When I was a child, I played with my friends, and when I was playing, I talked about a topic that made everyone excited and scared: what are you afraid of. We talk a lot. I am afraid of insects, earthquakes, diseases, darkness, and death. The last person said that I am afraid of natural and man-made disasters.
This conversation is still fresh in my memory, because a lot of the things I have been afraid of have been experienced or witnessed to varying degrees in my later life, but they didn't really scare me out. A lot of scary things happen every day, but they happen not to happen around us. For example, your family members are not among the large number of victims of Malaysia Airlines MH370, and poisoned milk powder is rampant but not drunk by your newborn niece. Next, there are no relatives and friends you are familiar with in the missing absenteeism in the Shandong mine disaster, so people gradually become numb.
Before watching this documentary, I happened to think of a funny question: Have I ever offended anyone over the years. After thinking about it, I drew a line of people who might be offended by me. In fact, we met each other by chance not long ago, and it was not a happy meeting. Before I decided that he could be considered to be offended by me, I had already made up my mind not to have any contact with him, not in time, space, Internet, etc. I hope we can really never meet, because, I'm afraid.
My impression of the US imperialists and their people was always simple and crude until I finished watching this 10-hour documentary. Based on all the material provided by the film, I believe that Steven is innocent, his first wrongful imprisonment appears to have been caused more by the inadvertent negligence of biased law enforcement officers, while the second is filled with Very obvious traces of framing. Steven said that he thought for a long time and couldn't think of anyone who had offended him and wanted to kill him like this. If the second attempt is likely to be a result of Steven's 2003 release in 2003 for a hefty 18-year indemnity for disgracing law enforcement and the latter seeking revenge, then why is the first jail time? . At the beginning of the film, the neighbors of Steven's family said they were not gregarious and had a bad impression of Steven and others. The case that led to his conviction also referred to an affair between Steven and his cousin, who claimed that Steven exposed her vagina, read herself on the hood of her car, threatened her with a gun, etc.; Steven said He is innocent, he has never done any of this. One of the law enforcement officers in the ensuing case of Ms Penny's sexual assault was Steven's cousin's husband.
According to general logic, in the case of Teresa Halbach, if significant interests are involved, it is not impossible for the law enforcement department and the judicial department to work together to frame the blame and convict innocent people. But Steven himself has no background, low education, and a poor family, and is unlikely to be a person with major interests or knowledge of major secrets. Therefore, it can only be concluded that the motive for framing the blame is reputation. With various episodes going back to before Steven's first jail term, it's more likely that the motive for his conviction and his imprisonment was a personal vendetta. I've been hoping to see more details about Cousin Steven and her husband, but it doesn't.
I felt helpless for Steven when he said very honestly that he really couldn't think of anyone who wanted to do this to him. If a man really blames someone and he himself has passed so long without knowing it, from his own point of view, he is also partly responsible for the tragedy. As for why the neighbors and some of Steven's relatives had such a bad impression of him before the first case, it's hard to say whether Steven himself did something that made others feel uncomfortable as well. Comfortable and inappropriate behavior. This behavior is now generally referred to as low emotional intelligence.
Also, I'm curious about some of the reactions from families, people involved, and the jury on both sides. There are a lot of court debates in the film. When Jerry and Dean throw a series of long and complicated sentences to the witnesses, I want to ask: Did Steven's parents who are sitting on the side understand? Teresa's younger brother Mike, who was present from start to finish and believed that Steven was the murderer from start to finish, understood? Did the 12 deadpan jurors get it?
I don't think Steven's parents, who are convinced of Steven's guilt, can understand the lawyer's defense, and they don't even have a clear understanding of the entire process. This kind of incomprehension, incomprehension, just like Steven can't figure out who to blame himself.
As for Mike and others, they are prejudiced. Once they find that Steven is the murderer, they will no longer bother to listen to the defense lawyer's arguments, and even feel disgusted with him. There were presumably such people on a jury unrelated to the people involved in the case, and one juror later said that during the jury discussion, three people were reluctant to participate and were convinced that Steven was guilty. They were tough and ended up bringing into their own camp a lot of mild-mannered people who thought Steven was innocent.
If they didn't deliberately not listen or deliberately deny it after they made up their minds, it would be really hard to understand why the trial took so long and so many doubts were listed. Teresa's brother Mike and others still confidently and firmly believe that Steven is the murderer . That leaves only one possibility, that they are as mentally retarded as Brendan, but obviously not. Perhaps it was more important for Mike, who had lost a loved one, to find someone to vent his anger and hatred. At that time, I suddenly began to hope that the so-called spirit in the sky was not a rumor.
And it's even more bizarre for jurors who change sides simply because their peers are tough. Aside from Jerry's "there may be ghosts on the jury" statement at the end, I prefer to believe that some people never learn to stand up for themselves. It's also possible, as the juror who was interviewed said, that the jurors were just tired and wanted to get home quickly, so they stopped arguing and convicted Steven directly. Such an explanation circumvents the intelligence, conception, moral sense, and humanity of these people. So it sounds the least stressful. The world can be a good place if one does something wrong simply because he is tired.
Later, I saw someone opened a fanpage for Making a Murderer on Instagram, and some of the pictures included Jerry and Dean, which won a lot of applause. I always thought that the court debate would be like the one in The Good Wife. The fast-talking lawyer was eloquent, and the witness was questioned a few times and leaked his mouth, but it was not. But I still found an impassioned feeling in Jerry, just as I was indignant to see Brendan unknowingly admit to a "crime" without knowing it, and the prosecutor's open mouth.
To be honest, the most speechless thing is Brendan. From the beginning of being lured into confession, to calling his mother several times, and finally saying "I don't know" when he testified in court, I even felt that it was right to be in prison. He might be a good choice. Every time I see his sluggish application, and listen to him speak, I have a sense of dread, for fear that his IQ will not be enough and I will fall deeper and deeper into this trap.
After watching this documentary in all kinds of shock and outrage, I feel more scared now. As I asked myself at the beginning: Have I offended anyone, and is there anyone who could harm me in the same way? It is hard to imagine that an entire system, and numerous judicial and law enforcement officers, are complicit in framing one person. This is probably the scariest thing I can think of right now. What if this happens to me? I happened to read the news this morning that several officials involved in the Huge case were given only warnings from the party, so I can roughly understand what it feels like.
Meanwhile, Teresa Halbach's death is almost unsolved, and the real killer has been at large for years. It can be seen that people still have enough wisdom and possibility to organize and use others in an orderly manner, kill a person without leaving a trace, and complete a whole set of conspiracy to frame and frame. And this is something no one else with equal wisdom and possibility can crack. It is not surprising that famous unsolved cases in history, such as the Black Dahlia, have arisen. Like Dean said at the end, in a situation like this, if you're unlucky enough to get into trouble, do it yourself.
I really hope that outside of humanity and human intelligence, there is another system that can override us, influence us, and correct us. Whether it is the God of the West, or the Jade Emperor of China.
View more about Making a Murderer reviews
