bocomoj This film series is a documentary.Doc-u-men-ta-ry : of, relating to, or employing documentation in literature or art : being, consisting of, or contained in documents : a presentation (such as a film or novel) expressing or dealing with factual eventsI don't know why people seem to believe documentaries are somehow "required" to present both sides in an unbiased manner. That's the job of journalists, and even they don't do it; the nightly news is filled with bias.People who confuse "documentary" with "news" don't understand what documentaries are supposed to be. Read the definitions above. Nowhere does it say that all facts must be presented or the presentation should be unbiased.The intent of documentary film is to present an argument and support that argument with information. Documentary film is the media equivalent to a structured debate or writing a persuasive essay. You include opposing arguments and facts only to the point they help make your case. End of story.This series provides a clear narrative from a certain point of view. It tells a compelling story about a man and his encounters with law enforcement and our obviously imperfect judicial system. Some of the things we see are truly horrific. Things on both sides of the argument.And that's really the point. We should really only be shocked by horrific things done by criminals. We shouldn't observe police and prosecutors engaged in any activity that even gives of whiff of impropriety. Yet, we do. In fact, it's observed so often, it has become almost a running joke. A very tragic joke, to be sure.Also, it's dumbfounding how many people fundamentally misunderstand our criminal justice system. Only the prosecution must prove anything using evidence. The entire purpose of the defense is to create reasonable doubt. Avery's attorneys have no mandate to provide evidence or even substantiate their claims in any manner. Defense attorneys routinely manufacture outrageous lies to save their clients. This is done every day. It is how it is supposed to be done, if the lawyer is any good. If the defense were required to state the truth and provide evidence, 99% of trials would never happen, because the defendant would just plead guilty.

xtinec-nyc It is shocking to see how justice system was so twisted and it really disgusts me to see those shameless disgusting faces from police dept. It is a great film and I truly admire the team who documentaried the film and the lawyers who had courage and wisdom to defend Steven Avery. Although i was truly devastated when I saw the result and it's so depressing to see Avery's family had to suffer from all this non sense. It is so sad and disappointing to know how ugly this reality is.

Frank . Not having been present at the trail, I of course cannot judge about the case. However, after having seen this documentary, I feel two quotes summarize how I now feel about the American justice system:"We can all say we will never commit a crime, But we can never guarantee that someone will never accuse us of a crime. And if that happens, good luck in this criminal justice system." (Jerry Buting, defense attorney). "If I'm gonna be perfectly candid, there's a big part of me that really hopes Steven Avery is guilty of this crime. Because the thought of him being innocent of this crime, um, and sitting in prison again . . . I can't take that." (Dean Strang, defense attorney).

Frank Lampard Like most people I was unfamiliar with this case before watching this "documentary." And like most people, I was disturbed as the makers of the film started to create real doubt as to the guilt of this man. Little insinuations and open ended segments are put in that make you scream "what is going on here!?" However, unlike most people that have watched this series, I started to research the court records of this case. I started to examine the actual evidence and testimony. I went beyond just getting my information from this show. What I found was probably the most open and shut case in the history of mankind. You had a truly evil human being, that had motive (the desire to rape and kill women). means (he was the last person to see the victim alive) and more physical evidence than you can shake a stick at. The man made numerous anonymous attempts to lure this woman on to his property, there is no evidence of her ever leaving his property, her vehicle and remains were found on his property... it is open and shut. As for the defense's case, they did not have one. They simply relied on "it is a conspiracy." But there is not one example of them ever expanding on or proving that conspiracy. So many facts all but scream, Avery did it, from his numerous attempts to lure the nervous victim on to his property, numerous incidents of his abusing women and others, his feeling that his being wronged in the past allowed him to do anything he wished to women, the actual physical remains of her body on his property, along with her vehicle, all of which he tried to cover up. I will not even bother with the numerous incriminating events in his background and numerous people that heard him brag about what he did. Steven Avery is a very bad man and a very guilty man, the testimony in court proved that, which is why the jury convicted. Anybody that would take the time to actually examine the case on their own, instead of simply relying on this extremely deceptive and manipulated "documentary," would know that. People have said this is a disturbing documentary, I agree. It is disturbing, because some manipulative filmmakers decided they were going to create a documentary to con thousands of people into thinking a guilty person was innocent, and they did just that. They mixed and edited a film that turned black in to white and up in to down. They banked on a viewing audience being too lazy and inflamed to actually take time to examine the real facts of the case. That is evil almost in the realm of Steven Avery.