port-ton Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Also, in terms of a similar vein, have watched West of memphis, the central park 5 and shenandoah I would recommend them all. I've never seen paradise lost, would it be worth watching even if I've already seen wom? Also, for anyone who hasn't listened, the first series of serial is absolutely tremendous listening, probably the case I've been most interested in of them all I can't really remember West Of Memphis although i did watch it after i had seen Paradise Lost. West of Memphis is a lot shorter and if i remember correctly more of a recap of events. Paradise lost is basically the exact same as making a murderer in that it spends a lot of time with the family during the trials and appeals, follows the defence lawyers and shows a lot of the courtroom action and brings up questions of potential suspects during the filming just by things people do and say on camera. It's a lot more immersive than West of Memphis but if you just want a short cliffnotes version of everything then it's definitely a good watch. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saints1884 Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 After watching this I'm convinced this was all a joke,and that at the end they would have said as much. But no,apparently this really did happen! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deeboy Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 I've just passed episode 3, I've no idea how that statement of what 'happened' from his nephew (?) ever stood up in any court. Genuinely gobsmacked. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deeboy Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 Len Kachinsky has an unnerving resemblance to Niles Crane. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1320Lichtie Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 Len Kachinsky has an unnerving resemblance to Niles Crane. Great shout. That was getting on my nerves when I was watching!! I was thinking of a Simpsons character for some reason but you've nailed it with that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTChris Posted January 6, 2016 Author Share Posted January 6, 2016 Kachinsky looks like William H Macy's in the Fargo movie. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K.T Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 The film makes have been contacted by a member of the jury who gave told them they only voted Guilty because they were afraid for their safety if they didn't. Would that be grounds for a retrial if proven? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DigOutYourSoul Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 I've just passed episode 3, I've no idea how that statement of what 'happened' from his nephew (?) ever stood up in any court. Genuinely gobsmacked. I was thinking this too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deeboy Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 I've only got 8,9 & 10 left. I want to say I can see where it's going, but it's flipped and turned that many times already it's hard to believe I do. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
locheedfcno1 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 Watched first episode last night. Hooked already! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banana Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 Crackin article on some of the main forensic evidence. http://chadsteele.blogspot.nl/2016/01/some-clarity-to-some-of-evidence-in.html I was wondering why this kind of thing wasn't pushed really really hard by the defence, it seemed off at the time and that article clarifies why. I wonder how much of a 'thing' it is to not get too sciencey with jurors as they will often not have a fucking scooby what's going on. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamieT1314 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 The defence had a witness rubbish the test procedures. The bullet and the blood should never have been allowed as evidence, Judge was in on it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19QOS19 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 The defence had a witness rubbish the test procedures. The bullet and the blood should never have been allowed as evidence, Judge was in on it. ** (ARGUABLY) SPOILERS IN THIS POST** Exactly. The blood was sealed in an evidence container. It was my understanding that once something has been sealed with an evidence 'sticker' it was illegal to break that seal unless given some kind of permission? The fact the lab said they would never extract blood in that way combined with the fact no one has said they did it, in my book made it blatantly obvious that someone had tampered with it. Combine that with someone testifying that the prosecution's test (for seeing if it was taken from the vile) wasn't a conclusive scientific test means it should have been scrapped. The whole documentary summed up the American judicial system tbh. The biggest shock was that it was happening to a white man! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banana Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 The defence had a witness rubbish the test procedures. The bullet and the blood should never have been allowed as evidence, Judge was in on it. Indeed they did, yet he was still convicted. I'm not convinced the jurors would've fully understood the implication of what the defence witness was saying. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamieT1314 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 I agree, anytime it would show a clip of the jury during the trial they certainly didnt really look like the sharpest bunch. Terryifying to think your life could be put in the hands of 12 random imbeciles incapable of understanding pretty simple scientific testimony. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banana Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 The whole documentary summed up the American judicial system tbh. The biggest shock was that it was happening to a white man! Christ, you really believe this kind of shit only happens to black people? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19QOS19 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 I agree, anytime it would show a clip of the jury during the trial they certainly didnt really look like the sharpest bunch. Terryifying to think your life could be put in the hands of 12 random imbeciles incapable of understanding pretty simple scientific testimony. When did it show you the jury? I thought they were never shown tbh. Obviously I wasn't very observant 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamieT1314 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 (edited) I thought we seen them a few times. I remember most of them had some shockingly bad knitwear over the back of their seats, could very well have been the public gallery. Edited January 7, 2016 by JamieT1314 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deeboy Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 You never seen the jury. You only seen the one who was excused. I'm guessing the jurors are kept anonymous so they can go on with a normal life. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DigOutYourSoul Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 Unless there's a lot of evidence that's hidden from you in the show - I don't think I could have returned a 'guilty beyond reasonable doubt' verdict. There are many doubts from what I've seen in the show. The police blatantly lying on the stand doesn't help. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.