‘Making A Murderer’ is much more than a docuseries, and it’s nowhere near over. Anyone who watched the Netflix 10-episode show saw that the jury of 12 was split in their decision — three thought he was guilty, seven thought he was innocent, and two were undecided. However, when the three would not budge, the others eventually gave in. Now, an original juror is speaking out, and it may just change everything.
Filmmakers Laura Ricciardi and Moira Demos followed Steven Avery‘s case since day one in 2005, and spent ten years making the series. However, in a new interview on Jan. 5, the filmmakers revealed that after Making A Murderer hit Netflix, one juror from the case has reached out to them, saying they “feared for their personal safety” during the case so didn’t vote innocent, but they do believe that Steven was framed. [hl_amazon_single url=”http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1627223630/ref=as_li_qf_sp_asin_il_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1627223630&linkCode=as2&tag=hollywoocom-20&linkId=7MSSL7AW7DISNLCE” header=”Read Steven Avery’s Case” title=”The Innocent Killer”]
“We were contacted by one of the jurors who sat through Steven Avery’s trial and shared with us their thoughts, told us they believe Steven Avery was not proven guilty,” Laura said on Today on Jan. 5. “They believe Steven was framed by law enforcement and if he receives a new trial, in their opinion, it should take place far away from Wisconsin.”
The juror also told the filmmakers that they would come forward as the source if asked. “The juror contacted us directly and told us the verdicts in Steven’s trial were a compromise. That was the actual word the juror used and went on to describe the jurors ultimately trading votes in the jury room. Explicitly discussing, ‘If you vote guilty on this count, I will vote not guilty on this count.’ That was a significant revelation,” she added.
Of course, this is one side of the story, as the prosecutor in the case, Ken Kratz told ABC News that key evidence was left out of the series. “This wasn’t a documentary at all; This was a defense piece that was generated by and for Steven Avery by his defense team. It wasn’t until Netflix decided to repackage this as a documentary that both sides were invited to participate,” he told Good Morning America. “My biggest concern about this whole process was their decision then to call it a documentary…This docudrama, I think its called, itself is not going to form a basis of a new trial. It doesn’t matter how much attention it receives, unless there’s a legal challenge that comes forth, there shouldn’t be a reason for a new trial.”
So, do you think he’s innocent, HollywoodLifers? Watch the interview with the filmmakers below then let us know.