Steven Avery Criminal History and Trials - 1375 Words

Steven Avery Criminal History and Trials (Essay Sample) Content: Steven Avery Criminal History and Trials Name Institution Steven Avery Criminal History and Trials Rape and murder are the two most heinous crimes that often attract heavy sentencing in case one is convicted. However, before the courts make the guilty verdict, the suspect goes through the due process where consider the available evidence to come to the decision. Of course, those who commit such serious offenses must receive the maximum punishment to act as a deterrent to others. However, some suspects have not been lucky as they have been forced to serve time in prison for crimes they never committed. Steven Avery is an American citizen from Manitowoc County, Wisconsin. Avery served 18 years out of the total 32 years attempted murder/rape sentence before DNA evidence exonerated him (McDonnell-Parry, 2016). After coming out of the prison in 2003, he filed a lawsuit for US$36 million in damages against Manitowoc attorney, sheriff, and county (Rowles, 2016). While his lawsuit was still pending, the authorities arrested him for the murder of one Teresa Halbach where the courts sentenc ed him to life incarceration without any parole. Averyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s wrongful sentencing on assault and rape charges attracted attention and raised awareness about false imprisonment. The subsequent murder trials along with the related issues have been the focus of Netflix documentary, "Making a Murderer." The current paper examines Steven Averyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s criminal history, trials and highlights the controversy and attention that the Netflix series has brought to the case. Steven Avery criminal History Steven Avery was born in Manitowoc County to Dolores and Allan Avery. School records revealed that he had an IQ of 70 and barely performed in school (McDonnell-Parry, 2016). He married Lori Mathiesen with whom he had four children. At only 18 years of age, the courts convicted him of burglary where he served 10 months in prison out of the two years that the judges had sentenced him. Together with a friend, he poured gasoline on a cat and threw it into a fire at his junkyard. He was convicted to 9 months in prison for animal cruelty after pleading guilty to the crime (Rowles, 2016). In 1984, the courts sentenced him to serve a six-year prison term for endangering the safety of a person after he had pointed a gun at. Sexual Assault Charges and Exoneration While awaiting sentencing, Beersten Penny was brutally assaulted and sexually molested. The police arrested Avery after the victim positively picked him from a photo lineup. Drawing on the evidence of 16 eyewitnesses, the court convicted him of attempted murder and rape, where it gave a 32-year prison sentence. However, after serving 18 years behind bars, DNA evidence exonerated him. Such testing was unavailable at the time he was convicted of sexual assault (Rowles, 2016). The new evidence linked the crime to Gregory Allen, who was already serving his 60-year prison sentence for unrelated offences. As a result, Avery was released in 2003 after the lengthy period behind bars. The case attracted wide public attention and prompted Wisconsin criminal justice system made improvements to reduce the chances of wrongful convictions. Later enacted into law, the recommendations became the Avery Bill that came into force in 2005. He filed a lawsuit for US$ 36milion as damages for the wrongful sentencing. As fate had it, he did not enjoy his new found freedom. Murder Charges In 2005, the police arrested Avery for the murder of a photographer, Teresa Halbach. The victim disappeared on 31st Oct 2005, and her last appointment was with Avery to take pictures of a minivan that was up for sale at his home. Before she went missing, the suspect had called her three times using a concealed number to avoid being identified. The investigators found Halbachà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s car hidden in a salvage yard. The bloodstains matched Averyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s DNA (Rowles, 2016). Later, the investigators found charred bone fragments in burn pit located to Averyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s home. They arrested and charged him with murder, but Avery maintained that he had been framed to discredit the pending wrongful sentencing civil case. During the investigations, charges of evidence tampering and conflict of interest emerged. Averyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s attorneys found out a box having Avery blood samples that had been used as evidence in the case of 1985 had been unsealed with a puncture hole in the stopper. As a result, they speculated that the investigators could have drawn blood from the stored Halbach stored vail and placed in her car to incriminate Avery. During the trials, the suspectà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s nephew, Brandan Dassey confessed that he helped to kill Halbach and subsequently dispose of his body. However, he recanted the confession, affirming that the authorities had coerced him. He declined to testify his role at Averyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s trial. The judges gave a guilty verdict for illegal firearm and murder and sentenced the alleged offender to life behind bars on the murder charges with an additional five years for weapons possession that were to run concurrently. Netflix Documentary "Making of a Murdererà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚  The "Making of a Murderer" raised attention and controversy surrounding Averyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s conviction. Filmed over a 10-year period, the real life documentary follows the sentencing and exoneration of the alleged offender who while exposing corruption in the law enforcement becomes the first suspect in another murder case (McDonnell-Parry, 2016). The documentary recounted the events of a man who served 18 years behind bars for a crime that he never committed and after his exoneration, the police arrested him for another crime for which he handed life incarceration. The documentary affirms that the U.S. justice system made serious errors where some were intentional. The hit series raised many concerns about the faults in the criminal justice system. As the producers argued, the investigators tampered with evidence and in fact planted incriminating material to link Avery to the murder case. However, the critics claimed that the film painted Avery in a favorable light while demoni zing the criminal justice system (Rowles, 2016). They further state it deliberately excluded vital information that linked the suspect to the sentence and prompted an uncalled uproar on Whitehouse.gov and Change.org. For them, Avery is a murderer and guilty of the crime as he was not framed. They accused the producers of masterfully manipulating the audience to conclude that the authorities framed the suspect by omitting key facts and conflating Averyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s prior apparent false sexual assault (Qazvini Barret, 2016). Besides, they arg...