***WARNING: Making a Murderer Spoilers Below***
Making a Murderer is Netflix‘s 10-part docu-series that has caught the attention of viewers around the world — including the hacker group Anonymous who claims they will soon release information from the cases in the film.
The film series investigates the case of Steven Avery as he’s put on trial for the murder of a young woman by the name of Teresa Halbach.
Part of the reason the documentary is so highly controversial is because — despite being a documentary and swaying the audience a certain way — there seems to be quite a bit of evidence to support the idea that Avery was set up for the murder by the Manitowoc County police. Specifically, Lt. James Lenk and Sgt. Andrew Colborn are mentioned.
While Avery was ultimately convicted and sentenced to life in prison, another disturbing aspect of the series was the confession and conviction of Steven’s learning-disabled nephew, Brendan Dassey.
Brendan was arrested for his involvement in Halbach’s murder in 2006 after he incriminated both himself and his uncle in the murder by confessing to investigators. Whoa!
Dassey later tried to rescind his confession, but the damage was already done, despite his attorneys arguing that detectives clearly pressured the young man into signing off on embellished statements. As a result, the teenager was convicted of homicide, sexual assault, and mutilation of a corpse and sentenced to life in prison in 2007.
Well now, Ken Kratz, the prosecuting attorney in both Avery and Dassey’s cases, is sharing his thoughts on the entire situation.
As we reported, Kratz already shared some extra evidence that he felt was important to the trial that seemed to be left out from the documentary as well as commented on Avery’s case.
Unfortunately, it appears that the former Wisconsin state prosecutor didn’t learn his lesson from all those nasty Yelp reviews and has shared his thoughts on Dassey’s case as he told People:
“I have a great bit of sympathy for Brendan Dassey. He never would have been involved in this except for his uncle. When his uncle handed him the knife he ensured that he’d be a part of this murder as well.”
But Brendan still has people who believe in him. In fact Dean Strang, one of Steven’s defense attorneys, said of Dassey’s case:
“The systemic protections that are supposed to be in place failed in a much more visible, troubling way in the Dassey case.”
One of the things that bothered Strang the most was that the teenager’s original court-appointed lawyer, Len Kachinsky, allowed the boy to be questioned ALONE by investigators. He noted:
“[Kachinsky] allowed the cops to interview this mentally compromised, emotionally immature 16-year-old boy without even being there.”
The defense attorney goes on to point out:
“A socially immature, cognitively low-functioning 16-year-old who’s never had any sexual experience supposedly goes into his 43-year-old uncle’s trailer and then, at his uncle’s urging, takes off all his clothes, manages to get sexually aroused and manages to assault a screaming, tied-down woman under the watchful eye of his uncle? That didn’t happen. Where’s all the blood? Stop and think. Really?”
Apparently, Dean isn’t a huge fan of Kratz either as he was infuriated by the prosecutor’s decision to hold a press conference that detailed the teen’s alleged involvement based on the boy’s confession. Avery’s lawyer said of that decision:
“It’s painful to think about government employees, professionals on the prosecution side advancing in the media before any trial and then at Brendan’s trial a narrative that physically couldn’t have happened, that physically was contradicted by the trace evidence.”
Since the trial, Kratz has admitted he regrets the press conference but still believes that Kachinsky was trying to help Brendan with a plea bargain by allowing investigators to question the suspect alone. He explained:
“[Dassey] was really in a good position to not only once and for all tell people how Steven was involved, but he could have gotten a significantly [reduced sentence].”
Kratz continues to defend his side by saying it was ultimately Dassey’s family who “coerced” Brendan into trying to back peddle his confession. He relayed:
“It was awfully clear to us that he was involved. [But] his family was telling him, ‘You tell the court that they made you say these things.'”
Honestly, we’re not sure how much Kratz is helping himself by trying to defend his decisions. Of course, he has to stand his ground, but at this point it might just be best to keep mum and move on — especially after resigning from his position as the Calumet County District Attorney in 2010 over a sexting scandal.
What do you think about the attorney’s recent statements regarding their past case?
[Image via Synthesis Films/Netflix.]