The Staircase



I skipped a couple of episodes between the original verdict and the last one so it might have been mentioned then ?
Nah, it wasn’t mentioned in the series at all. It seems strangely compelling though, and could explain why there was blood in the kitchen and she was clutching some feathers. It would certainly explain the gashes on her scalp (which was the main sticking point for the jury imo). I’m not sure why they never used it in the defence, but maybe it just seemed far too out-there and a bit of a long shot to chuck in.

I think he was innocent. I can understand why people wouldn’t like him or viewed him as strange, but I just think he was sooooo middle-class.

I watched the original docco (over 10 years ago i reckon) is it worth watching for the few extra episodes netflix has added on?

he was guilty as fuck for me (both times).
Maybe watch it all again and really concentrate, because I’m not sure how anyone could come to a ‘guilty as fuck’ conclusion.
 
I couldn't figure out whether he was guilty or innocent. One episode I thought guilty, the next I thought innocent. Sometimes I flip-flopped between the two probably twice an episode.

Great show imo. Much better than Making a Murderer, which was 90% filler and shots of landscapes 10% story.
 
Probably the same way as the trial jury did...

Which is why I asked how this differs from the original docco
I wasn’t having a dig mate, sorry if it came across that way. The extra episodes are about how he finally got out of prison. I enjoyed them.
 
I wasn’t having a dig mate, sorry if it came across that way. The extra episodes are about how he finally got out of prison. I enjoyed them.

There’s a lot of stuff the doc doesn’t feature , such as the life insurance policy, concerns for her high paid job......other things like him getting it on with the editor of the documentary (might explain why many feel it’s ott biased in his favour). I agree that on the show alone he appears not guilty, but if people have read up on other facts + his bizarre, apparently gentile ( yet not totally genuine) exterior I can see why plenty think he’s a cold, calculated killer.
 
What happened? He shagged the editor?

Aye . He was boffing her for some time apparently. There’s a lot of stuff out there on IMDb/internet that doesn’t get covered in this show.
Eg , any mention of ‘evidence of strangulation’ is completely glossed over (it got briefly mentioned in the last episode) but apparently got a lot of court time.
 
I wasn’t having a dig mate, sorry if it came across that way. The extra episodes are about how he finally got out of prison. I enjoyed them.

no probs... i'll get around to watching it as i'm really intrigued how it all panned out after the trial/conviction. got a lot of tele to get through at the moment.
 
The bbc podcast about this is fantastic and examines both sides

After just watching the Netflix doc I was edging towards thinking he was innocent but after the BBC podcast I’m now adamant he was guilty

It’s called beyond reasonable doubt and is excellent, presents both sides (which after listening to it, you’ll realise the Netflix doc didn’t, for a multitude of reasons that I won’t spoil)
 
The bbc podcast about this is fantastic and examines both sides

After just watching the Netflix doc I was edging towards thinking he was innocent but after the BBC podcast I’m now adamant he was guilty

It’s called beyond reasonable doubt and is excellent, presents both sides (which after listening to it, you’ll realise the Netflix doc didn’t, for a multitude of reasons that I won’t spoil)
I might give that a shot, I love a true crime podcast. I can highly recommend Sword and Scale - for the truly perverted episode 114 has a son killing his Mother and, ahem, losing his virginity to her corpse. Unbelievable, horrendous and horribly addictive podcast.
 
The bbc podcast about this is fantastic and examines both sides

After just watching the Netflix doc I was edging towards thinking he was innocent but after the BBC podcast I’m now adamant he was guilty

It’s called beyond reasonable doubt and is excellent, presents both sides (which after listening to it, you’ll realise the Netflix doc didn’t, for a multitude of reasons that I won’t spoil)

I’ll download that I think. I don’t think we need to worry too much about spoilers this deep into an old thread.
He was having a relationship with the editor of the documentary and clearly had a good relationship with the team. From the later episodes you could tell there was a lot of damming stuff they didn’t show in earlier episodes
 
no probs... i'll get around to watching it as i'm really intrigued how it all panned out after the trial/conviction. got a lot of tele to get through at the moment.

just finished the updated version. a 2nd trial would have been interesting and it's more than likely that he would not have been convicted given the deaver evidence, though that's not to say he didn't do it (i still reckon he did), as his own lawyer pointed out it would be more of a case of 'not proven' than not guilty.
 

Back
Top