How Losers Win

Donald Trump

Many around the world who do not need to be convinced of Steven Avery’s innocence or that there is corruption among various members of law enforcement who were involved in this case from the beginning.

People magazine took a poll back in January of 2016.  Of the almost 2,600 who voted, sixty-four percent believed that Steven Avery was innocent.  I believe that if a poll were taken the today it would reveal that the numbers have dropped considerably for Steven Avery so much so that it is questionable that the numbers of those who still believe in his innocence hold a majority in the United States.

One explanation might be that Avery’s detractors are a well-organized, united front.  They have a quiver full of talking points, and it is from this quiver quiver that they shoot arrows at anyone who in any way challenges the state’s case.

It has been a highly effective approach.  For one thing, they have made it their business to know the case inside and out.  Thus, pitted against the average Avery supporter, they are at a huge advantage because they have more knowledge, and as everyone knows, knowledge is power.  Picking apart truthers is a blood sport for them, and one at which they usually succeed.

Now, you may ask yourself why it should matter.  Well, for one thing public opinion actually does carry some weight.  I shouldn’t need to say this since the country where this matter is adjudicated is a democracy, but these days there is a prevailing sentiment among a great majority of people that politicians have grown indifferent to popular sentiment.

Nevertheless, if 99.99% believed in Avery’s innocence, and those people were vocal, politically organized for this specific cause, and were calling and writing letters daily, it would actually attract the attention of those in power, and eventually they would be forced to adjust accordingly.  How do you suppose the NRA ever gained its death grip on American politics?  There is a playbook for this, people, and it does work.

Unfortunately, the enemy side is the one with the playbook, or, they’re the only ones using it.

The only place to go for up to date information on this topic is the internet.  That discussion is held on Reddit.  Initially, everyone would go to MakingAMurderer You might see well over 1,000 people on the sub at any given time, and often the number was much higher.  But as months and months went by, this sub was gradually overtaken by guilters.  At some point it was completely overtaken by guilters, and when that happened, all of the  original mods (moderators) were replaced by a new set who all believe in Steven Avery’s guilt.

Soon after this astonishing turn of events, almost everyone left the MakingAMurderer sub, and rushed to join the newly created TickTockManitowoc which as created to fill the void.  It took a very long time for the MakingAMurderer guilter sub to claw its way back to relevance, but as things now stand, more people have returned to the guilter haven that is MakingAMurderer.  Reddit shows you how many people are on a given sub at any given time.  I’ve lately seen more on MAM, (as it’s known for Making A Murderer) than TickTockManitowoc (known by the abbreviation, TTM).

Dominance of the online discussion hardly scratches the surface though.  I have never heard a radio or television broadcast where the view of Avery’s was the main focus, but by now I’ve heard dozens where the view of AVery’s guilt was presented and was the main focus.  Among a few:

It wasn’t long after Making A Murderer hit the airwaves that Ken Kratz, the disgraced ex-prosecutor who tried the case, who came out swinging.  He developed a set of talking points which that he brought up unfailingly whenever he was interviewed. All of them were immediately debunked but no one in big media seemed to care, and with each successive interview, Kratz kept repeating the same stuff as each time it went unchallenged.

As Ken Kratz was enjoying the opportunity to spew a pack of lies in front of audiences which numbered in the millions, the only other people who had any access to the media megaphone were Jerry Buting and Dean Strang.  But there audiences, while supportive and enthusiastic, consisted of those who might be fit into either a bookstore or civic center.  In other words, as Kratz was getting his message out to a national audience, the only other people who might have been able to effectively oppose him were out on a speaking tour, and often that tour was in Europe.

Without Jerry Buting and Dean Strang to keep the conversation alive, who was there left?  The filmmakers Moira Demos and Laura Ricciardi?  Neither of these ladies has said anything substantive about Steven Avery’s guilt or innocence.  If they’ve said anything at all, it’s only been to deflect claims that the true agenda of their documentary was to support the cause of Steven Avery’s innocence

Both Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey have new legal teams now, but it’s not the customary job of an attorney to fight battles for their clients within the domain of media.  Other than the occasional tweet from Zellner, we hear almost nothing.

In today’s world, having the truth on your side is not enough.  Having the truth and popular support at your back is not enough either.  The enemy we face is cunning, and patient.  Like an infestation of vermin, they may be beaten back for awhile, but without vigilance the infestation will return.

So, in looking at how public opinion about Steven Avery has shifted over the last two years, yes, I do draw a parallel with the rise of such politicians as Donald Trump.  It doesn’t matter that he lost the popular vote, and it doesn’t matter that he is the most unpopular president in history.  In similar fashion, it doesn’t matter how much you talk about all of the absurdities that guilter cannot answer, or all of the evidence that supports evidence being planted.  This case is being fought on a different level, and right now, when no one was watching, the losers took the lead, and now I’m looking for my can of bug spary.

Share

4 comments

  • I don’t know if the numbers would drop considerably. But you are right about the controversial shows with talking heads. One that surprised me most of all was Dateline. The one that Andrea Canning hosted.. FFS. SHe knew of all the trouble Kratz got in, she worked for ABC back then and did a major report on it. But she was SO kind and nice to him.

    I sent Dateline several messages asking her why they gave this bastard (and FACTbender) a national platform in the middle of Avery’s appeal, but only got a bullshit reply. Needless to say my respect for their “Professionalism” has evaporated.

    One thing’s for sure, the media played a major role in Avery and Dassey’s convictions. It’s almost like the media is just another department for many LE agencies. Most people are simply to busy to dig for the real story and believe the highlights the see and hear in passing.

    • I’ve given a lot of thought to just this very issue. I do agree that often media outlets serve as a department of LE agencies. This is certainly true on a local level. THere are several reasons for this. One is that their audiences tend to be made up of people who are older. Who has the time to watch the local news? Who gets their news from television anymore anyway? Older people is who, and they tend to have a more idealistic view of law enforcement. The other reason is that news agencies depend on LE to get their scoops. If, say, the local news alienates the popo, they can forget about ever being first on the scene, or getting a call to go down to the courthouse when something is happening, etc.

      But in understanding how the media has handled this, I think the explanation is more complex. For instance, one of the people linked to was Kathryn Schultz of The New Yorker. Now, the New Yorker is not exactly know for its cozy relationship with LE. Quite the contrary if anything. My overall view is that there is nothing about this case that fits the template for this kind of story. If the guilty man is actually innocent, he is anything but a choir boy (or so we are told). He is cast as a crass, unmannered brute, really. There are a lot of loose ends. And a lot of agencies are already committed to a story. Why start really looking for the truth is that is going to lead to embarrassment?