some pretty egregious shit. They have him put away for life on mostly circumstantial evidence anyway though. That and whatever the hell they found under the hood of the car, which most likely wasn’t a sweat sample. 
  • adobo1148 said:
    This makes a nice companion to the current season of Serial, despite getting bogged down in mundane details. I did appreciate showing the effect this has had on the Dassey and Avery family. My mother is 77 and has chronic lower back pain and it broke my heart watching his mother struggle just to get out of car or use a stove. 


    Agreed... I just burned through all seven episodes of Serial today and constantly found myself drawing comparisons to MaM S2.  

    Nothing in the way of earth-shattering revelations this season, but it certainly does illustrate how the justice system continues to fail both Avery and Dassey (and the Halbachs, for that matter).  Scary shit.
  • I'm pretty underwhelmed by this season to be honest. Sure, there was some good stuff in there, but this easily could have been done in just a feature-length documentary if they wanted to do an update. The points made about the justice system made me frustrated and at times, hopeless, but then again, they didn't need 10 episode to do that.

    As for the computer history, I think the biggest problem is how do you prove that it was Bobby who searched for all of that stuff? Didn't they all live together at the time? So it could have been any one of them really, even Scott. Maybe I just missed where they mentioned that.
  • Doctor_NickDoctor_Nick Terminus
    edited October 29
    Given the way true crime media creators have a tendency to strawman and attack the weakest part of a case, ignoring inconvenient truths in hopes of crafting a better story, including in Making A Murderer Season 1; it is very difficult to know much about what the case really is without an outside source of information.
    CretanBull
Sign In or Register to comment.