Making a Murderer premiered quietly on Netflix just before Christmas in 2015. It was one of the streaming service's first forays into the serialized true crime drama genre. Netflix execs didn't seem to expect the show to make many waves, but within just weeks positive word-of-mouth and social media chatter had turned it into a bonafide pop culture phenomenon.
Note: Below I will get into specific "plot points" of the show (aka actual real-life events). I would not suggest reading my review if you want to start the show from the beginning and want to be "surprised" (I'm not sure how you haven't heard details about this case in the media before now, but that's besides the point).
The show follows the decades-long saga of Steven Avery, a Wisconsin man who spent 18 years in prison after being wrongly convicted of a sexual assault in 1985. After finally earning his freedom, Avery filed a multi-million dollar lawsuit against the local police department and several individual local law enforcement officials. Two years later in 2005 Avery was charged with another crime, the murder of aspiring photographer Teresa Halbach. Avery's nephew Brendan Dassey, a developmentally challenged teenager, also became charged in connection with the crime after a confession that may or may not have been coerced by the detective questioning him (depending on your viewpoint). Throughout the first season, Avery and Dassey's lawyers questioned the validity of the confession and raised questions about evidence that had possibly been planted and manipulated to frame Avery. Did the local police, angry at Avery's pending lawsuit, concoct a massive conspiracy to frame Avery for another crime, manipulating Dassey to help implicate his uncle? Despite the attorneys' efforts, both men were convicted, and the final episodes of the first season showed the beginnings of their appeals.
Making a Murderer Season 2 trailer
Season 2 is even more exhaustive than the first, and possibly even more enthralling, as each man's new post-conviction lawyer slogs through the seemingly neverending appeals process. Dassey's new attorney, a young woman named Laura Nirider, works for an organization dedicated to helping wrongly convicted youth. She seems a bit too concerned with grand aspirations of improving the legal system rather than the specific facts of Dassey's case, but still she is very skilled and totally dedicated to helping her client. Dassey's case makes it all the way to one step below the Supreme Court, and Nirider argues passionately in several enthralling sequences where viewers get to hear actual recordings of court hearings played over (surprisingly decent) courtroom sketches (cameras weren't allowed in the courtroom). I wonder if anyone thought of having a more experienced lawyer help Nirider argue in such a high court, but what do I know?
The real star of season 2, however, is Avery's new lawyer Kathleen Zellner. I was completely mesmerized every time that she appeared onscreen, which thankfully was quite a bit. Viewers are introduced to Zellner by hearing her tell a story about one of her previous clients, a murderer. The man had confided in Zellner that he had killed nearly a dozen more people, but she was bound by attorney-client privilege not to reveal this to anyone. When the man died, she boldly held a press conference and recited the names of each victim to their families, sharing what she knew about their deaths. She states early on in the series that her aim is getting at the truth, even if that means revealing the guilt of her client, and this proved her point. She had to get her client's permission before his death to do this, but I doubt that most lawyers would go to such lengths to speak the truth.
Zellner and Dolores Avery
Zellner spends the season exhaustively gathering new evidence in Avery's case, repeatedly visiting his family's property (the possible crime scene), conducting new tests, and raising doubts about the prosecutor's (and Avery's former attorneys') original case. She's possibly the most hands-on lawyer that I've ever seen. She also spends a significant amount of time pointing to possible new suspects, who just happen to be close relatives of Avery and Dassey (oops). This leads to a tense but thrilling phone call between Avery and Dassey's mother, in which threats are made against both Avery and Zellner, but she doesn't care and isn't the least bit intimidated, because she's just going where the evidence takes her. I really hope that Netflix sees the star power of this woman and gives her her own show, pronto.
Despite all of these positives, there is the obvious flaw that the show is decidedly one-sided in favor of Avery and Dassey's innocence. It's true that the other side mostly declined to participate in the series, but the producers seemingly tried to give the illusion that it wasn't biased by presenting press conferences and statements given by Halbach's family and Ken Kratz, the prosecutor in the original case. Why go to all of this effort to attempt to present both sides? I would have preferred that the show more openly declared its opinion that the men are innocent. Also, the camera spends way too much time lingering on Avery's elderly parents, seemingly using their grumpiness and hearing issues for comic relief. I do have to admit though that I laughed when the show spent 5 minutes showing Avery's mother trying to turn on the stove, bickering with her husband in the process, and I'm not sorry for it.
What is my take on the men's guilt or innocence? I'm pretty strongly convinced that Dassey is innocent (or mostly innocent), and that his confession was indeed coerced (although maybe not intentionally). Avery, however, is another story. Despite all the new evidence brought to light by Zellner, I still find it a bit hard to believe that the police could successfully carry out such a massive conspiracy to frame him. I'm 50/50 on whether he's actually guilty, but I'm more doubtful that he was framed. Tell me what you think in the comments...
