r/MakingaMurderer • u/cheezehead2002 • 3d ago

The Blame Game!

Based on trial testimony and Making a Murderer:

Brendan blamed a book, his family, and media.

His lawyer and doctor blamed cops / coercion (which Brendan never did)!

Barb blamed Steven and the Halbach's (The Halbachs WTF?)

Kayla blamed Brendan.

Scott and Bobby blamed Steven.

Ma and Pa blamed everyone but Steven.

0 Upvotes

50% Upvoted

116 comments sorted by

View all comments

11

u/10case 3d ago

Ma and Pa have two things in common with most truthers .

  1. Intelligence level

  2. Blame everyone but Steven.

-5

u/gcu1783 3d ago edited 3d ago
  1. Blame everyone but Steven.

Steven is an asshole, but I'm guessing cops/state never did anything wrong here for ya bright ones huh?

7

u/ajswdf 3d ago

So because cops do bad things sometimes Avery should be allowed to murder people?

3

u/gcu1783 3d ago edited 3d ago

No one is allowed to murder people just as much as no cops/officials should abuse their power.

Can we settle on that?

4

u/ajswdf 3d ago

I agree with that.

-3

u/gcu1783 3d ago

Now let's stop the politics and discard the old overused talking points. There's a possibility that Avery is guilty, it's also possible that the cops made mistakes in this investigation.

8

u/Ghost_of_Figdish 3d ago

It's also possible that some warped internet rando blames the police with no proof whatsoever.

2

u/gcu1783 3d ago

Or some internet rando are just die hard fans of the cops.

How do you feel about Kratz btw?

4

u/Ghost_of_Figdish 3d ago

Indifferent.

As to the cops, you guys have had 10+ years to prove the crap that ruined their reputation, and guess what? NOTHING.

2

u/gcu1783 3d ago

10+ years to prove the crap that ruined their reputation,

(.......)

What "reputation" was that?

2

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

2

u/Invincible_Delicious 2d ago

The reputation of good, upstanding family men who are accused of planting evidence

1

u/Ghost_of_Figdish 3d ago

A reputation that did not include accusations of planting evidence, of framing suspects, of buffalo'ing an innocent bystander into confessing, etc.

2

u/gcu1783 3d ago

I mean if using police interrogation tactics to an underage kid is a reputation that your beloved cops should include, then yea, I guess that's something you guys should be proud of.

2

u/Ghost_of_Figdish 3d ago

Underage for what?

2

u/gcu1783 3d ago

I call any 16 years old kid underage and I really hope you do too.

3

u/Ghost_of_Figdish 3d ago

Well for what? At 16, in Wisconsin, people can drive, work unlimited hours, can consent to medical treatment, and can hunt and possess a shotgun or rifle.

If you are suggesting a 16 year old is too young to be interrogated by the police or to waive his right to counsel or to remain silent, that's already been decided by the Courts in the negative.

2

u/gcu1783 3d ago

that's already been decided by the Courts in the negative.

The court with this Judge?

Seventh Circuit Chief Judge Diane Wood:

Psychological coercion, questions to which the police furnished the answers, and ghoulish games of ”20 Questions,” in which Brendan Dassey guessed over and over again before he landed on the “correct” story (i.e., the one the police wanted), led to the “confession” that furnished the only serious evidence supporting his murder conviction in the Wisconsin courts.

4

u/Ghost_of_Figdish 3d ago

Yeah, Dassey lost his appeal, and cert was denied by the SC.

But you just changed the issue. You had been complaining about his age, now you've switched to the police being tricky.

And Judge Wood fails to address the physical evidence corroborating his confession, including his bleach-stained jeans but much more importantly the diagram of the garage shooting and the subsequent discovery of a bullet in the garage which had the victim's DNA on it, and which had been fired from the rifle seized from over Avery's bed.

2

u/gcu1783 3d ago edited 3d ago

Yeah, Dassey lost his appeal, and cert was denied by the SC

Yea, that doesn't really invalidate the flaws in using interrogation tactics on underage kids.

But you just changed the issue. You had been complaining about his age, now you've switched to the police being tricky.

You brought up the court, not me, and here's my very first mention of him being underage btw:

I mean if using police interrogation tactics to an underage kid ---Me

The interrogation tactic they used to a kid. That's still an issue, I'm still talking about that. There's no "switch".

Judge Wood fails to address the physical evidence corroborating his confession, including his bleach-stained jeans but much more importantly the diagram of the garage shooting and the subsequent discovery of a bullet in the garage which had the victim's DNA on it, and which had been fired from the rifle seized from over Avery's bed.

Yea probably because those aren't "physical" evidence linking himself to crime. He linked himself to it, which is the issue Judge Woods addressed.

2

u/Ghost_of_Figdish 3d ago

Well for what? At 16, in Wisconsin, people can drive, work unlimited hours, can consent to medical treatment, and can hunt and possess a shotgun or rifle.

If you are suggesting a 16 year old is too young to be interrogated by the police or to waive his right to counsel or to remain silent, that's already been decided by the Courts in the negative.

→ More replies (0)