Convicting a Murderer (2023– ) User Reviews

An essential corrective to the unethical original

[exagorazo · 9/10 · 31 October 2023]

I'll preface this by saying I am not a Candace Owen's fan. I find her obnoxious and irritating. Thankfully, the series has her sitting in the back seat and offscreen for most of the time.

Part takedown of the original Netflix series, part case against Steven Avery, this series nails its mandate with flying colours.

I was one of the original fans of Making a Murder (MaM) on its initial release - memes, the Reddit rabbit hole, all of it. I was convinced not only of Brendan Dassey's innocence, but also of Steven's.

Fast forward to the release of Convicting a Murderer (CaM). I'd begun to have my doubts over the years, starting with a blood test that involved one of the infamous vials. If the original doco had lied about the hole in the lid of the vial, where else were they being lenient with the truth?

Turns out, everywhere. CaM exposes the unethical behaviour of the original filmmakers, editing quotes from the trial, copying and pasting random footage that made police look nervous or like they were lying, covering up the horrendous past of SA.

CaM is very well made. The filmmaking is snappy and suspenseful, and the variety of people interviewed keeps it from ever getting too slow.

The only criticism I have is that it's behind a significant paywall. I understand DW need to make money to continue to make series like this, but given the fact that millions and millions of people have been duped by the original series, I think it deserves a much wider audience.

That said, if you're not a DW subscriber, I recommend you pay for a month and watch anyway. It's worth your time.

Interesting.

[garyweaber · 8/10 · 14 September 2023]

Small spoiler of episode 4. I find it interesting people are complaining about the show because the first three episodes are rehashing what occurred leading up to the trial and about the man's character. This docu series isn't really focused on this man is guilty as much as it is here is what Netflix presented and how what they presented isn't the entire story. For example Netflix edited audio footage of a phone call made between police suggesting that Avery was the only suspect like the police were after him. In episode 4 they play the audio in full. Netflix audio was "He wants us to go back over and reinterview Avery again." The full audio was "He wants us to go back over and reinterview Avery and Zipperer again. Okay. Yeah Zipperer's not going to be real happy." And there is other things that Netflix blew past or edited to fit the narrative they wanted to portray. Its very interesting. When they do side by side comparisons of what Netflix shows and the real audio including things like cutting out key information that provides context to a statement made just to make it look like Avery was targeted by police and is innocent. I would also state he may be innocent i don't know this is the first i have ever even heard about this case ive never seen the Netflix show (but im going to after i finish this series) im not here to pass judgment on the guy i just find the Netflix manipulation fascinating.

An interesting watch

[mlboeding · 9/10 · 15 September 2023]

For those interested in seeing more about the Avery case without having to deep dive into your own research, this is a good watch so far. I have no opinion on Candace Owens either way, but I will say she is my least favorite part of this show. Points of the case they want to hammer home shows her repeating herself multiple times, and I find a lot of the jumps to her talking are out of place and mess with the flow of the show.

I'm enjoying how the show makes the rebuttal to Making a Murderer (MaM). Showing scenes from MaM and how their recordings are edited was a nice touch. Making the case that MaM intended to leave out key parts of conversations and recordings is enough for to watch the show by itself in my opinion. I'm also thoroughly enjoying having interviews with people that support both sides of the case.

Overall, the pacing seems a little slow, and Candace's frequent appearances retract from my score. If you like true crime, definitely worth a watch.

Edit (10/5/23): As the series goes on, I like the pacing more. Definitely tuning in every week until it finishes!

The missing pieces

[da-sooner-man · 10/10 · 18 September 2023]

Have greatly enjoyed this documentary through the first four episodes. If you're not a fan of Candace that's ok. She only provides minor commentary here and there. What's more interesting is hearing from those in Steven's family...there's a lot that was cut out of Netflix's interpretation. So it's good to see full context on some aspects of the case. If you want to be well rounded on this story this is a real must watch so you can at least say you've heard both sides. I can already say that I have a much better understanding of how cars are crushed, Avery's history towards women, and the insane behavior of this family. Do yourself a favor and watch this series.

Surprisingly detailed

[des-88232 · 10/10 · 18 September 2023]

I am skeptical whenever Candace Owens is involved, but she is surprisingly on point in this show, and not at all over the top.

It's absolutely shocking, the liberties Making A Murderer took with the truth in the effort to make a very likely guilty man look not guilty.

The 1st 3 episodes are a bit dry and not an easy watch or listen, mainly focusing on Steven Avery's abominable past. The man is an absolute monster.

Getting past that though, the 4th episode is an absolute gut punch for anyone who bought into Making a Murderer's dishonest storylines. Undeniable proof that the show willfully added and omitted evidence to attain specific reactions from audiences. Shameful.

Convicting A Murderer hammers home point after point and provides irrefutable proof that the Making A Murderer filmmakers were actively trying to help Steven Avery by using their own words and footage, and contrasting with documents and reality. Ouch.

As the show progresses, it becomes utterly clear that Making A Murderer deliberately sidelined the truth in order to forward a biased narrative, and that the filmmakers were activists in search of a muse.

I LOVE to hear truth regardless of how I feel

[nlclarkson-20756 · 10/10 · 18 September 2023]

I am so grateful for this docuseries.

When I watched 'making a murderer' I could feel the manipulation, but I also had questions & concerns.

I concluded, after watching 'making a murderer',that Steve Avery was guilty but couldn't know for sure because the 'making a murderer' series did a great job minimising Steven Avery's criminal and personal history. The documentary makers also did a great job trying to cast doubt over the police force involved.

Personally, I don't know how you could get past the torturing of a cat. This was the biggest red flag.

So I am truely thankful to DW and Candace Owens for showcasing the truth.

I don't understand why it's so controversial to share ALL information and have the individuals decide.

I don't appreciate the attempts at manipulation on myself or other viewers. People are incredible and have the capacity to make up their own minds with the information presented.

This is Candace Owens gift to us all, no manipulation, instead she trusts and respects her viewers to come to their own conclusions.

Must watch companion piece

[mariusica · 10 October 2023]

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.

More than showing that Avery is guilty

[elijbunopnd · 10/10 · 29 October 2023]

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.

Recommend, do not avoid if you liked the netflix series.

[josevega-74481 · 10/10 · 11 September 2023]

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.

The facts the media left out

[senefeldk · 10/10 · 27 September 2023]

Candace demonstrates yet again how the media spins and often deletes key information to fit their narrative. Captivating from the first episode. Each episode lays out additional detail which was intentionally omitted in making a murderer. Making a murderer portrayed Steven Avery as a victim and edited the story to fit that narrative. This has created so many delusional fans for Steven Avery that behave in a manor that makes them seem to be mentally unwell. It's purely deception yet almost no one challenges their narrative. People think they know the full story from just making a murderer and they couldn't be more wrong. Give it a look and decide for yourself.

Finally, the WHOLE truth

[tjames-34511 · 10/10 · 17 September 2023]

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.

Covers What Was Left Out

[dobbymagick · 10/10 · 24 September 2023]

As several others have mentioned, I was a bit dubious about Candace Owens. However, her role basically amounts to a "pretty face" that just presents the show.

That being said, this presents actual trial transcripts that show the glaring omissions made by the Netflix series. Especially interesting are the interviews with Avery's brother Earl and his ex-wife. Some of the content of their interviews will make your stomach turn, but they show Avery in a light he didn't want discovered; you will see why.

There's also interesting interviews with Jodi the former fiancee.

All in all this is a presentation of facts that may help you decide guilt or innocence if you are on the fence.

We didn't need this, but glad it was made

[jerrycoliver · 6/10 · 19 October 2023]

Starting off, I think Daily Wire has some very incredible post-production capabilities and I'm somewhat familiar with their structure and resources (as well as their slate) and it's pretty remarkable the volume, consistency and quality they can put out.

On the down side, Candace Owens, who is a personality who is divisive, that's not a criticism from me...what is, is her obsession of interjecting herself into these stories. It's like she wants these movies ("Greatest Lie ever sold" and "Convicting a Murderer") to be a documentary but she also wants to be a star. I could understand if she had a journalism background and she was building off the concept of a reporter package, but she doesn't, and it doesn't read like that. Either way, nothing against her, but the documentaries she's a producer on would be exponentially better if she removed herself from in front of the camera.

Now there's a complication with this series, I'm not sure who I'm following down the rabbit hole. There is the "Foul Play" woman who we spend a considerable amount of time with, but one scene she's in a group chat with no set up, then she's interviewing pro-Avery protestors with no set up...there is just no focus on who we're supposed to identifying with and where we're going. To make matters worse, watching "Making a Murderer" is a pre-requisite. Throwing Candace in the series also complicates things.

There is no story. If you're looking or waiting for a story, it's not here. That really frustrates me. Everything done using video needs to have a story. Each episode just explores one aspect of Steven Avery which the "Making a Murderer" left out.

The above two complaints are easily fixed. All you need is a writer. For how exceptional Daily Wire is on the back-end pulling things together, if they had 1/10th that quality in development and pre-production, they would be the premier documentary production company.

Here's how it could have been approached: Similar opening episode, explain the hype and all these people believing the lies. Then you take your main character(s) and have them explain the first crack in the facade, then travel with them in a linear story through the rest of the deception. Then you reveal who the film makers are and why their motivation (instead of talking about them in the first episode and kind of glancing over them, you reveal them as the story unfolds.) Then you end with a resolution. This video doesn't have that. There is no resolution. It's the problem with "Bowling for Columbine" (like it or not, there is no resolution, thus it's empty.)

The whole "Michael Moore" documentary approach is wrong though. Kevin Spurlock, Michael Moore, even Matt Walsh, they don't make documentaries. They're basically reporter packages. Moore is the worst though because he stages things then passes them off as legit.

All in all, very cool that people did do the research to get all the information that wasn't explained in the original series, but it's 8 years too late and poorly executed.

Strange how this doc exposing the bias in MaM, is biased.

[Xavier_Stone · 5/10 · 16 September 2023]

First off let me say that Candace Owens did not do any legwork or research on this, strictly a narrator. I find this odd but whatever, I'd rather have someone with actually investigative skills in this role.

So for the first three episodes the audience is given more details of the interviews/interrogations and recorded phone calls. I was actually impressed that they had the Making a Murderer edit shown side by side with the actual calls and easily proves the bias and attempts of the film makers to mislead.

Yes his past is bad and colored before and after he got released from a wrongful conviction. This series digs deep into these allegations but it's mostly he said/she said with little to no evidence and some police reports that the accusers can't even remember correctly. Less than ideal, certainly not the Gotcha moment they present it as.

Now for the bad, and this show is biased as well. No real explanation as to why the Fastbender interview with Brendan is not regarded as the coerced confession that it is. The guy has a low IQ and is repeatedly given information and then somehow it's a revelation when he parrots that info back?? This series just passes over it.

Brendan confesses to so many things and none are found to be anywhere near credible. Handcuffs, stabbings, blood everywhere, guns and bullets. Sounds like a horror film, yet no blood or evidence to support his story. Doesn't matter. Guilty.

There is so much obvious shadiness surrounding this case, yet this doc does nothing to admit that there's anything out of the ordinary going on.

Nothing about car keys found on the 7th search of a trailer by the Manitowoc police who shouldn't be there. Or that it doesn't have any of Teresa's DNA on it, just Steven's. Lol what?

In this case we can only deal with probabilities as the investigation has been shown to be so incredibly poorly done.

Did SA kill TH? Probably Did Brendan help ? Probably Did the police have a motive and means to frame SA? Yes Did the Manitowoc police frame him? Low prob, but possible Was another person involved or commit this crime? Probably

I find it interesting that nothing is shown about how bad the police work was in this case. It's all just confirmation bias for people who think he's guilty rather than a good investigation.

Shows why Avery is incarcerated

[drnmtth · 10/10 · 21 September 2023]

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.

Impressed

[sassy-girl5 · 10/10 · 24 September 2023]

Watched making a murderer? Get ready to get mad. Loads of evidence not shown. Interviews edited to fit an agenda. A history of violence and sexual assault never mentioned. These aren't just rumors being told, these are news clippings from the time of events, interviews, and cases he pled guilty to. Phone conversations from prison. First 3 episodes are infuriating because you thought for years that Steven Avery was innocent or at least needed a new trial. Now, you're getting a new look at this man. A man that went out of his way to see this young girl many times in the span of a couple of months before she was killed. Also this isn't drawn out like the two seasons of making a murder which is nice. Candace Owens does a great job getting to the point and proving that Steven isn't who we all thought he was. Run, don't walk!

Not all "True Crime" documentaries are true.

[srm-1 · 10/10 · 31 October 2023]

If you were one of the many millions who watched Making a Murderer (MaM) back in 2015 and became interested in the Avery case, then you owe it to yourself to take a look at Convicting a Murderer (CaM) and compare the two before reaching any conclusions.

For me, after watching CaM, it would seem that the producers of MaM have some serious questions to answer. The Manitowoc Police Department are right to be angry for their deliberate misrepresentations in the Avery case, simply to garner more viewers and pocket a few extra bucks at the expense of the reputation of local law enforcement. Their defense always seems to be, "We are storytellers, not journalists", and that is exactly what they do: they tell a story. The only problem is, it is not an entirely true one, and CaM does an excellent good job of filling in the blanks that its predecessor chose to ignore.

As CaM reveals over the course of 10 comprehensive episodes, rather than simply tell the whole story of the case, the makers of MaM instead chose to leave many important details out, and flat out manipulated many of the actual courtroom interactions to fit their own agenda. Sure, the police did make some mistakes, and none of them will be rivalling Sherlock Holmes for plaudits, but it really isn't a very complicated case - though MaM made it seem so.

As someone who made up their mind about Avery years ago, I didn't need any further revelations from CaM to support my original position. But what CaM does reveal is just how easy it is for the media to manipulate people. Of course, there have always been such people in society. Rest assured, those protesting on the streets outside the courtroom are exactly the same kind of people who stood in the crowd 2,000 years ago pleading for another murderer to be set free.

Nobody likes to see anybody wrongfully convicted of any crime that they did not do. But, in this case, I am sure that the family of Teresa Halbach regret every day that Avery's original 1985 conviction was overturned.

And that is the sad, sad truth of the real story.

Exposes the lies of making a murderer

[sdarens-61187 · 10/10 · 27 November 2023]

It is truly amazing the amount of deceptions and half truths there were in Making a Murderer. This documentary systematically breaks down those mistruths and exposes Making a Murderer to be full of falsehoods and a sham.

The film was well done and put together and multiple times plays the Making a Murder video and then shows what truly happened. It is powerful to see what was put forward and then the actual truth.

Every one who watched Making a Murderer should watch the show to see the actual truth. It was amazing to see the people who believed in Making a Murderer and what they believe. It's amazing how many people were duped by the show. Hopefully watching Convicting a Murderer will bring them back to reality.

A MORE COMPLETE PICTURE

[Whitneyseven · 10/10 · 21 October 2023]

This mini series helps fill in some of the holes created by the Netflix documentary. I've watched 9 of the 10 episodes so far and have changed my opinion of Avery's guilt. I found it hard to believe he was innocent after watching the Making a Murderer series, but I was left puzzled and uncertain. Now, with the additional information offered by Convicting a Murderer from the Daily Wire, I believe he is guilty. I feel somewhat sorry for Brendan Dassey as he was pulled into this crime by his uncle and poorly advised by his extended family on whether or not to plea out. What a horrible situation. Good documentary - informative and well-made.

This changes everything.

[keith-thomas-jr · 10/10 · 11 January 2024]

Convicting a Murderer changes everything.

If you really want to see the next chapter is this crazy story, watch Convicting a Murderer.

There is way more to this story than I ever would have believed. You can find the first episode on YouTube, by episode 5 they really start getting into evidence not seen in "Making a Murderer".

"Making a Murderer" was made with tunnel vision and only shows a small percentage of the story.

If you enjoyed watching "Making a Murderer" as much as I did, you need to see this follow up series. The full family interviews are shocking. Candace Owens did an amazing job on this.

Candace Owens bringing the truth to light!

[champgirl-26766 · 10/10 · 18 September 2023]

Such a terrible person, anyone that can defend him should also be behind bars. Thank you Candace for AGAIN revealing the truth that our mainstream media fails to deliver everyday. The proof is in the facts, and the facts are all laid out in this documentary, any logical person that is sane, and that watched making a murderer knew that we were not getting the entire story. I am so happy there are still honest journalist out there that can bring clarity to the lies that Our government and mainstream media clearly want to withhold from us for an unknown reason. I look forward to every single episode to come, may the truth prevail!

Interesting series, but...

[osceeoscee · 7/10 · 4 October 2023]

First of, one must appreciate some facts that were not included in MaM series and shed some light onto the case. Avery's conduct towards women, his overall attitude after getting out of prison, edited bits from the court, manipulation in MaM to name a few. However, in my opinion CoM is a silly attempt to discredit MaM through even bigger manipulation. So called "facts" are not really facts but pieces of a puzzle that make no bigger sense. Sticking with the prosecutors and their theories in a childish attempt to gain viewers while not really providing additional information to attract us to pay for DW+. In general this series is worthless, so to speak, and has no value for those seeking the truth in the case. It's just a silly attempt in discrediting MaM at all cost. Supposed to be shocking but isn't at all. Interviews with Collborn and Kratz bring nothing to the table we have not known already. Earl Avory's stance is a bit surprising but I bet he gets paid to say and says anything to satisfy payers. There's so much we don't know and most likely will never know about the case.

Kathleen zellner dissproves this whole documentry

[tomuchlego · 1/10 · 1 April 2024]

I have too admit that season 1 definetly manipluted the viewer

But season 2 has a great responsce to this as it dissproves almost every single claim candace disputes the gun the plates brendans manipulation who did it the errors the foreniscs it displaces all of candaces so called "proof" watch making a murderer season 2 and then see a usefull her opinion is. It isnt at all kathleen talked about the lisence plate in which candace did a whole episode on and even when kathleen fiscusses it for 5 minutes she disproves the ENTIRE episode.

I love how candace owens thinks that just becuase shes popular she can try convince the viewer of "fake" evidence promoted in court when in season 2 it diacusses evrything

It wasnt overall negative as she does highlight stevens past and steven in general in which the series doeant do.

Wider perspective on a biased original

[marfwork · 8/10 · 2 February 2024]

I am convinced Steven Avery is right where he belongs.

After watching the Netflix series back in 2015 something didn't sit quite right, I couldn't point out why and I did my fair share of research. Over time I got more and more unsettled by his supposed innocence.

The edits and cuts of phone calls, altering the answers given in court, keeping evidence out ... Well, they're storytellers, but they choose to sit on the wrong side of it.

After watching Convicting a Murderer, I still think the police were flawed at times, some participants were shady, to say the least, but the evidence pilling up to the same person leaves no space for presuming Steven Avery could be innocent.

I admit I enjoyed Netflix's version but it is important to keep an open mind and not be blinded by what we're shown there. As thin as a pancake can be, it always has two sides. Here we get to see the family, the police, the media... a much wider perspective.

Not bad

[new859 · 8/10 · 5 December 2023]

Although this documentary didn't change my mind about this case, it did raised many reasonable questions. Overall, the quality of this movie is better than I expected. And it changed my impression about Candace Owens. However, it omit one important person, the lawyer of Making a Murderer season 2, Kathleen. She is the focal point of the second season. In this Convicting A Murderer, it doesn't mention her name at all, not even one minute of her appearance. After watching Convicting a Murderer, I re-watched the last two episodes of Making a Murderer season 2, the hard questions Kathleen proposed are all still legit.