Convicting a Murderer

There's a ton of stuff the jury saw that Netflix kept from their audience simply because it went contrary to their attempt to exonerate Steven. Watch this and see for yourself. When I watched Making a Murderer I thought Avery was guilty but by no means was that my verdict because of what I saw on the docuseries. Netflix drove hard the idea that the police contrived to frame Steven for the murder of Theresa with the motive that they didn't want to have to pay him the settlement for having served 18 years in prison for a false claim against him. I saw this as flimsy, firstly because it credits these officers in question as genius masterminds of the highest order secondly because such a plan itself, as it was supposedly executed, relies so heavily upon an ability to predict Avery's actions as well as Theresa's. Given that and the circumstantial evidence against Avery I didn't buy the narrative Netflix was selling. Now having watched the first 4 episodes of Convicting a Murderer it's very easy to see why he's sitting in prison today, why he has had no success with juries and appeals, namely, the evidence speaks for itself.

The series is meticulously made, with great attention to detail, comprehensive interviews, and never-before-seen audio and video clips and court documents that belie the claims of Steven Avery and insinuations of the 'Making A Murderer' filmmakers, that Avery is innocent and that the police enforcement is corrupt. Candace Owens is a force in this film. They showed both sides of the argument and provided the facts that the Netflix film intentionally left out.

This film also shows the truth of the power of media to affect people's minds and lives, particularly for evil. It also shows how it's easy to fool people, and how difficult it is to convince them that they were fooled.

As someone who found season one of Making a Murderer perfect (initially), this was a perfect down to earth alternative point of view. Was aware of some liberties the Netflix show took from news articles, but this so much more details that you would expect.

Maybe you have to start it with an open mind, as I definitely didn't have something against DailyWire or Candice (first encounter).

As the series progressed it got better and more interesting, episodes 5,6,7 were the point where I found myself enjoying it the same as the original show. It's really what I wanted from an objective MAM season 2.

What sets this sequel apart is its commitment to presenting a balanced perspective. While "Making a Murderer" focused on the defense's perspective, "Convicting a Murderer" invites viewers to consider the opposing viewpoint, providing a more comprehensive understanding of the case. This balanced approach challenges preconceived notions and leaves viewers with a more nuanced perspective on the intricacies of the justice system.

In this sequel, the filmmakers maintain their meticulous attention to detail, offering a wealth of new information and insights that will keep true crime enthusiasts and legal aficionados alike on the edge of their seats. "Convicting a Murderer" is not just a sequel; it's a compelling continuation of the "Making a Murderer" saga that adds depth and complexity to an already riveting story.

As a 20 year investigator, so many things about Making A Murderer didn't make any sense to me. Convicting A Murderer answered those questions for me and told the whole truth. Complete interviews, complete police reports, actual forensic evidence, and common sense are finally being shown to the public.

Candace Owens haters will be happy to find that she is only a small part of this. People who have actually been victimized, and/or their loved ones, comprise the interviews in the film and provide evidentiary support for the correct conviction that has taken place. Although justice has been served, to some extent, my heart breaks for the children involved.