The documentary, "Making a Murderer" currently on Netflix and available at You Tube, is of great value to those of you interested in Statement Analysis, and discernment of deception.
It is a great example of "emotion versus science" as its portrayal contains much truth, hard facts, missing information, deception, wrong doing, personal leakage, and "good guys" versus "bad guys" where the good guys have black hats and the bad guy has a white hat.
It is a strong example of propaganda and is useful for those interested in discerning propaganda techniques.
In short, it is one of the best documentaries I have seen to help those wishing to learn lie detection. Almost everyone in the documentary is indicated for deception or wrong doing, from the sketch artist to the accused to the accusers, to the attorneys. I found one defense attorney
A very bad man spent 18 years in prison for a specific crime he did not commit.
He is hated by police.
Upon release, he is a media darling, including the Innocence Project and is set to gain millions of dollars in suit.
He is then charged with murder.
Police not only show misconduct, but deception, under oath, including their new faulty memories.
The prosecutor uses language that suggests sexual issues of a personal nature, who's voice inflection goes to high pitch while employing words associated with water. "Swimming upstream" and "perspiration" and even his description of the rape, which we have no reliable linguistic connection due to both the editing of the documentary and the leading questions of investigators.
I wrote that the nephew did not get an appropriate defense. I believe he was involved, in some degree, with the assault, murder and disposing of the remains, but his defense attorney was both deceptive and grossly negligent.
It is a treasure chest for Statement Analysis and if you do not think that emotions are powerful enough to influence decisions, look at
a. How many tens of thousands are signing petitions on behalf of Steven Avery
b. How the Innocence Project did not want him as a client any longer.
I watched the entire documentary, but did so with much typing and distraction, and did all analysis on the fly, while just listening. After it, someone posted the transcripts, which is very useful.
Here is my challenge to you:
Not using what I have mentioned already, how many elements of propaganda can you label?
How many forms of deception can you identify, specifically?
Use entire situations (such as editing) or simply using small words, such as "little girl", by the prosecutor, for commentary.
Hint: "Jodi" is a good example of documentary bias, or propaganda, in order to leave the viewer with a distinct impression that does not represent reality.