If you haven’t seen it already, you must have been living under a rock. Making A Murderer is one of the hottest shows on Netflix right now. But unlike its other popular shows, such as Orange Is The New Black and House of Cards, this is true life crime.

The story is about a man named Steven Avery, of Manitowoc County, Wisconsin, who was sent to prison in 1985 and served 18 years for being accused of trying to rape and kill a woman; a crime he didn’t commit. A few years after he was released, he was sent to prison again for the murder of Teresa Halbach, an auto magazine photographer. However, as seen in the documentary, created by Laura Ricciardi and Moira Demos, Avery might not have committed the crime.

So why have this documentary come into our lives almost 10 after the initial trial ended?

With other popular true crime series such as The Jinx (which, I personally, still need to watch) and Serial out there, Ricciardi and Demos must’ve believed now was the right time to release the project they’ve been working on for over 10 years.

Many people who have watched the show stated they want Avery and Dassey freed and believe they're innocent. In fact, a few petitions went around the Internet asking President Obama to pardon Avery and Dassey. But, even with a million signatures on a petition (and even before the White House issued a statement), President Obama can’t pardon Avery and Dassey because the case isn’t a federal case. Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker won’t pardon them either, stating “Those who feel they have been wrongly convicted can seek to have their convictions overturned by a higher court.”

Perhaps the "fans" of the show aren't digging deeper enough as to what was stated and presented outside of the documentary.

Of course, there were going to be things left out that are going to leave people on edge. Thus, this leaves the audience guessing "Who killed Teresa Hallbach?" These theories range from either Hallbach's ex-boyfriend or brother killing her to the police planting the evidence and framing Avery for it to Avery saying his brothers did it. Regardless of what Ken Kratz or the Halbach family says about the documentary, it’s out there and everyone's seen it. They can't just boycott an entire Netflix series because it goes against what they believe in. I've heard just as many people who believe Avery is guilty, including his ex-fiance Jodi Stachowski, as there are those who think he's innocent.

When I first watched the series, I thought he was innocent. But after reading a couple of the articles and as I was finishing it up, I realized the series isn't really a "sympathy" piece. As very one-sided as it is, Ricciardi and Demos are trying to tell a real life, interesting story and get it out there to public. In a recent interview on The Late Show With Stephen Colbert, Demos said "It’s more a how-dunnit. What we were documenting was the process and that’s what justice is, it’s a process. So, can we rely on these verdicts at the end?" Ricciardi backed Demos' statement by saying "What we hope to achieve by sharing this story with as many people as we can is really to try and engage Americans and for people to feel a sense of responsibility and to try and understand their own agency here."

Demos and Ricciardi are trying to get their target audience to think and to question the world around them, as with any other form of entertainment does. Is there bad in good people? Is there a sense of bias and judgement that goes outside of high school, but to an entire neighborhood judging a family because of their past history? Are there flaws in our police and judicial system? Are we quick to accuse people of a crime? Are we quick to sensationalize things?

And speaking of sensationalizing, enough with the “Hottest Women in Making A Murderer” or “Why Dean Strang is The Hottest Guy On The Show” This isn’t Orange Is The New Black. This is real life. The trial took place almost 10 years ago and these are real people. So, why fan girl over them as if it was just another series to gush over? Strang commented on the attention he has been receiving to the Journal Sentinel by stating "It's weird, it's disorienting….In this state alone there are hundreds of lawyers who would be better models than I, at least for doing the day in, day out, unglamorous hard work in the state's courthouses"

In fact, Strang and Buting are no longer Avery's attorneys. On January 9th, Kathleen Zellner, a lawyer from Chicago, announced she and Tricia Bushnell, the legal director of the Midwest Innocence Project, will be taking over as Avery's attorneys.

Avery wants to prove his innocence and is determined to do so, even in prison. In fact, he recently filed an appeal "

claiming authorities used an improper warrant and that a juror was out to get him, among other things." So, should we root for him to finally be free? Does he deserve to rot in jail forever? Are these two new attorneys going to do better or worse than Strang and Buting? It's really all up to you decide, whether you believe the evidence presented in the documentary or go beyond the series and find it.