Off Topic Thread too point uh

.ak

.ak wrote: »

Making a Murder is fascinating, but the Jinx is better IMO.

Can't help but feel these documentaries because of their drama value are only telling one side of the story though.

Oh yeah completely. The whole time I'm wondering what it would be like if you had the prosecution being interviewed throughout.

Buer

Podge_irl wrote: »

Who's your favourite?

The one that sleeps the most.

Buer

awec wrote: »

Pretty sure it's Awec and Aweca

In a bizarre coincidence, my son actually has your name.



To confirm, he is not named after you.

Buer

.ak wrote: »

Making a Murder is fascinating, but the Jinx is better IMO.

Can't help but feel these documentaries because of their drama value are only telling one side of the story though.

Completely. The makers have commented publicly on the questions regarding bias and lack of even handedness in the portrayal following some comments by those involved.

They responded that they couldn't show every bit of evidence but showed what they felt to be the most important.

Which, on digging into the case, is pretty much BS. They had a theme in mind from the start and built their documentary around it. Still compulsive watching, mind you.

awec

Buer wrote: »

In a bizarre coincidence, my son actually has your name.



To confirm, he is not named after you.

You mean you didn't tell your wife that you wanted to name your first son after your favourite boards mod?

sullivlo

.ak wrote: »

Making a Murder is fascinating, but the Jinx is better IMO.

Can't help but feel these documentaries because of their drama value are only telling one side of the story though.

The Jinx is next on my list. Currently listening to Serial (the podcast) now. It's pretty good too - and makes the commute easier.

Zzippy

awec wrote: »

You mean you didn't tell your wife that you wanted to name your first son after your favourite boards mod?

Reminds me of this

Yeah_Right

awec wrote: »

You mean you didn't tell your wife that you wanted to name your first son after your favourite boards mod?

AK or RuggieBear?

Have watched four episodes of Making a Murderer now, still have no idea what I think about the case.

making a murderer

Clearly a biased enough tale, but absolutely fascinating. Binged on it this week and finished it last night.

Couldn't but be impressed with the two defence lawyers, Dean Strang in particular is some man.

Lot of utter disbelief at clearly wrong statements in court. I couldn't understand how the FBI guy could possibly make the statement that he did. He wasn't forced to either, could have easily just said "of the 3 I tested, 3 were negative". The idea that he could extend that to samples he hadn't tested is absolutely bizarre.

Timeline of the entire case here -
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/3yvajx/timeline_of_eventsnew_info/

For anyone who enjoyed it and hasn't seen The Jinx yet, go do that asap. It's only 6x40minute episodes so is an easier monster to get through.

sullivlo

Deleted User wrote: »

making a murderer

Clearly a biased enough tale, but absolutely fascinating. Binged on it this week and finished it last night.

Couldn't but be impressed with the two defence lawyers, Dean Strang in particular is some man.

Lot of utter disbelief at clearly wrong statements in court. I couldn't understand how the FBI guy could possibly make the statement that he did. He wasn't forced to either, could have easily just said "of the 3 I tested, 3 were negative". The idea that he could extend that to samples he hadn't tested is absolutely bizarre.

Timeline of the entire case here -
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/3yvajx/timeline_of_eventsnew_info/

For anyone who enjoyed it and hasn't seen The Jinx yet, go do that asap. It's only 6x40minute episodes so is an easier monster to get through.

It is a defo biased presentation of the case - but the prosecution said they didn't want to be involved in the documentary. It's definitely edited to show Avery in a good light, and the cops in a bad light. And there is some evidence left out. But the bits they showed would definitely show "reasonable doubt".

I'm not sure Avery is innocent, but based on the evidence shown I don't know how they could say he was 100% guilty.

Buer

sullivlo wrote: »

It is a defo biased presentation of the case - but the prosecution said they didn't want to be involved in the documentary. It's definitely edited to show Avery in a good light, and the cops in a bad light. And there is some evidence left out. But the bits they showed would definitely show "reasonable doubt".

I'm not sure Avery is innocent, but based on the evidence shown I don't know how they could say he was 100% guilty.

I think that'a all reasonable enough. From more reading, regardless of the murder conviction, I'm now unsure as to whether he should even walking the streets. The conversations between Brendan and his mother that are in the documentary are edited significantly. One of the parts they leave out is Brendan telling his mother that Steven molested him and his brother.

I'm fairly convinced that there's absolutely reasonable doubt but also he's in the right place.

Bazzo

sullivlo wrote: »

It is a defo biased presentation of the case - but the prosecution said they didn't want to be involved in the documentary. It's definitely edited to show Avery in a good light, and the cops in a bad light. And there is some evidence left out. But the bits they showed would definitely show "reasonable doubt".

I'm not sure Avery is innocent, but based on the evidence shown I don't know how they could say he was 100% guilty.

I saw the other day that supposedly one of the jurors came forward to the makers of the documentary recently and told them that there was a family member of someone in the sherrif's department in the jury and another juror was a family member of someone in the clerk's office. They said that those two refused to vote anything but guilty from the outset and that that particular juror at least began to fear what reprecussions there might be if they didn't go along with the guilty vote. They reckoned the only way the trial would have been fair was if it was held outside WISCONSIN, never mind with jurors from the same county.

No idea of the validity of it but here's a link to an article about it: http://www.vulture.com/2016/01/making-a-murderer-juror-says-steven-avery-was-framed.html

Buer

Can't the lawyers involved have visibility of the potential juror list and object to specific potential jurors in advance? If so, they don't have a leg to stand on with that one.

sullivlo

Buer wrote: »

Can't the lawyers involved have visibility of the potential juror list and object to specific potential jurors in advance? If so, they don't have a leg to stand on with that one.

Yes - they do. They have the option to remove up to 6 people from the list of potential jurors - they used their 6 strikes, and that's what they were left with.

The juror who was excused was really shook by the whole experience I think. Felt sorry for him.

mfceiling

Black lines....so many black lines

irishbucsfan

I feel like the NSA has been through my internet

Bazzo

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I feel like the NSA has been through my internet

If you've ever been in contact with anybody in the states, they probably have

TeoReid

I walked to work on Monday when it was -16c. my testicles just reappeared

Zzippy

TeoReid wrote: »

I walked to work on Monday when it was -16c. my testicles just reappeared

Ah, but it's probably a dry cold! You lucky b@stard! :P

Podge_irl

TeoReid wrote: »

I walked to work on Monday when it was -16c. my testicles just reappeared

Think -23C was the coldest I had over New Years. I swear I've felt a lot colder in Ireland at times.

Bazzo

Podge_irl wrote: »

Think -23C was the coldest I had over New Years. I swear I've felt a lot colder in Ireland at times.

Had two Bostonians with me back home over the Christmas this year and they assured me, despite how mild it was this year, that they weren't used to that kind of cold.

Must be something to do with the humidity.

awec

I think it's cause in Ireland it's usually wet and windy as well as cold, which makes it feel worse.

I was in Washington before Christmas and it was nowhere near as cold as Dublin despite being similar temperatures.

sullivlo

North American cold tends to be crisp and dry - it's freezing out, you'll get chapped lips, but you can wrap up and stay warm. I've been in -20 in Chicago and just worn extra clothes.

Ireland cold is damp. It really gets inside your bones. -2 or -3 in Dublin makes me consider not leaving the house.

Pink Fairy

The Ireland rugby thread had gone more off topic than the "off topic" thread

Bazzo

Bazzo wrote: »

Had two Bostonians with me back home over the Christmas this year and they assured me, despite how mild it was this year, that they weren't used to that kind of cold.

Must be something to do with the humidity.

Conversely I've spent summers in Boston and the heat is totally different too. It's so humid that it feels miles hotter than it really is.

Podge_irl

Sky Mango Tux wrote: »

Conversely I've spent summers in Boston and the heat is totally different too. It's so humid that it feels miles hotter than it really is.

I went from a completely unbearable 40C in Geneva with no air conditioning to -22C in Lapland last year. Massively prefer the cold.

mfceiling

I remember meeting a lad in Rio who went from -40 in Canada to 38 in Brazil. That's a serious jump to take!!

mfceiling

mfceiling wrote: »

I remember meeting a lad in Rio who went from -40 in Canada to 38 in Brazil. That's a serious jump to take!!

Similar to getting out of bed this morning

awec

Was saying to my fiancé this morning that the lions are touring NZ in 2017 which happens to be the same time we are looking at honeymooning.

"I'd be up for that!", she says.


Zzziiiiiinng!

kuang1

You jammy fecker...
Where's the envy emojji?!

Zzippy

awec wrote: »

Was saying to my fiancé this morning that the lions are touring NZ in 2017 which happens to be the same time we are looking at honeymooning.

"I'd be up for that!", she says.


Zzziiiiiinng!

Nice! We're touring NZ in March/April but don't think we'll even be in same place as a Super Rugby game at the same time. I have, however, been told I can go fishing...

sullivlo

sullivlo wrote: »

Yes - they do. They have the option to remove up to 6 people from the list of potential jurors - they used their 6 strikes, and that's what they were left with.

The juror who was excused was really shook by the whole experience I think. Felt sorry for him.

Just finished Making a Murderer

I found that interview to be really bizarre. Why was the excused juror so shook?

Also, why did Michael O'Kelly start crying at the blue ribbon in court?

Yeah_Right

awec wrote: »

Was saying to my fiancé this morning that the lions are touring NZ in 2017 which happens to be the same time we are looking at honeymooning.

"I'd be up for that!", she says.


Zzziiiiiinng!

Nice work. I see why you're marrying her. Had a mate who went to the RWC in NZ for his honeymoon. Where do you find these women?

awec

Yeah_Right wrote: »

Nice work. I see why you're marrying her. Had a mate who went to the RWC in NZ for his honeymoon. Where do you find these women?

If you're struggling just talk to Awec. I will set you on the right path sir.

Your life will become two halves. Before Awec and after Awec.

CatFromHue

I went to NZ a couple of years after the 05 Lions tour and all the tour guides said the place was mental. For sky diving in Wanaka they usually do a couple, maybe 3, a day but your man said they were doing 12 or 13!

The same with the white water rafting were they were doing multiples of what they usually do.

Dunno about the sky fields I'd imagine they were mental.

NZ is a great place but if you want to see NZ it mightn't be the best time, if you want to go for the rugby that's a different story.

mfceiling

awec wrote: »

Was saying to my fiancé this morning that the lions are touring NZ in 2017 which happens to be the same time we are looking at honeymooning.

"I'd be up for that!", she says.


Zzziiiiiinng!

And then she'll sit down and think about it and you'll be in the carribean sitting on a beach drinking strawberry dacquiris!!

So I finished up Making a Murderer this evening, some thoughts on it:

I don't know whether Steven did it or not but there seemed to be a huge lack of physical evidence for a rape/stabbing/strangulation/shooting. Once that blood test came back from the car and the guy from the FBI said he couldn't detect the preservative, I'm not surprised he was convicted.

Brendan though, the way his case was handled was absolutely outrageous and I don't know how anyone involved can sleep at night. How the hell did he not get a new trial once it was established his defence team was actively working against him? Was the fact he was clearly developmentally delayed irrelevant? I don't think he had anything to do with anything, the whole thing was disgusting imo.

sullivlo

Sky Mango Tux wrote: »

So I finished up Making a Murderer this evening, some thoughts on it:

I don't know whether Steven did it or not but there seemed to be a huge lack of physical evidence for a rape/stabbing/strangulation/shooting. Once that blood test came back from the car and the guy from the FBI said he couldn't detect the preservative, I'm not surprised he was convicted.

Brendan though, the way his case was handled was absolutely outrageous and I don't know how anyone involved can sleep at night. How the hell did he not get a new trial once it was established his defence team was actively working against him? Was the fact he was clearly developmentally delayed irrelevant? I don't think he had anything to do with anything, the whole thing was disgusting imo.

I'm a scientist. I've actually worked on the detection of EDTA. I'm not surprised that there was none detected in the blood sample found in the car. However they couldn't say whether there was any trace in the tube - it could be that it wasn't detectable generally. For me, the blood looked to be smeared on. Not dropped on from a cut. And why are there no fingerprints on the wheel? If he went to the effort to remove prints, why not remove the blood! And if he was wearing gloves, how would the blood get out of the gloves? (the only cut he had was on his finger).

I don't think the blood is too incriminating.

But I really don't know if he is innocent.

Agree on Brendan. The treatment of that poor child really left me shook.

molloyjh

George Hook and his missus on Ray D'Arcy at the moment is absolutely hilarious. Not all intentionally, and the wife isn't coming across too great. But it is pure quality television. Cringy and funny.

thomond2006

Who's worse? Munster or the Houston Texans offense?

thomond2006

If you want a 1.01 on throwing away a win, step forward Cincinnati Bengals. Incredible lack of discipline with two cheap shots hands the Steelers the field position for an easy field goal to win.

sullivlo

sullivlo wrote: »

I'm a scientist. I've actually worked on the detection of EDTA. I'm not surprised that there was none detected in the blood sample found in the car. However they couldn't say whether there was any trace in the tube - it could be that it wasn't detectable generally. For me, the blood looked to be smeared on. Not dropped on from a cut. And why are there no fingerprints on the wheel? If he went to the effort to remove prints, why not remove the blood! And if he was wearing gloves, how would the blood get out of the gloves? (the only cut he had was on his finger).

I don't think the blood is too incriminating.

But I really don't know if he is innocent.

Agree on Brendan. The treatment of that poor child really left me shook.

I'm no scientist but I meant to mention that, there was no mention of control tests or whatever, now maybe that didn't suit the point of view of the documentary makers or maybe it didn't happen.

Another thing I simply could not get my head around is how

the appeal judge and the trial judge are one and the same person. You'd the trail judge telling Steven he's the most dangerous man he'd ever had in court, and then you expect him to be impartial in the appeal?

sullivlo

Sky Mango Tux wrote: »

I'm no scientist but I meant to mention that, there was no mention of control tests or whatever, now maybe that didn't suit the point of view of the documentary makers or maybe it didn't happen.

Another thing I simply could not get my head around is how

the appeal judge and the trial judge are one and the same person. You'd the trail judge telling Steven he's the most dangerous man he'd ever had in court, and then you expect him to be impartial in the appeal?

and why mention the rape that he was exonerated for in his reasons for not allowing an appeal?!

Neil3030

If one were inclined to buy a house or apartment in France, where would people recommend?

A town that satisfied as many of the following criteria as possible:

Has a Top-14 team
Near the sea
Good weather in summer
Near mountains for skiing in winter
Easy to get around, ideally centre-ville within walking distance
Nearby airport with flights to the UK/Ireland

Squidgy Black

Neil3030 wrote: »

If one were inclined to buy a house or apartment in France, where would people recommend?

A town that satisfied as many of the following criteria as possible:

Has a Top-14 team
Near the sea
Good weather in summer
Near mountains for skiing in winter
Easy to get around, ideally centre-ville within walking distance
Nearby airport with flights to the UK/Ireland

Personally I'd say Pau, I loved it there, weather isn't amazing but it's decent enough. Near the Pyrenees, San Sebastian and Biarritz aren't too far away either. The centre is big enough with a decent amount of shops. Toulouse airport is only a short train away.

Buer

Grenoble.

Nowhere near the sea....but:

Mountainous region renowned for skiing at the foot of the Alps. Airport that goes direct to Dublin (and Lyon airport isn't too far if flights aren't working out). Top 14 team with a number of Irish connections. Summer months have weather of high twenties. Not a big city either so easily navigated.

Also, if you were pushed, you could pop over to Italy or Switzerland for a couple of days by car, easily.

Zzippy

Missus had Bondi Rescue on the tv there (I think she likes looking at the buff lifeguards). Its an old episode cos Steve Irwin is in it. But one of the lifeguards was Matt Burke, former international with the Wallabies!

Pink Fairy

Zzippy wrote: »

Missus had Bondi Rescue on the tv there (I think she likes looking at the buff lifeguards). Its an old episode cos Steve Irwin is in it. But one of the lifeguards was Matt Burke, former international with the Wallabies!

Yeah.......the missus likes looking at buff guys........we believe ya!

irishbucsfan

Pink Fairy wrote: »

Yeah.......the missus likes looking at buff guys........we believe ya!

She also recognised Matt Burke, very good knowledge of rugby...