Netflix: Making a Murderer

[jd1020]

Originally Posted by DementedLogic

I'm the reerun, yet you can't explain how Brendan Dassey told the cops about the purse and cell phone in the burn barrel, when that information had not been released to the public. You are so emotionally attached to the idea that Avery and Dassey are innocent, that you aren't able to step back and look at things objectively. I understand the feeling. I felt the same way after the documentary.

The first people to mention a purse, a cellphone, and a camera were the ****ing detectives.

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by DementedLogic

I'm the reerun, yet you can't explain how Brendan Dassey told the cops about the purse and cell phone in the burn barrel, when that information had not been released to the public. You are so emotionally attached to the idea that Avery and Dassey are innocent, that you aren't able to step back and look at things objectively. I understand the feeling. I felt the same way after the documentary.

Exactly what did Brendan "confess" to that wasn't first prompted by the police? It wasn't the purse or cell phone.

[RockChalk]

Originally Posted by DementedLogic

I'm the reerun, yet you can't explain how Brendan Dassey told the cops about the purse and cell phone in the burn barrel, when that information had not been released to the public. You are so emotionally attached to the idea that Avery and Dassey are innocent, that you aren't able to step back and look at things objectively. I understand the feeling. I felt the same way after the documentary.

You do understand that Fassbender and Weigert are names of the investigators, not nicknames for Brendan Dassey, right? I'm assuming you don't, because it's the only way anyone with a basic reading comprehension (and by basic, I mean even Brendan Dassey could understand what he was reading) would go through the original interview on 2/27/06 and conclude that Dassey mentioned anything before the investigator's suggest it.

I'm not sure that anyone in this entire thread is 100% sure of Steven and Brandon's guilt or non-guilt, but almost anyone with basic brain function knows that none of this went down the way the prosecutors say it did. And even more-so, you are the only person posting in here that reads a very clearly written out interview (again, the original on 2/27/06) and takes away from it that Brendan Dassey gave one original thought in his "confession"

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by RockChalk

I'm not sure that anyone in this entire thread is 100% sure of Steven and Brandon's guilt or non-guilt, but almost anyone with basic brain function knows that none of this went down the way the prosecutors say it did.

THIS. Those two idiots could not have cleaned up the blood so perfectly in either of those rooms. Way too many objects and trash. I doubt a professional could have pulled that trick off.

[RustShack]

Wasn't the cell phone used the next morning? How was it in the burn barrel then? Why was the a separate burn barrel from the Fire?

[ForeverChiefs58]

[ForeverChiefs58]

We’ve got the full text of the letter below but Zellner sums it up nicely: Kratz basically asks Avery to confess to him so he can write a tell all book about the case. As if that wasn’t messed up enough, he also disses Avery for asking him to look into fingerprint evidence that might exonerate him. Why would Ken do that when Steven is guilty? Steven really needs to stop it with these nonsense claims and just admit he did it so he can join the ranks of other famous killers who confessed.

Kratz wrote this letter back before Making A Murderer came out and turned into a viral sensation, so he probably never expected it to surface. It’s just more fuel for people who interpreted his behavior during Avery’s trial as prosecutorial misconduct, and believe him to be a narcissistic weirdo more interested in furthering himself than in seeking justice.


Dear Mr Avery:

I got your letter dated August 28 2015, wherein you tell me your visitor list is full, and ask if I checked out other fingerprints found on Teresa Halbach’s car, telling me that these people could have “set you up” for this.

I apologise for misunderstanding your letters from a couple years ago, as I thought you were interested in being honest about what happened and finally telling the whole story to someone. Since I’m the person who probably knows more about your case that anyone else, I hoped that you would chose me to tell your story to.
Unfortunately, you only want to continue your nonsense about being set you. That’s too bad, because you had ONE opportunity to finally tell all the details, but now that will never happen.

By the way, the difference between you and famous convicted murderers from the past is that they told their whole truthful story to someone, who then wrote a book about what actually happened and people got to understand both sides. I was willing to do that for you… but if you are going to continue to lie about what happened between you and Ms Halbach, I am not interested.

If you change your mind, and want to tell your story someday, please contact me.

Sincerely yours,
Kenneth R Kratz

[ForeverChiefs58]

Read the disturbing text messages that caused Making a Murderer's Ken Kratz to lose his job

If you're part of the population that became obsessed with Netflix's docuseries Making a Murderer over the holidays, then you are well acquainted with the face of Ken Kratz, the Wisconsin prosecutor responsible for Steven Avery receiving a life sentence in the 2005 death of Teresa Halbach.


While the series has polarized viewers, raised a million questions about Avery's guilt and caused many to wring their hands at the American judicial system, there's one thing most of us can agree on: Kratz is pretty creepy.

His overconfident demeanor during the trial mixed with his love of stepping up to the mic to address local media was skeezy for sure, and as fans of Making a Murderer became obsessed with the show and started googling Kratz's name, more information about him began bubbling to the surface.


As we learned at the end of Making a Murderer, Kratz was involved in a sexting scandal in 2009, in which he sent a series of inappropriate texts to a female domestic violence victim. Kratz was prosecuting the woman's ex-boyfriend for allegedly strangling her when Katz sent upwards of 30 sexually suggestive messages to the victim.

The woman told investigators she felt threatened by the messages and was "afraid that if she doesn't do what he wants, Kratz will throw out her whole case," according to ABC News. The scandal led to Kratz's resignation as Calumet County district attorney after the governor sought his removal.

The text messages he sent that led to his resignation are now public — and pretty disturbing.


"It was nice talking with you! Feel free to text me (between 8 and 4) if you are bored. You have such potential. See ya. KEN (your favorite DA)," Kratz messaged the victim on Oct. 20, 2009, the first message in a three-day series of texts used in the woman's civil suit against Kratz, obtained by Radar Online.

"No text yet today? I’m feeling ignored. Are you even up yet?" Kratz followed up with. According to Radar, the woman replied that she was ill and Kratz offered to bring her soup and a margarita — which she declined.

At 11:30 a.m. on the same day the victim told Kratz she was ill, his text advances became more aggressive.

"I know this is wrong. I am such an honest guy, and straight shooter…but I have to know more about you… Are you the kind of girl that likes secret contact with an older married elected DA…the riskier the better?" he wrote.

"Still wondering if I’m worth it? Can I help you answer any questions?" he persisted as the woman shut down his advances. “Why would such a successful, respected attorney be acting like he’s in 7th grade? Are you worried about me?”


The victim then told Kratz that she would not lie and she was uncomfortable with his behavior, but Kratz persisted.

"You should never lie to me! Obviously we have talents and this to offer that the other is intrigued by [sic], or you would have called me creepy. You wanna accept."

On Oct. 21, 2009, Kratz began to verbally attack the domestic abuse victim when it became clear that she was not reciprocating.

"It would go slow enough for Shannon’s case to get done. Remember it would be special enough to risk all," he texted the victim, alluding to the fact his sexual fantasy about her would last the duration of her former boyfriend's abuse case.

When the woman didn't respond, Kratz kept the texts coming by demeaning her and talking himself up. "Hey..Miss Communication, what’s the sticking point? Your low-self esteem and you fear you can’t play in my big sandbox?[sic]

"You may look good at first glance, but women that are blonde, 6ft tall, legs and great bodies don’t like to be shown off or to please their men! [sic]" he wrote on Oct. 21.

"I’m the atty. I have the $350,000 house. I have the 6-figure career. You may be the tall, young, hot nymph, but I am the prize."

His final texts came on Oct. 22, 2009.

"I would not expect you to be the other woman," he wrote. "I would want you to be so hot and treat me so well that you’d be THE woman! R U that good?"

The woman filed a sexual harassment suit, which was settled out of court in 2013, according to Radar.

[ForeverChiefs58]

Read the disturbing text messages that caused Making a Murderer's Ken Kratz to lose his job

If you're part of the population that became obsessed with Netflix's docuseries Making a Murderer over the holidays, then you are well acquainted with the face of Ken Kratz, the Wisconsin prosecutor responsible for Steven Avery receiving a life sentence in the 2005 death of Teresa Halbach.


While the series has polarized viewers, raised a million questions about Avery's guilt and caused many to wring their hands at the American judicial system, there's one thing most of us can agree on: Kratz is pretty creepy.

His overconfident demeanor during the trial mixed with his love of stepping up to the mic to address local media was skeezy for sure, and as fans of Making a Murderer became obsessed with the show and started googling Kratz's name, more information about him began bubbling to the surface.


As we learned at the end of Making a Murderer, Kratz was involved in a sexting scandal in 2009, in which he sent a series of inappropriate texts to a female domestic violence victim. Kratz was prosecuting the woman's ex-boyfriend for allegedly strangling her when Katz sent upwards of 30 sexually suggestive messages to the victim.

The woman told investigators she felt threatened by the messages and was "afraid that if she doesn't do what he wants, Kratz will throw out her whole case," according to ABC News. The scandal led to Kratz's resignation as Calumet County district attorney after the governor sought his removal.

The text messages he sent that led to his resignation are now public — and pretty disturbing.


"It was nice talking with you! Feel free to text me (between 8 and 4) if you are bored. You have such potential. See ya. KEN (your favorite DA)," Kratz messaged the victim on Oct. 20, 2009, the first message in a three-day series of texts used in the woman's civil suit against Kratz, obtained by Radar Online.

"No text yet today? I’m feeling ignored. Are you even up yet?" Kratz followed up with. According to Radar, the woman replied that she was ill and Kratz offered to bring her soup and a margarita — which she declined.

At 11:30 a.m. on the same day the victim told Kratz she was ill, his text advances became more aggressive.

"I know this is wrong. I am such an honest guy, and straight shooter…but I have to know more about you… Are you the kind of girl that likes secret contact with an older married elected DA…the riskier the better?" he wrote.

"Still wondering if I’m worth it? Can I help you answer any questions?" he persisted as the woman shut down his advances. “Why would such a successful, respected attorney be acting like he’s in 7th grade? Are you worried about me?”


The victim then told Kratz that she would not lie and she was uncomfortable with his behavior, but Kratz persisted.

"You should never lie to me! Obviously we have talents and this to offer that the other is intrigued by [sic], or you would have called me creepy. You wanna accept."

On Oct. 21, 2009, Kratz began to verbally attack the domestic abuse victim when it became clear that she was not reciprocating.

"It would go slow enough for Shannon’s case to get done. Remember it would be special enough to risk all," he texted the victim, alluding to the fact his sexual fantasy about her would last the duration of her former boyfriend's abuse case.

When the woman didn't respond, Kratz kept the texts coming by demeaning her and talking himself up. "Hey..Miss Communication, what’s the sticking point? Your low-self esteem and you fear you can’t play in my big sandbox?[sic]

"You may look good at first glance, but women that are blonde, 6ft tall, legs and great bodies don’t like to be shown off or to please their men! [sic]" he wrote on Oct. 21.

"I’m the atty. I have the $350,000 house. I have the 6-figure career. You may be the tall, young, hot nymph, but I am the prize."

His final texts came on Oct. 22, 2009.

"I would not expect you to be the other woman," he wrote. "I would want you to be so hot and treat me so well that you’d be THE woman! R U that good?"

The woman filed a sexual harassment suit, which was settled out of court in 2013, according to Radar.

[ForeverChiefs58]

EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW
‘Making A Murderer’ D.A. Says Addiction Responsible For Sext Scandal: ‘I Was Creepy’
Ken Kratz claims he has changed since propositioning a crime victim.


Infamous Making A Murderer prosecutor Ken Kratz admits he sent inappropriate text messages to a domestic violence victim involved in one of his cases— but he swears he wasn’t in his right mind.

In an exclusive interview, Kratz told RadarOnline.com that he was hitting rock bottom in an addiction battle during the shocking scandal.

“I had become dependent on a combination of prescription medications, and started behaving in a very erratic, really creepy way,” confessed the former Wisconsin District Attorney, who convinced jurors to convict Steven Avery of murder in the famous 2007 trial— and resigned in disgrace three years later following his sexting shame. “Including hitting on people as part of my job. It culminated in sending these text messages to a crime victim.”


Soon after, the woman went to police with the sexts— and Kratz was caught. He was suspended from law for four months, and was told to step down from his government position.

He says he also lost his wife, his house, and was forced to file for bankruptcy. He also personally paid a “very large settlement” to the victim.

During six months out of work, Kratz claims he received inpatient treatment for his addiction.


“All of these consequences forced me to change,” he said. “I completely changed my personality. If you watch the Netflix series, I’m arrogant, narcissistic, I’m a d*ck! It’s not an attractive personality that’s out there. Some of that bravado was required [for the job], but some of that was me. But that’s not me now.”

Today, Kratz claims he is five years sober from drugs, and works as a criminal defense attorney for his own Wisconsin-based group, Kratz Law Firm.

Many of his clients suffer from addiction, just as he did.


“I get to help people every day,” he said. “I tell every one of them my story, because lots of stuff happened to me. I tell them, ‘If I can change and make better decisions, you can do this, too.’ So I turned what was the darkest thing on my life into a positive. I’m just really proud of that journey.”

Kratz says he’s angry Making A Murderer filmmakers brought his murky past back into the public eye with a mention in the series.

“It’s now become an opportunity to shame me, and try to define me as the person who engaged in that texting, that kind of behavior,” he explained. “Now I’m looked upon like I should remain embarrassed and ashamed of that part of my life. But I’m not. I’m very thankful all that happened.”

Making A Murderer' Prosecutor Ken Kratz Writing A Book To Clear His Name

‘Making A Murderer’ Prosecutor ‘Considering’ Lawsuit Against Filmmakers
Attorney Ken Kratz is furious over his depiction in the hit Netflix docuseries.

[Trivers]

Anybody showing up for the protest in Manitowoc tomorrow??

I usually drive through downtown on the way to work in Two Rivers. But not tomorrow.

Some locals are upset that there is no protest for the victim.

Some are taking bets on whether Rev. Jackson shows up.

If you do visit, go to Lake's south on 10th street. Great hamburgers and cheese curds!

[Swanman]

Originally Posted by Trivers

Anybody showing up for the protest in Manitowoc tomorrow??

I usually drive through downtown on the way to work in Two Rivers. But not tomorrow.

Some locals are upset that there is no protest for the victim.

Some are taking bets on whether Rev. Jackson shows up.

If you do visit, go to Lake's south on 10th street. Great hamburgers and cheese curds!

A protest on behalf of Avery is in its own way a protest for the victim because if he didn't do it, exonerating him paves the way for finding the real killer.

[The Rick]

Why a Reporter Who Covered the Avery Case Is Launching a 'Making a Murderer' Rebuttal Podcast

Dan O'Donnell's new podcast on iHeartRadio, Rebutting a Murderer, isn't just some random person's take on the popular Netflix documentary series Making a Murderer. O'Donnell, a Milwaukee radio reporter, covered the case and appears throughout the series, at various news conferences and pacing around courthouse hallways.

The popular Netflix series, which is being prepped for new episodes, is both captivating and polarizing. O'Donnell, who was reluctant to watch at first, told Adweek that "half of Wisconsin" binge-watched the show within two days of its debut. After being urged by friends and colleagues to watch, he did. And he didn't agree with everything he saw. So that's how the 10-episode Rebutting a Murderer came to be.

"It's the most visually stunning, captivating documentary series I've ever seen. It's like, Fargo meets the Sopranos. It was beautiful," said O'Donnell, who now works for WISN radio. "But as I was getting into it, I was like 'wait a second. That's not how I remember it.'

Adweek: How did you come to cover the Steven Avery case?
Dan O'Donnell: I covered the Steven Avery case for the radio station I used to work for, news radio 620 WTMJ in Milwaukee. I had just graduated from law school in June 2006 and I loved radio and broadcasting. I decided, instead of practicing law, I'm going to go into broadcasting full-time. At that time the Avery case was very big. We knew this was going to trial, and a few months before, my boss said, "Hey Dan, you have a legal background. What would you say to sort of putting your life on hold for a good two months, going up to Calumet County and covering this for us?" At the time I was 24, 25-years-old and I said "Yeah, I don't have any kids. Let's do it." I covered it every day. I would do hourly reports. I would do live interviews on all of our shows, I was filing occasional reports for our network affiliate ABC News radio, and this was before Twitter. Instead of sending out tweets with all the updates, I was doing a minute-by-minute almost blog. It was sort of like a timeline of events. I covered it as a news reporter from pretty much start to finish.

Were you familiar with the case before covering it?
The Steven Avery case was huge. I think the film does a good job of portraying, when Avery was freed in 2003, [that] he was like a hero in Wisconsin. And then in 2005, when it became clear that he was the primary suspect in this 25-year-old woman's disappearance, it was like a punch to the gut.

Filmmakers Moira Demos and Laura Ricciardi had been documenting the case since shortly after Avery's arrest in 2005. Did they ask you to participate in the documentary?
I recall we all had to sign releases. The filmmakers gave us all releases. Of course I signed it without even thinking about it. I kind of joked to them that I'm a radio guy so sometimes I won't be shaven and I certainly won't be wearing a suit. I'm the one that announces, I think in episode eight, that a verdict is in. They captured me pacing around on the phone giving a live report.

What issues do you have with the finished product?
I understand that the filmmakers acknowledge they were there with a narrative in mind. However, they selectively omitted what I believe to be key evidence. They selectively glossed over key evidence that tends to show Avery's guilt. Moreover, what they did with respect to their frame-up allegations/conspiracy theory was not to provide any actual affirmative evidence to support their conclusion. Rather, based on supposed motive and opportunity, they made insinuations and vague allegations of wrongdoing. The filmmakers are instead relying on us to supply the conclusion that they've already drawn.

So do you think Steven Avery is guilty?
Yes. There is literally no question in my mind. If you're really interested in Making a Murderer, watch the confession [Brendan] Dassey makes on March 1 with the two interrogators. He goes into extraordinary detail. I mean, painstaking detail. The series makes it seem like this guy's really dumb, right? He wouldn't have been able to make [those details] up. One of my favorite parts of the trial was when he's asked where he would have gotten these details. He says, "I don't know, I might have read it in Kiss the Girls." We've already established this kid reads at like a fourth-grade level; a James Patterson 464-page dense novel is not something he's going to be able to read and retain. My 8-year-old reads at a fourth grade level. There is no way he's going to be able to follow the intricacies of Kiss the Girls. If you go back and really watch the confession, there was no coercion. I have no doubt, reasonable or otherwise, that those two committed this heinous crime.

If Brendan isn't capable of retaining Kiss the Girls and reads at such a low level, why do you think it's possible he was able to participate in such a horrible crime?
Here's the thing—and this was never mentioned in the series—at one point in Dassey's phone call to his mother from jail, he says that Avery inappropriately touched both him and a female cousin. Avery had already been sent away to prison for life so there is no real reason to investigate this, but it seems as though it's possible at least that Avery was molesting Dassey. Dassey wasn't developmentally disabled; he was just cognitively disabled. I think that Avery possibly molesting him is a big part of why he would do this in front of his uncle. The uncle would be egging him on like, "Come on Brendan, do it kid, do it." It's another piece of the puzzle, the molester/victim relationship. [It's] really sick, it's almost like master/servant. I do think Brendan is a tragic figure in this. I really do. But I think he was victimized by his uncle, not the justice system.

Would you say the filmmakers are irresponsible?
It's not irresponsible. Well, that's a tough question. They're not responsible, obviously, for all of the threats and what their viewers have done since watching this film. They couldn't have possibly known that people would react so crazily, [that they'd be] sending threatening notes to Brendan Dassey's attorney Len Kachinsky, who is vilified throughout the film. He had people telling him they hope he dies of cancer. He's suffering from, I believe it's leukemia right now. The filmmakers don't bare any responsibility for that, but they make these allegations, and they make it very clear what they're alleging.

How did the podcast come together?
I remember thinking back to when I covered the trial and I was like, "Wait a second, that's not how I remember it." It was Steven Avery's story. It got me thinking that this was just one side of the story. This was one perspective. The Avery family's perspective. I think people owe it to themselves to get the other side of the story. To get another view on this. To take into account the evidence that was either omitted or glossed over. I decided to tell that other side of the story. Let's let people watch the series, listen to my podcast and decide for themselves.

http://www.adweek.com/news/televisio...podcast-169092

[ModSocks]

Originally Posted by The Rick

http://www.adweek.com/news/televisio...podcast-169092

So do you think Steven Avery is guilty?

Yes. There is literally no question in my mind. If you're really interested in Making a Murderer, watch the confession [Brendan] Dassey makes on March 1 with the two interrogators. He goes into extraordinary detail. I mean, painstaking detail. The series makes it seem like this guy's really dumb, right? He wouldn't have been able to make [those details] up. One of my favorite parts of the trial was when he's asked where he would have gotten these details. He says, "I don't know, I might have read it in Kiss the Girls." We've already established this kid reads at like a fourth-grade level; a James Patterson 464-page dense novel is not something he's going to be able to read and retain. My 8-year-old reads at a fourth grade level. There is no way he's going to be able to follow the intricacies of Kiss the Girls. If you go back and really watch the confession, there was no coercion. I have no doubt, reasonable or otherwise, that those two committed this heinous crime.

Uhhmm....problem with that theory. Kiss the Girls was also a movie, and there's a good chance he can retain what he saw in a movie. Brendan mentioned cutting Teresa's hair....but i read on another site that the book makes no mention of cutting anyone's hair but the movie DOES.

Also, even if he did get the details from the book, who's to say he read the whole thing? We're talking about a stupid teenage boy. Who's to say he didn't pick up the book because someone pointed out the sex scenes to him?

[BigMeatballDave]

If he actually killed her, it ****ing blows my mind why that dipshit didn't crush her car and incinerate her body and belongings in the Smelter.

It's a salvage yard. The perfect place to make a murder disappear.