Like many television viewers, I was astonished by the Steven Avery story as portrayed in Making A Murderer. As many know, the program strongly suggested that investigators planted evidence, pressed co-defendant Brendan Dassey to make a false confession, and otherwise framed Avery for the murder of a young woman. The show left me with the impression that Avery was probably guilty, but that, at least in some ways, he had indeed been set up.
My opinion is now completely different. Author Katz carefully reviews every accusation and answers it with clear, compelling information and evidence. It's truly unfortunate that he succumbed to addiction during this time, leading to the loss of his marriage, his career, and his reputation. He says he's working hard to make a comeback--yet he never expresses self-pity or makes excuses for his actions and behavior.
I highly recommend this book to those who are now sympathetic to Avery. Whether it changes your mind about his guilt or it doesn't, it will let you see this murder case and conviction in a new light. I think it's a persuasive one. The book is well-written, the author displays striking honesty and courage, and I hope people will re-consider signing petitions for Avery's release before they look at this case again.

It was a good read, but very close to the hit series from Netflix. This is a good recommendation for an avid reader who likes true crime. If you are a TV watcher and reader, like me you would not have had new information.

Overall this book is good, it handles the facts, tells you how things where handelnd and in which order and at what timeline, so exactly what a non fiction book should do!
The writing is mostly nicely done as well, not too dry or in any way making this book hard to read and I personally appreciated that pictures of the crime were included so that the reader gets a feel of the actual case. So all that was good.

What I didn't like so much was the constant pointers towards the tv show. I think this book would have worked way better if the author wouldn't have focused so much on pointing all the little things out that the tv show did "wrong" or showcased in a different view point and instead focused on simply showing his side of how this crime went down, the evidence and what happened.

I personally thing everyone is allowed their own opinion, and let's be honest if a tv show I still made about the side of the murderer the chances are pretty high that the production people will try to at least give the audience the doubt if the guy really did what he has been convicted of doing. We all know that going into a show like "making a murderer" right? And if we don't we certainly will not be interested to read the ither side of the story!

So to me, I would have liked this book a good amount better if the author would have not constantly be pointing fingers and basically doing the same thing as he was complaining about the tv show doing: pressing his own option and slight spin in how he saw the events go down unto the reader!

I am not saying that Kratz is right or wrong, because honestly I don't think any of us outsiders can actually really ever get a real understanding of what happens during those investigations and within the mind if the murderer, and while I can understand why a book written from the investigations/prosecutors side will definelty tend more towards " look how guilty he is!" I would have still appreacted if Kratz could have kept a bit more natural in the "presentation" of the case so that the reader can a read least try and build their own option with "all" the evidence they get.


And after all that, let me end this and say this:

This book is good,
it could have been better in my option if the author could have kept a bit of a more natural tone and not focused so extremely in building this book around the tv show

BUT if you enjoy non fiction true crime books I am sure you will have an intersting time reading this.


And if you are someone that loves the show?
You might want to read this just to get the other side of the story, since let's not forget that every story has at least two versions and both side deserve to be heard if you listen to one of them!

Avery: The Case Against Steven Avery and What "Making a Murderer" Gets Wrong

OK, True Crime IS my guilty pleasure genre. And I am particularly fascinated by stories of “justice gone wrong,” and am a strong advocate for fairness in the justice system and a believer in the need for judicial reform. So, the whole phenomenon around Steven Avery and the Netflix series “Making a Murderer” would seem to be right up my alley. After all, I was obsessed worth Serial, so a story about a wrongful conviction should be my thing, right?

But here is the thing: it’s easy to advocate for justice for an intelligent, articulate young man (Serial’s Adnan Syed). It’s a lot harder when the accused murderer is a man like Steven Avery: a crude, uneducated man whose family business is an auto salvage yard where he lives in a trailer among rusted out wrecked cars and indulges himself fathering children, harassing people, and torturing animals. Truly.

Some years ago, Avery was accused and convicted of raping a woman, and sent to prison where he stayed until the case was overturned, as his innocence was proven. Just when his case against the County was moving toward what looked like a huge cash award for wrongful imprisonment, he was accused of murdering a young female photographer who came to the salvage yard to take photos for Auto Trader.

Making a Murderer presented a compelling argument for what looked like at best inept police work and at worst a totally corrupt judicial system that went after him because his case for the prior improper conviction was about to bankrupt the County. He settled for $400,000, which he used for his defense in the murder trial.
I admit, I couldn’t watch all of Making a Murderer. They actually lost me fairly early on with the animal torture, and while I thought there had likely been some significant errors in the prosecution of the case (especially the way Avery’s nephew Brendan Dassey was used), I wasn’t convinced he was innocent.

This book, written by the prosecutor, reinforced my opinion that Avery is a disgusting creep. It also gave me a TON of facts that were not part of Making a Murderer. It’s well written, and Kratz is open with his own story and the mistakes he made along the way (unrelated to Avery’s case). Anyone who watched the series and thinks Avery is innocent should really read this book, and it would be a good choice for true crime fans, especially if they can handle reading about a disgusting man.

Really, if I hadn’t committed to review it, I might not have finished it. I knew the status of the legal case, and I felt like I didn’t care if he had been wrongly convicted. Saying that goes against my personal beliefs, and I do think there are huge problems with our system of “justice” – but this man should be locked away forever, IMHO.

Four stars. I still hate Avery, and am not a big fan of Kratz, but the book is well done.

A well-balanced counter-argument to the Steven Avery case from someone who actually worked on the case. It answers many of the questions raised, but overlooked in the documentary Making a Murderer. It makes one re-think and re-evaluate everything he/she might have thought about the case from just having seen the documentary. I will be purchasing this book to use with my Seniors as a counterpoint to Making a Murderer. So glad that someone published a different opinion about the case. This book will make my students re-think everything they thought about the case from having seen the documentary.

First, this review is in exchange for an ARC given by NetGalley. That said, the review is unbiased.

I'm actually surprised by what I'm going to write here--I liked Ken Kratz's book. The writing is highly engaging and intelligent, and the case he makes is compelling. (For the record, I am of the "sympathetic but suspicious" camp when it comes to Steven Avery, and the "free poor Brendan" camp on his nephew). While he disputes the "Making a Murderer" points, he does so typically with specific evidence, which I appreciate. And he is open about his own failings, as a sex addict. (It seems he should have specified drug addict, too, but I'll give him credit for what he does discuss.) You can actually see him fighting his own temptations to dismiss, minimize, or gloss over what he's done--and still very clearly articulating his own responsibility, his own victimization of others. I appreciate that honesty.

My only criticisms would be to reign in some of the more speculative/excessive language (persuade by argument, not by volume), and to give credit to the "Making a Murderer" team--maybe they *do* believe Avery is innocent, even if they're off-base on that. I would also urge him to rework the defense of Brendan's interviews without his parent--in a single paragraph, Kratz says 16 year olds don't have the right to have a lawyer/adult present, Brendan can tell right from wrong, and that if his mother were present, she'd just sell out Brendan to save her brother, so having her present wasn't in the interests of justice. The first point is legal--if that's the law in that state, so be it. The second point requires evidence (any psychologist reports?) that isn't provided, and the third point is a conflict of interest between Kratz's desire to succeed in a case and protecting the rights of a suspect.

Overall, I actually came out of this thinking that Kratz would do well to consider writing more true crime books. He's thoughtful, he writes well (or his ghost writer does--I'm not sure what his set-up is), and he manages to synthesize a lot of information in a compelling way.