upworthy
More

The real reason 'Making a Murderer' disturbs us isn't about sussing out whether he did it.

What if it's not about whether he's innocent or guilty?

A documentary has gotten people all over the world riled up.

SPOILERS ABOUND. You've been warned.

In the past few weeks, the Netflix-watching community has been gathered together in a virtual town square — social media — to express strong feelings produced by the documentary "Making a Murderer."

If you haven't seen it, it's the story of how Steven Avery, wrongfully imprisoned for 18 years for sexual assault by a shortcut-taking municipality in Wisconsin and then released when finally exonerated, gets convicted again (for murder). There are all sorts of good questions raised about how he was found guilty the second time.

Images from Netflix's "Making a Murderer," used with permission.

It's the stuff nightmares are made of.

First, the accused is not necessarily an easy-to-like character. Avery is an uneducated guy from "the wrong side of town" and a family not very well-respected — their family tree of various bad behaviors is probably a couple of typed pages long.

Grudge-wielding authorities targeted Avery immediately as a suspect in the first case, a sexual assault, in 1985. He spent 18 years in prison for it until the Wisconsin Innocence Project intervened and helped present new DNA evidence showing someone else committed the assault.

It was later proven that the police department had ample evidence that should have led them to investigate others, which they didn't pursue. Not only did their dogged insistence on locking up Avery wrongfully deprive him of a huge chunk of his life, but it also resulted in the real perpetrator, Gregory Allen, remaining free to violently rape in the ensuing years.

Avery was released and returned home to try to move on and live his life. That should have been the end of the story, right?

But just as Manitowoc County was facing the possibility of paying millions of dollars to him in restitution, a search for a missing woman named Teresa Halbach seemed to point to Avery.

Her body was later discovered. Evidence seemed (at least on the surface) to damn Avery and his nephew, and they both went to prison for it.

After 18 years of his life wrongfully spent in prison, Avery was right back there.

Did he do it or didn't he? That's the question, right — or is it?

There are fierce debates happening on Facebook and in living rooms around the world. Netflix's documentary presents a lot of troubling aspects to the prosecution's murder case, and the prosecutor, since disgraced for other salacious, character-destroying reasons, argues that the film leaves out crucial evidence the public should be considering. There are lots of split opinions and some who don't know what to think.

But what if the moral obligation of the viewer isn't to try to get to the bottom of whether Steven Avery committed the crime?

Instead, the audience can use its collective power to ask the right questions: Are people all over America getting fair trials based on unbiased investigations?

Or do overworked, under-resourced, and potentially undertrained police departments fit evidence to a favored theory rather than collect all the evidence that could lead them to the truth — truth that could potentially disprove their theories?

Do pressured prosecutors use the media and the law to gain outcomes that favor their own track records and careers, rather than protect the "innocent until proven guilty" core tenet of our judicial system?

The potential for wrong judicial outcomes seems more and more obvious lately.

Consider:

Sandra Bland, pulled from her car by a Texas officer under falsely reported pretenses, leading to arrest and, subsequently, her suspicious death in jail.

Adnan Syed, a teen boy whose inability to account for his whereabouts and ailing, overwhelmed lawyer caused him to be convicted of his ex-girlfriend's murder — perhaps unjustly, as the radio podcast "Serial" highlighted.

Glenn Ford, who spent 30 years on death row for a crime he didn't commit, causing his prosecutor, in a public show of humility rare for prosecutors, to express extreme regret at how he handled the case and doubts about the way cases are routinely handled.

Upworthy screenshot.

"My mindset was wrong and blinded me to my purpose of seeking justice, rather than obtaining a conviction of a person who I believed to be guilty. I did not hide evidence, I simply did not seriously consider that sufficient information may have been out there that could have led to a different conclusion. And that omission is on me."
— Marty Shroud, former prosecutor who tried the Glenn Ford case

When I asked the national Innocence Project's Paul Cates whether cases like these are outliers, he gave me unsettling news:

"Since 1989, DNA evidence has helped to exonerate 337 people of crimes for which they didn’t commit," Cates said via email. "The National Registry counts another 1391 [exonerated] by other means. And these represent just a fraction of the wrongful convictions as it is extremely difficult to prove innocence once you’ve been convicted."

That's why the Innocence Network hopes these lightning-rod moments in pop culture will prompt citizens to reflect and act.

If you get addicted to "Serial" and "Making a Murderer" partially because it's so scary how vulnerable any of us could be to a wrongful conviction, then some part of you knows that the justice system in America is in need of deep, expansive overhaul.

These are a few of the many methods for overhaul, according to the Wisconsin Innocence Project's Keith Findley:

"We ... need to change the culture in police departments so they see themselves, and are rewarded accordingly, as neutral investigators into the facts rather than agents of the prosecution whose job it is to build a case against a chosen suspect. Likewise, we need a change in the culture in prosecutors’ offices so that the search for justice is a higher priority than the drive to obtain convictions."

We can rally around our TVs every time a talented filmmaker exposes one of the many cases like this, and then quickly move on. Or we could see it as the wake-up call it is. It disturbs us for a reason.

What happened to Teresa Halbach is unimaginably horrible. What adds so much insult to the injury, though, is that because of poor police work and shady prosecutorial conduct — even if Avery really did commit her murder — there will always be the possibility that her real killer went free.

We can insist on a better justice system, and we should encourage all of our neighbors to do the same.

Here's the trailer for the documentary. You really have to see it to believe it.

Art

In 125 years, millions of people have looked at this painting. No one really saw it until recently.

Van Gogh saw something it took scientists another 100 years to see.

Image from Wikimedia Commons.

Van Gogh's Starry Night, 1889.

Vincent van Gogh never got to enjoy his own historic success as an artist (even though we've been able to imagine what that moment might have looked like). Van Gogh died in 1890 at the age of 37 in Auvers-sur-Oise, France after shooting himself in the chest with a revolver. It was a tragic end to a turbulent life marked by mental instability and severe self-doubt.

According to the Van Gogh Museum, in a letter to his brother Theo in 1890, just a couple of weeks before his death, Van Gogh wrote, "...my life, is attacked at the very root, my step also is faltering." The man was struggling and exhausted. The high standards he had set for himself and his art were taking a toll. He was unsure about his future and, up to this point, had not received much recognition for his work and thought himself a failure "as a man and as an artist."

His most well-known work, Starry Night, was famously painted while Van Gogh was staying in an asylum in France 1889 after he mutilated his ear during a psychotic episode. According to the Van Gogh Museum, though, this may not be the full story. While it is widely agreed that Van Gogh did in fact cut off his own ear, the museum notes that it was because of a fight between Van Gogh and Paul Gaugin, the artist he had been working for in Aries, that led to the violent explosion that highlighted his deteriorating mental state.

Vincent Van Gogh, artist, 19th century, famous artist, Starry NightVincent Van Gogh's Self-Portrait, 1889Image via Canva.

As one of the best known and most studied artists of the 19th century, Van Gogh's madness and how it influenced his work is not new information. But it turns out that those of us who have appreciated his work have been missing out on some critical details for more than 100 years—revealed in the 2010s thanks to the Hubble Space Telescope.

A video at the bottom of the page will explain everything, but before we get there, let's do some backstory:

We known Van Gogh was an artist—and a genius artist at that—but, it turns out, he was also scientist. Kind of.

Whether intentionally or not, fresh eyes have found that Van Gogh's art—aside from being breathtaking—also captures one of science and nature's most elusive concepts: Turbulence.

The concept of turbulence is hard to understand with math, but it turns out art makes it fairly easy to comprehend through depiction. So, what is turbulence?

According to Britannica, turbulence, or turbulent flow, is a concept of fluid dynamics in which a type of fluid flow (liquid or gas like air or water or air) undergoes an irregular fluctuation or energy cascade. In other words, the air or water swirls and eddies as it moves: big eddies make smaller eddies, and those make even smaller ones, and so on. Common examples of turbulent flow include blood flow in arteries, lava flow, atmosphere and ocean currents, and the flow in boat wakes or surrounding the tips of aircraft wings.

It looks like this:

figures, flow, turbulence, turbulent flow, science, movementTurbulent flow illustrated and animated.All Van Gogh GIFs via TED-Ed.

The thing is, scientists only started figuring this out pretty recently.

turbulence, turbulent flow, science, nature, researchAnimation of art referencing science.All Van Gogh GIFs via TED-Ed.

And yet, there was Mr. Vincent van Gogh, 100 years earlier in his asylum with a mutilated ear and able to accurately capture this turbulent flow in what would become his most famous work, Starry Night.

Starry Night, Van Gogh, turbulence, art, art captures scienceAnimated Starry NightAll Van Gogh GIFs via TED-Ed.

The folks who noticed Van Gogh's ability to capture turbulence checked to see whether other artists did the same. Most of the Impressionists achieved "luminance" with their art—a striking and lifelike depiction of light's effect on color. While impressive, they did not capture or depict turbulence the way Van Gogh did.

The Scream, Edvard Munch, art, popular art, history, painting An animated depiction of The Scream.All Van Gogh GIFs via TED-Ed.

Not even Edvard Munch's The Scream, with it's swirling color and movement, could recreate what Van Gogh had accomplished.

Even in his darkest time, Van Gogh was able to capture—with eerie accuracy—one of nature's most complex and confusing concepts 100 years before scientists had the technology to do so.

Who would have thought that the beauty Van Gogh captured was foreshadowing what scientists would observe in the real, natural world in a century's time? To learn even more, watch the TED-Ed video below:

- YouTubeyoutu.be

This article originally appeared twelve years ago. It has been updated.

From Your Site Articles
art
Animals & Wildlife

Robert Irwin weighs in on the '100 men vs. 1 gorilla' debate with the best possible answer

In the most Irwin way, he turned the viral question on its head.

Queensland Police Service/Wikimedia Commons (left), Photo credit: Canva (center and right)

Robert Irwin's answer to who would win in a fight between 100 men and 1 gorilla settles the debate.

In 2020, a viral debate was launched on social media prompted by an intriguing question: Who would win in a fight between 100 men and 1 silverback gorilla? In the years since, the question has been reposed repeatedly, with people expressing diverse but vehement opinions about whether a gorilla is strong enough to take on 100 humans or whether the sheer number of people would be enough to overtake the powerful primate.

Silly question? Perhaps. Something people can't help weighing in on? Most definitely.


@cbsmornings

Could 100 men defeat one gorilla in a fight? #NateBurleson and the internet are on the case. #gorilla


Some might think the most prudent answer would be, "It depends. What size are the people, and what's their strategy for attacking or subduing the gorilla?" But Robert Irwin, the conservationist son of the late (and much beloved) wildlife expert Steve Irwin, actually provided a perfect answer that should end the debate once and for all.

Irwin took to TikTok to share that he's been asked the "Who would win in a fight between 100 humans and 1 gorilla?" question over and over recently, even having people stop him on the street to ask.

"I have a couple thoughts on this," he began. "First of all, I don't know. Gorillas are strong, mate. Like really strong. But it's a hundred people. I'm not sure." But, he said, as an animal conservationist, the entire idea of fighting an endangered species didn't sit right with him. Then he turned the question on its head.

"How many people does it take to save gorillas?" he asked. "That's the question we should be asking because there's not many of them left."

@robertirwin

Everyone here on TikTok keeps asking me about this viral ‘Human V Gorilla’ debate 😂 I'm finally weighing in on the discussion everyone is talking about.


He explained that yes, gorillas are super strong and powerful, but most of the time "they're pretty chill." A gorilla isn't going to just randomly pick a fight with 100 people. Unless they feel threatened and need to defend themselves, they're just going to go about doing their thing, as gorillas do. "I guess what I'm trying to say is we don't need to fight gorillas," concluded Irwin. "Maybe let's just let this one remain a mystery."

People loved Irwin's take and the way he turned the question on its head from fighting gorillas to saving them.

"This is real masculinity. Lover not a fighter."

"Him gentle parenting us like school children is sending me."

gif, gorilla, animals, conservation, naturegorilla hurrying GIFGiphy

"The main man has spoken. The debate is over."

"He really said, 'it’s never HOW is the gorilla.'"

"'How many people does it take to save gorillas' is the most Robert Irwin answer."

"Your dad would be proud ❤️ spoken like a true conservationist ❤️."

Robert Irwin has followed in his father's footsteps and become an environmental icon in his own right, with fans from all over the world following his passionate educational content about our planet's creatures. Many in the comments remarked that they didn't know that gorillas were endangered, but it's true. All species of gorilla are considered Endangered or Critically Endangered, according to Endangered Species International.

There are two main species of gorilla, the eastern and western gorilla, and the World Wildlife Fund reports that both species have been decreasing in number for decades. However, the mountain gorilla subspecies is the sole exception, with numbers on the rise thanks to concerted conservation efforts. Mountain gorillas were officially downgraded from Critically Endangered to Endangered in November 2018, a genuine conservation success story.

However, there are still only around 1,000 mountain gorillas in the world today, so that turnaround in numbers is a fragile success. And other species still need our help to save them from further demise.

gorillas, endangered species, gorilla vs 100 humansGorillas are generally pretty chill.Photo credit: Canva

The Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund has been working on saving gorillas for over 55 years, focusing on a holistic approach that includes gorilla protection and ecosystem preservation, scientific research, training the next generation of conservationists, and helping local communities near gorilla populations. You can learn more here.

Thank you, Robert Irwin, for the gentle and timely reminder of what really matters in the gorilla vs. humans debate.

From Your Site Articles
animals
Joy

A woman accidentally said, 'Love you!' to an important client. His response was perfect.

He even followed up with a heartwarming e-mail.

Photo credit: Canva

Saying "I love you!" by accident is one of life's most cringe moments.

For many of us, telling our friends and family that we love them is second nature. Every time someone leaves the house, "Love you!" Before bed at night, "Love you!" Getting off a call with them, "Love you!"

That's all well and good until that sweetly ingrained habit spills over into your work life. Especially when you're talking to an important client, where the boundaries of professional conduct are particularly important to uphold. (Do you feel the cringe coming?)

I Love You Elf GIF by MOODMANGiphy

A woman shared an oh-so-human story about absent-mindedly telling a client she loved him, and his thoughtful response has people cheering.

"Accidentally said 'Love you!' at the end of a call with an important client yesterday," wrote a Reddit user. "I heard him giggle as I hung up, and I was mortified. Today, I saw he emailed me this:"

The email began, "Hey—Just wanted to say that I didn't mean to laugh at you when you accidentally signed off on our call with a 'love you.' I just found it funny because I've definitely done that before, and I know it happens."

Okay, phew, he understood that the laughing was mortifying and he wasn't bothered by the "love you." But then he added the absolute best thing he could have said about the situation:

"I'm glad you have enough love in your life that that response comes naturally. If anything, you should be proud of that. :)"

Then he mercifully resumed their professional conversation. "Have a great weekend! We'll follow up about my call with Chris on Wednesday, as discussed."

embarrassing story, saying I love you on accident, workplace stories, professional communication"Love you!" Oops.Photo credit: Canva

He didn't just ignore the elephant in the room and let it hang over her like an awkward cloud. He put her at ease, letting her know he's done it before and it happens and is no big deal. But then he took it a step further, adding a deeper human layer to the moment by acknowledging the fact that the words flowing so automatically and easily for her meant she was surrounded by love.

The client's emotional intelligence and thoughtful response warmed people's hearts.

"What a great and respectful response. He is completely right, it’s such a beautiful thing to have that much love in your life that it comes out naturally."

"You work with good people."

"Honestly, this made my day 😂 It's so wholesome how they responded. Shows that a little kindness (even accidental) always leaves a good impression!"

"Such a classy response. Made you feel at ease while staying professional and moving the conversation forward."

"Green flags from that client."

Green Flag GIF by The Last Talk ShowGiphy

People also shared their own similar experiences with blurting out accidental "love you"s and it was a veritable love-fest:

"I told my supervisor I loved her at the end of our weekly touch point call - she chuckled and said she loved me too. We shared a good laugh. I am happy to see empathy from a random human, it is much needed."

"I said 'love you' to my new boss at labcorp when she called me to tell me I passed my drug test. Same thing, hanging up, not thinking, she gave me my results and my start date to come in for orientation and I ended the call with 'bye love you!'"

"Back in the day I straight up called one of my bosses mom. It was so embarrassing I almost died."

"A surprising number of people have done this at least once. Happens when you’re distracted and tired. My ex husband (a prosecutor) accidentally ended a phone call with 'I love you' when talking to a rural county sheriff in the middle of the night."

Embarrassed Hide GIF by florGiphy

"I had a coworker say 'love you,' just as we were about to hang up. There was an awkward pause, clearly neither of us had hung up, then he added, 'Don’t tell my wife.' We both laughed and finally disconnected."

"I did that with my ex husband last Thursday, we both burst out laughing lol. Happily we get along great and he and his fiancée are attending my wedding next week."

"Was on phone with my boss right after he had called his wife. He ended the call with "love you." Had so much fun telling him that while I cared for him, I didn't think it was love."

Embarrassing moments don't have to ruin your day—in fact, when handled like this client, they can turn into beautiful moments of human connection. This kind of relatability, empathy, and emotional intelligence makes us all feel better about our shared humanity, oopsies and all.

From Your Site Articles
humanity
Joy

Did you know that at least 10 baby names have been banned in the United States?

What happened to freedom of speech?

via Canva/Photos

A crying baby.

The names we give to our children can be very personal. They can reflect religious beliefs, family heritage, or have a special meaning attached to them, as in Grace, which means "divine favor," or Eli, which means "ascended." In the United States, people they are protected by the Constitution's First Amendment, freedom of speech, which allows us to name our babies whatever we like.

However, there have been some cases where the courts decided that a particular name is illegal, and, although it is infrequent, it has happened at least 10 times in the country. The most notable banned names are Misteri N-Word, King, Queen, Jesus Christ, III, Santa Claus, Majesty, Adolf Hitler, @, and 1069.

court, court reporter, legal system, plaintiff, judge, baliffA court reporter taking notes.via Canva/Photos

Why are these 10 names banned in the United States?

III (Roman numerals pronounced “three”)

Thomas Boyd Ritchie III was known by many of his friends simply as III. So, he petitioned the court to have his name changed to Roman numerals. Sadly, a California court rejected the name change because it was a symbol and a number. It’s illegal for people to have numbers in their names because they can’t be entered into state name databases.

Misteri (N-word)

In the California Superior Court case Lee v. Superior Court (1992), Russell Lawrence Lee wanted to change his name to Misteri (N-word). Lee believed that the name could be used to conquer racial hatred. Unfortunately for Lee, the court denied his request, saying the name constituted “fighting words.”

@ (pronounced “at”)

The address symbol, or @, has been banned in multiple jurisdictions because, like a numeral, it cannot be input into state database records.

Jesus Christ

The name of the Christian lord and savior has been banned in several U.S. states based on claims of blasphemy and the possibility of confusion.

jesus christ, heaven, god, divinity, holy trinity, religionDepiction of Jesus Christ in Heaven.via Canva/Photos

1069

In 1976, the North Dakota Supreme Court told high school teacher Michael Herbert Dengler that he could not change his name to “1069.” “The only way [my] identity can be expressed is 1069. The first character, 1, stands for my concept of nature which manifests itself as one individual among the various forms of life,” he noted. “I stand as a single entity amongst millions of other entities, animate and inanimate. But yet even though I am an entity unto myself, I am part of the whole of life which is one. I am one; life is one; and together we are one.”

He later moved to Minnesota and tried to change his name, but he was rejected again. Neither state allowed people to have numbers as their names.

Santa Claus

In December 1999, Robert William Handley of Ohio filed a petition to change his name to Santa Rob Claus, because he had played the Christmas character for the past 40 years, and was known as “Santa Rob” year-round. The court rejected his petition, saying it was “misleading to the children of the community.” Two years later, the Supreme Court of Utah allowed the name change.

santa claus, santa rob, banned names, christmas, saint nickA photo of Santa Claus.via Canva/Photos

Majesty, King, Queen

In several states, naming your child after a royal title is illegal to avoid confusion with actual royalty. Does Queen Latifah know this?

Adolf Hitler

If you want to name your child Adolf Hitler, you can’t do it in Texas. After the atrocities he committed in the 1930s and ‘40s, his name has no place in the Lone Star State. However, you can be named Adolf Hitler in New Jersey. Back in 2009, there was a big hubbub when the father of Adolf Hitler Campbell wanted his child’s name written on a birthday cake, and the proprietor of the business refused.

From Your Site Articles
baby names
Community

Fairy Godmother at Disney World perfectly nails ASL for deaf girl, helps her transform into Cinderella

"THIS is inclusion. And it's magical."

Images via Canva/Wikipedia

Fairy Godmother helps girl transform into Cinderella.

Disney World is a truly magical place for everyone. For Instagrammer Fallon Brizendine Mowl (@partnermouse), Disney World created the best day ever for her deaf daughter Gisele thanks to a very special ASL (American Sign Language) interpreter named Janie (@jan.i.e).

In a touching video shared by Mowl, she captured a recent trip to Disney World with Gisele for an unforgettable Cinderella experience. There, she met her Fairy Godmother, Janie, who helped her all day long as she transformed into the beautiful Disney princess.

"We asked if any Fairy Godmothers/Apprentices at BBB knew ASL—and we got Janie! Thank you, @jan.i.e and Disney, for making the magic inclusive and our experience not only special but truly seen," she captioned the post.

The video begins with Janie and Gisele meeting for the first time. "Hi Gisele! My name is Janie," she signs. "We are going to play together, okay?"

Gisele tells Janie, "I want to be Cinderella!" Janie responds, "Oh, I love her!" In the next clip, Janie is with Gisele as she picks out her hairstyle to dress like Cinderella. "Ponytail or flowers? Which do you prefer?" Janie asks her. Gisele would like a long ponytail, and Janie thanks her before leading her to a changing room to try on her powder blue Cinderella gown.

She leads her to a dressing room where Gisele changes into the sparkly gown. Before Janie leaves her, she says Fairy Godmother's iconic phrase in ASL: "Bibbidi, Bobbidi, Boo!"

Once Gisele has changed, it is time for her to get beautified by getting her hair and makeup done. Janie helps get her set up in a beauty chair to pick her look. "Blue or purple? Do you want a flower or butterfly?" Janie asks. Gisele replies, "A flower." Looking on is Gisele's dad, and Janie jokes, "Let's look like your dad! A long beard...kidding!"

With her hair and makeup complete after a sprinkle of glittery fairy dust, Gisele's big reveal is done with Janie's help. "Let's close your eyes. I see a beautiful you, wow!" she says to Gisele. Then Janie says to Gisele's mom and dad, "And now...Princess Cinderella!"

Gisele is turned around in the beauty chair to show her proud mom and dad her makeover, and she is absolutely glowing. In a final clip, she poses in front of Cinderella Castle at the Magic Kingdom dressed as the princess herself. Gisele then says her final goodbyes to Janie with her family. It's clear Janie is overjoyed to have spent the afternoon with them as she signs in ASL, "Thank you!" at the video's end.

Viewers are overflowing with emotions after watching Mowl's video with Gisele:

"Why did this make me cry 🥹" one commented.

"I am sobbbbbbbbbing, this is so beautiful! 🥹🥹🥹🥹."

"I hope Janie always gets to sleep on the cool side of the pillow. What a gem. I hope your daughter had the best day."

A final touched viewer shared, "THIS is inclusion. And it's magical."

From Your Site Articles
disney world
Trending Stories