Quote:
Originally Posted by Locke
Ultimately, no one here is comfortable shouting from rooftops that Avery is innocent, but at the very least he deserves a fair trial and it seems irrefutably clear that neither he nor Dassey got one.
At the end of the day the prosecution stacked the deck with the coerced Dassey confession and subsequent press conference in conjunction with heavy handed local pressure and frankly either incompetent or complicit attorneys (in Dassey's case).
If the prosecution are so confident in their evidence then they should have no qualms or concerns about presenting it in front of an unbiased jury on a level playing field.
That being said, it would be hypocritical of me to suggest this and subsequently ignore the fact that via the existence and popularity of this documentary that the same tactic has been employed, just as much as the Dassey Confession Press Conference stacked the deck against Dassey and Avery so too does Making a Murderer stack the deck in favour of the other players.
So now after this documentary is released we see the standard defences of 'evidence was omitted' and 'you dont know all that we know' from the side that is all of a sudden being opposed by the very same public opinion that they used initially as a strength.
Its all well and good when its on your side but public opinion is a fickle mistress.
What boils my blood is that the people charged with ensuring justice miscarried it quite egregiously and suffered no consequences for it. That isnt right.
|
There's little chance the initial sexual assault conviction wasn't set up. That alone begs for consequences that never came.
An evidence box that contains a crucial piece of evidence for a figure case has very clearly been tampered with and no follow up? A key to the victims vehicle central to the prosecution is not there until it shows up in an obvious spot when an officer being sued by the defendant shows up? Come on. Not even am investigation???