‘Making a Murderer’ Gets New Episodes on Netflix

Netflix - Making a Murderer
Courtesy of Netflix

Making a Murderer” will return to Netflix with new episodes, the streaming network announced Tuesday.

The new installments will take fans of the documentary series back inside the story of convicted murderer Steven Avery, and his co-defendant, Brendan Dassey, as their respective investigative and legal teams challenge their convictions and the State fights to have the convictions and life sentences upheld. This next chapter will provide an in-depth look at the high-stakes post-conviction process, as well as the emotional toll the process takes on all involved. Executive producers and co-directors Laura Ricciardi and Moira Demos are once again helming the project, with an exact episode count and premiere date for Season 2 yet to be announced.

Related

‘Making a Murderer’ Defendants Still Feeling Impact From Series

The episodes will offer exclusive access to Avery’s new lawyer Kathleen Zellner and Dassey’s legal team, led by Laura Nirider and Steve Drizin, as well as intimate access to the families and characters close to the case.

“We are extremely grateful for the tremendous response to, and support of, the series. The viewers’ interest and attention has ensured that the story is not over, and we are fully committed to continuing to document events as they unfold,” said creators Ricciardi and Demos.

Related

What to Watch After ‘Making a Murderer’

“Because of Ricciardi’s and Demos’ incredible vision, commitment and keen eye, audiences around the globe became completely captivated by the personal stories of Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey and the unique lens their experiences provide into the criminal justice system,” said Lisa Nishimura, Netflix VP of Original Documentary Programming. “We’re thrilled to be continuing our longstanding relationship with the filmmakers, and look forward to giving our global viewers eagerly anticipated updates on this story.”

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 24

Leave a Reply

24 Comments

Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. Ronald Duke says:

    I’m glad I’m not the only one who thinks Avery has incredibly bad luck. This guy is clearly innocent!

  2. Syd says:

    Avery is innocent!

  3. Juan says:

    FREE AVERY!!!!

  4. Marvalous says:

    Plus out of nowhere they show a picture of the key with the extra part that goes around your neck where did that come from they never mentioned that

  5. Marvalous says:

    I just would like to ask one question what person you know has car keys and lives at a house that doesn’t have their house keys on the same key chain

  6. Don Quixote says:

    It’s funny how the people who believe Avery to be guilty are also the ones who present the least evidence in their arguments, cannot seem to grasp the concept of both innocence until guilt is proven and reasonable doubt, and have far and away the most grammatical errors in their comments. Just an observation though, wouldn’t be able to judge them, too much reasonable doubt…

  7. RatedR says:

    The mane thing that was suspicious to me was the 32 million Avery was about to get for that wrongful conviction the first time. The Justice System is fk up and I believe he was set up. There’s no way in hell I’m about to commit a crime knowing I’m about to be rich for because the state fail me the first time for a crime I didn’t commit. Let’s be freaking real now. They was totally after him after that.

  8. Concerned neoghbor says:

    This documentary is very one-sided and does not tell the extent to which the community as well as law enforcement went to find out what really happened to Teresa. Steven Avery and Dassey are sick individuals who should be locked up so that Avery never has an opportunity to kill again. Ever heard of the link between every time you get caught it makes you better at what you do? This is Avery. If we allow a very skewed documentary (that has never given ALL the evidence to it’s viewers) to determine justice then what is the point of trials. We should just allow outside film makers to determine the guilt or innocence of everyone accused. I vote that if Avery is released we should have those two women live with Avery until he or one of them dies. Good luck girls… Perhaps you should have done more investigating instead of padding the film for your own celebrity.

    • Neil Robinson says:

      I think it did show the extent the law went to prove that Steven Avery was guilty no matter if he was innocent or not , there would of been no court in any other land that would of found him guilty and a enquiry would of happened immediately, you and your friends at the sheriff’s Dept should be worried

    • Mandy says:

      Ken is coming out with a book so eventually “all the sides” will be revealed. But unfortunately, the way that the evidence against Avery is presented doesn’t show that he’s guilty. Also, following his Lawyer’s Twitter states even now, there’s little evidence against him.
      To be honest, I don’t know how I feel about Dassey because he is mentally ‘slow’ – the documentary did a good job investigating, one sided or not.
      I don’t think this was to make a celebrity.

      • Idratherstayanonymous says:

        Hey Mandy, I think this “Concerned Neoghbor” might be the actual Sgt C! Even after going through all the evidence available to the public you can say that the doc is “one sided”, something Ken Kratz first put out there – why would anybody believe what he has to say after his behaviour during and after the trial?It’s a documentary, not a court room! It doesn’t have to be neutral, it’s trying to make a point Law Enforcement of the area and the local justice system is trying to cover up: DAs and Police have too much power and behave accordingly (“Absolute power corrupts absolutely.” applies here), even to the extent they did with Steven Avery. The issues the DOJ has in Wisconsin were never meant to be uncovered, in fact it might not only be a local issue…

  9. Wendy says:

    Steven Avery is GUILTY, If you let him out he will do it again. I sure hope his lawyer is going to be able to handle the guilt she will feel if he gets out and rapes and kills some else’s daughter, sisiter, friend, and or mother. Steven Avery you are nothing but a loser and you are right WHERE YOU BELONG

    • Mike says:

      Here’s the thing. Based on the evidence the state presented, there was a mountain of reasonable doubt. They said the duo tied her to the bed and raped her and cut her throat and dragged her into the garage where they shot her. Yet no rope fibers on the bed posts, no scratches on the posts from the leg irons, no blood or DNA from Teresa whatsoever in the bedroom. Have you watched the entire documentary to see how much of a slob Avery is? How do you think he cleaned all that up if he actually did it? How did he clean his garage, where he allegedly shot her a dozen times while leaving everything else in the garage a complete mess? How did he remove every single trace of her DNA while also leaving his own, and all the other dust and clutter and junk that was still there? There was zero evidence found by anyone other than Manitowoc Sheriffs Department, which was found under suspicious circumstances.

      Could he have killed her? Probably. But it’s up to the state to provide the evidence, and the defense did a great job casting doubt on it. The state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the murder occurred as they say it did, and they didn’t do that. Remember, the majority of the jury initially thought he was not guilty but 3 members were extremely resistant to finding him not guilty. And 2 of the jurors had connections with the Manitowoc Sheriffs department. You do the math. The jury isn’t there to determine if he did it or not. The jury is there to determine if there is reasonable doubt, which there was. Unfortunately, people who are guilty sometimes get through the legal system because prosecutors can’t prove beyond a reasonable doubt. But in this base, there is an abundance of reasonable doubt because he didn’t do it.

      I don’t even want to go into Brenden’s lawyer, Len Shitforbrains, who basically served him up on a silver platter. As well as the investigators who coerced and walked him into confessing to something he didn’t do, and then told him he had to call his mom and tell him that he did it otherwise he would be in trouble. Then they used that phone call against him in court. His lawyer let him be interviewed by the investigators alone without legal representation or his mom present, and they didn’t accept his first statement and made him write a second statement where he confessed.

      Want to know why the people who planted the body planted it in their burn pit? Because all the initial alibis from everyone on the property said that they had a bonfire that night. They used that knowledge to plant the body and make it look like they put the body in the fire. This isn’t complicated. Andy Whatshisname was about to be up shit creek without a paddle once it was discovered he received a phone call from another agency stating they had an inmate being held for a crime he didn’t commit, and he did nothing with it. Lt. Lenk was about to be up the same creek. Why is it that he was the same person who mysteriously found all the evidence? Why was the lab tech given instructions to “place her in the garage or bedroom?” Why did she find inconclusive evidence but present it as if it was valid? Why did Avery have a cut on his left hand, yet have his blood on the right side of the column (that also looks identical to blood being smeared with a cotton swab)? There’s way too many WHYs. Because it doesn’t make any damn bit of sense.

      And before you start going on about evidence that was left out of the documentary, I will let you know I already considered some of it. Brenden had bleach on his pants that day. The state claims it was from cleaning up the crime scene. Bleach is a common household cleaning agent. It’s sole purpose isn’t to clean a crime scene so it’s just speculation. Also, they say Avery used *69 to call Teresa. Think about this for a second. He wanted her to come to his yard to take photos. Why would he *69 the call, just to say “Hey it’s Steven Avery can you come take some pictures….” It makes ZERO sense. The “evidence” that people say proves he did it, that was left out of the documentary, is nothing but speculation and a bunch of gibberish that doesn’t make sense.

  10. June Acra says:

    I just decided to watch this, is it a true story, I need to know this.

    • Irma Fuentes says:

      Mike, in a nutshell, you have summed up my feelings exactly regarding both case. I found the entire documentary thought provoking, disturbing and just tragic for ALL parties involved.

    • Mandy says:

      I think you should probably google and research if you cannot figure out if it’s real or not from Netflix.

  11. Lex says:

    It just documents what the public has known for a long time….some cops are dirty and the criminal “justice” system protects them.

  12. I love this documentary , a real life crime story that made everyone is talking about

  13. Wish they would bring forth truth,liijibg forward to watching!

  14. Tom says:

    Gee, maybe they will get it right this time.

More Digital News from Variety

Loading