"On Oct. 31 at approximately 4:30 p.m. I drove up to my 'deer camp' off of Kuss Road (through) my gravel pit and observed a fire going in the proximity of Steve Avery's home or on Avery property. The fire appeared to be contained to a 55 gal drum."
Radandt's statement was misrepresented by the State: the "fire in a 55-gallon drum" in the "vicinity of Avery's home" turned into a large fire (a bonfire) in the fire pit (burn pit) behind Avery's garage.
According to a friend of Joshua Radandt's who was at the deer camp between November 4-6, 2005, the woods and gravel pit at Radandt's quarry were searched the morning of November 5th, before Teresa's RAV4 was found at Avery Salvage Yard, but the deer camp wasn't searched prior to November 7th. They found human bones in and near Avery's fire pit (also referred to as a "burn pit") on the afternoon of November 8th (page 157).
"I was at the deer camp [at Radandt's quarry] when the car [Teresa's RAV4] was found about 300 yards away [on Saturday, November 5, 2005, by the pond in the "pit" of Avery Salvage Yard]. I didn't see anyone search the deer camp while I was there November 4-6th. They did walk through the woods and gravel pits that Saturday prior to finding the car. It [the deer camp] might have been searched by police between October 31st and when the car was found and after I was gone for the weekend. Don't remember. The reason Josh and Travis were on the sign up sheet that day [Saturday, November 5th] was because they were asked to give a statement regarding the fire. I have read about Josh being questioned at the deer camp, but it's not true. What some of you guys are missing since you haven't been to the deer camp is that the camp is at the same elevation as the Avery property where [Joshua claims] the fire was burning. The land between the deer camp and the fire is dug out. I could see Avery's shack/yard from the parking area of the deer camp. It isn't unreasonable to see a fire at dusk from that distance and sight line." - InTheKnow2016, August 30, 2016, RedditWhat Radandt described as a large fire on the 31st in his initial statement wasn’t a bonfire. It was one fire, in one burn barrel. This would correlate with the normal activity on the Avery property and not with the narrative given by the prosecution.
Radandt wasn't call to testify. The prosecution made an effort to stay away from him as a witness because the misrepresentation by law enforcement of his statement would be revealed through testimony.
In 2017 Radandt gave an affidavit, which Kathleen Zellner included in her motion for post-conviction relief.
The following is part of Radandt's affidavit, in the section labelled, "Trial Defense Counsel Failed to Investigate the Veracity of the Police Reports Regarding Joshua Radandt" (Radandt was on both the prosecution's and defense's witness lists but neither team called him to the stand).
When Mr. Radandt told investigators that he saw a fire on the Avery properly on October 31, 2005, he described the fire as appearing to be contained to a fifty-five gallon drum.The following is another part of Radandt's affidavit (when he says "later that week," he is talking about the week following Teresa's disappearance, and "later that week" would be November 10th or 11th, but not November 12th since that is the day the contents of "deer camp burn barrel #2" were processed):
When investigators re-interviewed Mr. Radandt on November 10, 2005, they pressured him to describe the fire as large, behind Mr. Avery's garage, and in an open burn pit. Mr. Radandt never told investigators that the fire was behind Mr. Avery's garage. Mr. Radandt sets forth in his affidavit that he remembers seeing the fire, contained to a burn barrel, and between several trailers on the Avery property.
Trial defense counsel failed to investigate Mr. Radandt's observation of a fire on the Avery property.
Had trial defense counsel investigated Mr. Radandt, they would have learned that investigators had pressured Mr. Radandt to exaggerate the size of the fire, and he refused to do so.
If trial defense counsel had called Mr. Radandt as a witness, his testimony would have demonstrated to the jury that the investigators knew Ms. Halbach's vehicle had been driven through his gravel pit and planted on Mr. Avery's property.
The jury would also have learned of the efforts of the investigators to pressure Mr. Radandt to exaggerate the size of the fire.
I was told by DOJ agents that they believed that Teresa Halbach's vehicle was driven to the Kuss Rd cul-de-sac by driving west through an empty field, then south down the gravel road past the hunting camp until reaching an intersection with a gravel road that ran northeast into the Avery property. They told me that they believed Halbach's vehicle turned northeast onto the gravel road and entered the Avery property at its southwest corner. It is my understanding that this theory was based on the work of scent tracking dogs.
I also read and heard it from others that law enforcment stated that they believed that Teresa Halbach's vehicle was stored somewhere on Radandt's property before it was moved to the southeast corner of Avery property.
Later that week I received a call from law enforcement on my cell phone. Law enforcement asked me to unlock my three hunting trailers so they could be searched. I left work and drove to the hunting camp. When I arrived there was nobody there. I unlocked my trailers and left.
It is my understanding that they were searched by law enforcement and scent tracking dogs.
Later that day law enforcement called my phone again. They informed me they completed their search and I could use them again normally.
During the course of the conversation law enforcement informed me that they were going to collect the contents of the burn barrel at the hunting camp at a later time. When I returned to camp they had the area cordoned off surrounding the burn barrel and had officers to watch the burn barrel day and night on a rotating basis until its contents were collected.
A few days after November 5, 2005, I remember seeing light in the Manitowoc County sand and gravel pit to the south of Radandt's property. I remember that the lights appeared to illuminate the entire Manitowoc County pit.
I understand that there were suspected human pelvic bones recovered from a gravel pit property south of Avery's Auto Salvage. Upon reviewing a map showing the coordinates at which these bones were found, I believe they were found in the Manitowoc County sand and gravel pit.
Prior to November 5, 2005, the only permanent security measures in place to prevent access to the Radandt sand and gravel pit by trespassers were "Private Property" signs posted at all entrances. There were locking gates or cables at each access road, but they were rarely used.
Approximately one or two months before the start of Mr. Avery's criminal trial in 2007, I was summoned to the courthouse. At the courthouse, I was questioned again about my recollection of seeing a fire in the direction of the Avery property on October 31, 2005. I was not called as a witness to testify at Mr. Avery's criminal trial in 2007.
The following is a summary on the impact of Joshua Radandt's affidavit (credit to redditer 7-pair-of-panties):
1. LE knew that RAV4 was stored on Radandt's property before being moved.
2. LE knew the route that RAV4 took to get where it was found.
3. LE found the bones, maybe even burned them themselves, and protected them round the clock till they could be planted and re-found in/near Steven Avery's burn pit. Do we have pictures of any of either location? Oh yeah, never mind that!
4. We have bright lights in the Manitowoc county gravel pit, illuminating everything. Could someone have been picking the best, most identifiable bones for the planting? Oops, they dropped a few along the way! Don't worry, we'll just try to convince/strong arm the neighbor into saying the fire was MUCH bigger than it actually was, and we'll just leave a few random bones around his property so he'll be sure to cooperate with us.
5. After reading Radandt's statement, this case goes straight to the top!
6. Thank you for the truth Joshua Radandt! Wish there were more like you around there. So sorry you got wrapped up for so long in all this.
Zellner noted in her June 7, 2017 motion that "Mr. Radandt has been unfairly targeted as a possible suspect because he owned land adjacent to the Avery property." She also noted: "Current post-conviction counsel has interviewed Mr. Radandt on two occasions and has been accompanied by him twice to view all of his property. No evidence exists that implicates Mr. Radandt in the murder of Ms. Halbach, and he has a solid alibi for the afternoon of October 31st, 2005."
Zellner wrote in her June 7, 2017 motion that law enforcement pressured Joshua Radandt to describe the fire he observed on October 31st around 4:30 p.m. as a large fire behind Steven Avery's garage, in an open burn pit, even though in his written statement on November 5th Radandt described the fire as being in a burn barrel. Radandt stated:
Zellner wrote in her June 7, 2017 motion that law enforcement pressured Joshua Radandt to describe the fire he observed on October 31st around 4:30 p.m. as a large fire behind Steven Avery's garage, in an open burn pit, even though in his written statement on November 5th Radandt described the fire as being in a burn barrel. Radandt stated:
I remember them asking me if I was sure that I saw what I said I saw. It seemed to me that they weren't satisfied with my statement about the fire. Specifically, it seemed to me that they wanted me to change my story to include a larger fire. Because they were reluctant to accept my story as true, I eventually asked them what they wanted me to say. They told me that all they wanted was the truth. I advised them that I had been telling the truth.Regarding the burn barrels, Zellner wrote on page 76 of the motion filed on June 7, 2017:
Bone fragments could not have actually been located in burn barrel no. two because this barrel had already been sifted by WSCL personnel on November 7, and no human bone fragments were discovered in this barrel or any of the barrels examined at that time. During their examination of barrel no. two on November 7, 2005, WSCL personnel used the same sifting apparatus that they later used to sift the burn pit behind Mr. Avery's garage. Suspiciously, the pieces of burned bone that were eventually found in barrel no. two were noticeably larger than the bone fragments from the burn pit. If bone fragments had been in burn barrel no. two when it was examined by Mr. Ertl and his team from the WSCL on November 7, 2005, the bone fragments would have been isolated by their sifting apparatus.
Maps of the track from the cul-de-sac on Kuss Road to the driveway of the deer camp, which continued on from the deer camp to the quarry. The entrance to the camp driveway juts out from the wide area of the cul-de-sac (below where the red line turns shartply in the bottom image and at the start of the yellow image in the top image). However, in the top image the red line is too far to the left; the yellow line is the track described in Joshua Radandt's affidavit.
Brutus @cadaverdogbrutu
Pagel and his Kuss road blockade...turns the true heroes away on the day...sniffer dogs. Unbelievable. #hownottorunalegitinvestigation
TickTockManitowoc @TManitowoc
Picture this scene: "Any sign of my missing Teresa?" "No sorry, Ms. Halbach..our sheriff blocked the search and rescue dogs from looking."
-- END UPDATE --
January 16, 2017
by Canuck64, TickTockManitowoc
Here is the unedited text of a letter Brendan Dassey sent to Manitowoc County Circuit Judge Jerome Fox, dated June 30, 2006.
Dear Judge Jerome Fox,This line bothers me: "Then I went home and talked to my mom about Scott’s mom in the hospital and asked if Scott’s mom is alright." This is either the truth or a lie. There is conflicting testimony from Barb's as to the time she returned from Scott Tadych's. One version she returned at 11:00 pm another version she spent the night. But she certainly wasn't home at 10 pm.
Hello. I was going to write to you a while back but I didn’t have a pencil.
The thing I was going to write to you about was that all my statements I gave the investigators are not the truth.
The truth is that me and my brother blaine came home from school at 3:45 p.m. about and walked down the road to our house but while me and blaine were walking down the road we talked about who would get to use the phone to call our friends to see if they were going trick or treating.
So blaine called his friend and while he was calling him I went to my bedroom and played playstation 2 until my mom came home between 5:00 and 5:30.
Then when she left, blaine got picked up by his friend’s mom. I was in the living room watching t.v. until I got a call at 6:00 p.m. from blaine’s boss and I told him that blaine want trick or treating with his friend.
Then I watched some more t.v. until 7:00 p.m. when the phone rang and it was Steven and he asked me if I wanted to come to the bombfire and I did.
Then we drove the golf cart around my mom’s yard to find garbage and junk. We found a van seat, some wood, some tires, and a cabinet, and me and Steven put the stuff on the fire and by that time it was about 9:00 p.m. and my mom came home and called Steven on his cell phone and asked if I had a jacket or sweater on and told Steven that I was to be home at 10:00 p.m.
So me and Steven were standing by the fire till 10:00 p.m. or close to it. Then I went home and talked to my mom about Scott’s mom in the hospital and asked if Scott’s mom is alright.
Then I went to bed and got some sleep for the next day of school. So that is what really happened. And my brother blaine knows that I was home at 4:00 p.m.
Sincerely,
Brendan Dassey
P.S. Me and my mom think you are a good judge. Thank you for your time.
It appears someone helped Brendan write this.
I doubt think anybody can possibly know if there was a fire that night. But what I do know is that the prosecution did not present any evidence that there was a body in the fire during the time Brendan was there or that Brendan had any knowledge a crime had been committed.
When Carla Chase participated in the live event on Facebook (several months ago), she said, yes, there was a fire that night.
I believe it was exactly as Brendan stated above. They drove around and collected stuff to burn from the yard. (Teresa Halbach was not anywhere on the property much less burned behind Steven Avery's garage.)
I believe this represents Brendan's honest recollection of what he did that day. Unfortunately this was written after a year had past, after police planted all kinds of bullshit into his head, after a year of exposure to what the media was reporting. I believe there was a fire in which Brendan helped Steven Avery collect these kind of items from the yard and put them into the bombfire (sic). I'm just not totally convinced it happened on October 31st, 2005 though.
If Brendan really wrote this letter to Judge Fox, it should put paid to the question of whether or not there was a fire that night....unless he was told so often that the fire was that night that he now believes it.
I have a feeling he was possibly prompted. I don't think Brendan's defence every believed him, so probably told him to include the fire, just to make his account more credible, as the prosecution said there was a fire.
I believe during a phone call after Brendan's arrest Steve said Brendan had been over for a bonfire. I think by that time the fire became a reality in everybody's mind.
But Bobby testified at trial that there was no fire Monday night. The defense missed it or ignored it because at that moment Strang made an objection about what Bobby said regarding Mike O.
The only person the testify at trial that there was a fire behind the garage was Blaine, and he was the early witness who was the most certain there was no fire. That is until investigators got angry and yelled at him on November 15, 2005.
- END REDDIT POST -
The following is the original post published on July 12, 2016.
Joshua Radandt was the first to claim that there was a big fire by Avery's trailer. He wrote in his November 5th, 2005 statement (exhibit F of Kathleen Zellner's motion) that it was contained in a 55-gallon drum [see June 13, 2017 update at top of this post].
In her motion for post-conviction scientific testing, Zellner wrote:
"Individual A [Joshua Radandt] gave a statement in which he described seeing a fire in a burn barrel behind Mr. Avery’s garage on October 31, 2005. Subsequent investigation has determined that Individual A’s statement is contrary to the facts; Mr. Avery’s burn barrel was never behind his trailer or garage, and it was impossible for Individual A to observe Mr. Avery’s backyard as he described because of the elevation of the quarry from where he was allegedly making his observations."In another statement that Radandt gave on November 5th (page 79), he told investigator Gary Steier that when driving to his deer camp at 4:30 p.m. on October 31st he saw a big fire by Avery's trailer (his property is 1000 feet from Avery's trailer and separated by a berm). It was at Radandt's quarry where burnt bones eventually were found, including a female pelvic bone.
Blaine Dassey was interviewed by DCI agents Stauss and Wilson on November 7th (trial exhibit 355), page 3). When they asked him if "there were any bonfires last week," they wrote: "Blaine responded there were not. Blaine said he would know if there was a bonfire because he always like to have them." Blaine went trick or treating around 5:30 PM on October 31st and returned home between 9:30 and 10 PM and went to bed. When the agents asked him if he recalled anything unusual happening after he went to bed, they wrote that "Blaine said he does not." On November 11th, the same two DCI agents went back to re-interview Blaine. They wrote: "Blaine said that one day last week (week of 10/31/05) Blaine was supposed to have a girl, Adrianna Owens, over to his house for a bonfire. Blaine said this bonfire never took place as Owens later said she did not want to come out for a bonfire."
Based on early interviews of Bobby Dassey and Robert Fabian, there was a fire on Tuesday or Wednesday night, not Monday night (and Fabian went rabbit hunting with Earl on Wednesday, not Monday), but it wasn't a bonfire (CASO file, page 208 and page 237). At the pre-trial hearing (page 172), Earl said it was Wednesday or Thursday, not Monday, October 31st, when he and Fabian went rabbit hunting (Earl's statements given to detectives in November 2005 were coerced and not truthful).
Barb Janda was the first to claim that she saw a big fire when she got home with Scott Tadych around 8 p.m. on October 31st. She said this during her November 14th interview.
On November 9th, DCI agent Kapitany interviewed Barb Janda as he escorted her in his squad car to Aurora Medical Center (CASO file, page 191), but the report was not entered into evidence (Barb Janda did not testify at Avery's trial). CASO's Wendy Baldwin wrote in her November 14th activity report (CASO file, page 264) that she and another DCI agent, Kim Skorlinski, "had prior contact with Barbara and she did agree to meet us there [at the Lighthouse Inn in Two Rivers, where they interviewed Blaine Dassey] to speak about the case further." Baldwin did not file a report about this previous contact (there should be a DCI report on this previous contact).In Steven Avery's case, he was forced by his family members — who, other than Blaine, lied about the fire — into finally conceding he held a bonfire on October 31, 2005. However, on that day there wasn't a fire in Steven's fire pit, and certainly he was not feeding a fire large enough to cremate a body.
CASO FILE, PAGE 195Once investigators had the discovery of bones and released this to the media, they were able to coerce others to say there was a fire, lest they themselves be charged with obstruction, accessory after the fact, etc. Reports after the three above have all witnesses saying that there was a big fire in Avery's fire pit on Monday night, October 31st.
TYPE OF ACTIVITY: Interview of Bobby Dassey
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 11/09/05
REPORTING OFFICER: Inv. John Dedering
DASSEY indicated that on Tuesday or Wednesday, he observed a burning in the area in a pit behind STEVEN's garage. He believed there was brush burning. DASSEY stated he was home that night. BOBBY DASSEY states STEVEN sometimes burns tires in the pit and STEVEN usually burns tires at night so you cannot see the smoke. DASSEY indicated STEVEN does not burn his tires anywhere else and he indicated he believed STEVEN was burning with DASSEY's little brother, BRENDAN.
PAGE 208
TYPE OF ACTIVITY: Interview of Robert Fabian
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 11/10/05
REPORTING OFFICER: Inv. Gary Steier
The following week, ROBERT receives a phone call at his residence from CINDY's sister, THERESA (ph) LNU. THERESA LNU has informed either CINDY or ROBERT that she has talked to CANDY AVERY, EARL AVERY's wife. THERESA LNU tells ROBERT that she was told by CANDY AVERY that ROBERT and EARL were rabbit hunting on the property on Wednesday, 11/02/05, instead of Monday, 10/31/05.
CASO FILE, PAGE 236
TYPE OF ACTIVITY: Supplemental Report
Interview with Earl K. Avery, M/W DOB 06110170 6904 STH Y Whitelaw, WI
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 11/11/05 at approximately 12:36 p.m.
REPORTING OFFICER: Inv. Gary Steier
Inv. STEIER asks EARL if he had seen a fire at approximately 4:30 p.m. that evening. EARL said he and ROBERT FABIAN sees STEVEN at approximately 5:00 p.m. He doesn't recall a fire by STEVEN AVERY's residence, but states he knows there was a fire at that location. EARL states he knows this because STEVEN has asked BRENDAN to get rid of the rims and wire out of STEVEN AVERY's fire pit on Wednesday night and to place them on the rim pile located in the AVERY'S AUTO SALVAGE yard. EARL indicates this is unusual because the rims and wire are already placed outside the burn area for BRENDAN to pick up. BRENDAN did not have to take the rims out of the fire, they were already set aside. EARL says there were approximately five to six rims there. EARL states this is on Wednesday night, 11/02/05.
EARL states on Wednesday night, 11/02/05, BRENDAN takes five rims out of a fire pit by STEVEN AVERY's residence at 5:00 p.m. EARL surmises that there must have been a fire on Tuesday night.
Was There Really a Bonfire on Halloween?
By Lynne at StopWrongfulConvictions
February 9, 2016
The state alleged that Steven Avery burned the victim’s body in a huge bonfire behind his trailer and burned her personal effects (cell phone, camera and palm pilot) in a burn barrel in the front area of the home the evening of 10/31/05.
burn pit behind trailer
burn barrel
While reviewing all of the initial statements made by Steven Avery and the others who had been on the property that day, I noticed that not a single person mentioned a bonfire on October 31 – the day Teresa Halbach disappeared. The witness statements evolved considerably over time so that by the time Brendan Dassey was arrested everyone believed there was a bonfire and/or burn barrel fire on Halloween night.
Let’s examine the statements beginning with the early interviews. Steven Avery was interviewed by Detective O’Neill with the Marinette County Sheriff’s Office on November 5 (the day Teresa’s RAV 4 was found) and again on November 6.
Steven Avery’s interview 11/6/05 @ 29:57:
Q: When’s the last time you burned?
A: Two weeks ago.
Q: What did you burn, just regular garbage?
A: Just garbage.
Steve Avery was interviewed again by Special Agent Fassbender on November 9, 2005, which was the day they arrested him on the weapon’s violation.
Blaine Dassey was interviewed on November 7, 2005 — two days after the RAV 4 had been found at which time the burned phone parts and some of the bones had already been found in the burn barrels near Steve Avery’s trailer and the Janda/Dassey residence. Note that Blaine got off the bus with Brendan Dassey at approximately 3:45 p.m. He had plans that evening to go trick-or-treating with a friend and the fact that it was Halloween made it more likely that he would remember a bonfire that evening.
Blaine was first asked about the burn barrels.
Then he was specifically asked about a bonfire.
And he further explained later in the interview that there was supposed to be a bonfire that Thursday but it was cancelled. This is important because Brendan Dassey’s statement about the bonfire was consistent with Blaine’s.
Trial testimony revealed that Blaine was interviewed by investigators again on November 11, November 15 and again on unknown dates. Between his initial interview and his trial testimony, Blaine’s statement about the bonfire changed. (Called by the state, day 12 p 52-107)
Later questioning . . .
Blaine admitted during defense cross examination that he did not mention anything about any fires in his initial interview with investigators.
Let’s look at Bobby Dassey’s testimony (beginning on p 33).
later . . .
Bobby’s testimony was consistent with what Steven told the investigators in his early interviews – there hadn’t been any bonfires since approximately two weeks prior to 10/31/05.
Scott Tadych: There are three documented interviews of Scott Tadych. Scott was dating Barbara Janda at the time of Halbach’s disappearance.
Interview 1 – November 10, 2005. No mention of a fire.
Interview 2 – November 29, 2005. This time he mentions a fire.
Interview 3 – March 30, 2006. This time the fire is described as “big”.
Finally, at trial, Tadych described a fire with flames “as high as the garage,” and he testified that it was the fire that stuck out the most about his day (beginning p. 122).
Notice how Scott’s statements evolved from no mention of a fire to a fire to a big fire with ten feet flames. Were police pressuring him to provide a statement in support of their theory?
Brendan Dassey was interviewed on November 6, 2005. @11:30 he stated “We were gonna have a bonfire on Thursday...” He went on to explain that his mother, Barbara Janda, cancelled the bonfire. There was no mention of a bonfire on October 31, 2005. In fact, Brendan was the first person to mention a bonfire at all. Did investigators use the information to create a story that there was a “bonfire” on Halloween because it would sound incriminating to a jury?
Brendan was interviewed at his school by Detective Wiegert and Special Agent Fassbender on February 27, 2006. At the very beginning of the interview, the investigators told Brendan that there had been a bonfire. They stated it as if it were a fact confirmed by many when the truth is no one mentioned a bonfire in any initial interviews. They didn’t ask him if there was a fire, they TOLD him. That is not a proper way to conduct an interview.
Note that the information about burning a seat referenced a fire that occurred weeks before October 31 but, by February, time had passed and it became easy to convince Brendan that the bonfire occurred on Halloween. Police needed this to support their theory — that the body was burned that night because bones were allegedly found in the burn pit behind the garage. I say allegedly because investigators did nothing to document that the bones were ever in the burn pit. See this article for more information about the bones.
It seems that by the time of Brendan’s arrest everyone had accepted as fact that there was a bonfire in the burn pit behind Steven Avery’s garage on October 31, 2005. During the Making a Murderer documentary, a phone conversation has Steven discussing it with Barbara.
“That night he (Brendan) came over, we had
the bonfire and he was home by 9:00 because Jodie called me at 9:00 and
I was in the house already.”
I believe even Steven became convinced that they were burning things on the 31st because everyone accepted it as fact, but it’s much more likely that the most recent fire occurred weeks earlier as told by Steven, Brendan and Blaine in initial interviews – when their memories would have been most reliable.
If we consider the possibility that there was no bonfire on Halloween, we can also consider the likelihood that there was never a body or phone and camera parts burned on that property. The remains were in a condition consistent with a cremation. No crowns of the teeth remained; only root fragments (link). The condition of the bones combined with the fact that the collection wasn’t documented with a single photo and the indications that there was no bonfire on 10/31 means that we must consider that not only was the key, the blood and the bullet planted — so were the bones, and there is a considerable amount of circumstantial evidence to support this claim.
by Canuck64 at Reddit
The Bonfire that was or wasn't.
Here is a timeline of how the bonfire developed using the available witness statements and trial testimony.
Joshua Radandt information - November 5, 2005; first one to mention fire on Oct. 31st: RADANDT informed Inv. STEIER on Monday shortly after 4:30 p.m., RADANDT was driving to his deer camp through his quarry where he observed a large fire on the STEVEN AVERY property located by the red house. RADANDT indicates he remembers it being right after 4:30 because he had had an employee that had just come to work to take another employee's shift at 4:30 p.m
Steven Avery Interview – November 5, 2005: No mention of fire
Steven Avery Interview – November 6, 2005: Was asked about the burn barrels, Steve states there had not been a fire in the barrels in about 2 weeks.
Brendan Dassey Interview – November 6, 2005: Tells Deputy O’Neil that a bonfire was planned for Thursday night (Nov. 3), but his mother Barb cancelled it on Tuesday (Nov. 1)
Blaine Dassey Interview – November 6, 2005: When asked about the burn barrels, he said there was no fire that day. He did state that there was a barrel fire on November 3rd, 2005.
Bone Fragments found – November 8, 2005
Steven Avery Interview – November 9, 2005: Told detectives there was no fire in the barrels the night of October 31st. He said he burned some brush, tires and garbage behind the garage 'the week before last, or the week before Teresa went missing'.
Chuck Avery Interview – November 9, 2005: No mention of fire
Scott Tadych Interview – November 10, 2005: No mention of fire
Brendan Dassey - November 10, 2005: Told police that on November 1st, he and Steve burned branches, wood, a few old tires, and a junked car seat - but that he had seen no sign of Halbach while he was there. Brendan had only been there an hour or two, and had left while it was still burning steadily.
Blaine Dassey interview- November 11, 2005: When asked if there was a fire in Steve’s burn barrel, Blaine once again said that there was no fire.
Barb Janda interview – November 14, 2005: Tells police there was a large fire behind the garage when she got home with Scott Tadych at 8 pm and saw two people standing by the fire, but did not know who they were.
Blaine Dassey interview – November 15, 2005 (Maribel): Two officers met with Blaine and Barb and, in angry loud voices, accused Blaine of not accepting that Steve is guilty. Uncontested testimony states that they did get into Blaine’s face. At that meeting Blaine states he now remembers Steve putting a white plastic bag into the burn barrel at 3:45-3:47pm on October 31st.
Scott Tadych Interview – November 29, 2005: Describes two people standing around a fire between 5:15-5:30pm. When he returned at 7:30-7:45pm he again observed two people standing by the fire. Tadych was asked when he dropped Barb off did he made some comment about the big flames that were coming out of the fire pit behind Steven’s garage. He said he may have made that type of comment, but he does not remember it. Tadych said if Barb stated that he made a comment like that, then he did. Tadych was asked if Steven’s fire could be called a bonfire, because of the size of the fire and flames. He said his definition of a bonfire may differ from others, because a big fire to him many not necessarily be a bonfire. Tadych was asked if the flames were at least 3” high and he said there were at least that high.
Scott told investigators on November 10, 2005 that he left the Aurora Care Medical Center in Green Bay at 2:15 p.m. on October 31st and drove home to his trailer, which is two miles east of Avery Road on Highway 147. He first told investigators that he arrived home at 3 p.m. but changed the time in his following statements to 3:15 p.m. It was 30-minute drive from the medical center to Scott's trailer home on Highway 147; therefore, he would have arrived home around 2:45 p.m. if he really left at 2:15 p.m.Kayla and Candy Avery interview – at the end of February 2006: Told school counselor and then Fassbender and Wiegert, that she saw a bonfire while trick or treating at her grandmother’s house. Kayla’s mother Candy states she also saw a bonfire on October 31st.
It was crucial for the State to establish that Teresa was at Avery's after 3 p.m., but she wasn't. She was gone by 2:45 p.m. Scott said he went home and then went hunting, so he would have passed Bobby as he was driving eastward and Bobby was driving westward, but the State had to put Teresa and her SUV at Avery's after 3 p.m., which is why Scott lied about the time and directions they were traveling when they passed each other. Scott and Bobby were trying to get out of the line of fire as suspects.
Kratz also used Scott to establish that there was a big fire at 7:30 p.m. on October 31st, when he says he dropped off Barb at her home, but this is another one of Scott lies. Barb backed up this lie in her November 14th statement to police (page 264). "Barbara said when she returned home at 8:00 p.m., she did see a rather large fire, approximately three feet high, in the pit at Steven's garage. She said she could tell there were two people standing there; however, does not know who that was. Barbara said Scott made the comment, 'Look how big the fire is.' Barbara stated she went into the house to tell whoever was in the house at the time that she was going to be leaving for a short time...Barbara stated when she returned home around midnight, she did not recall seeing the fire at that time."
On February 27, 2007, Scott testified at Avery's trial: "It was a big fire. It was bigger than normal... they [the flames] were almost as tall as the garage. Eight, ten feet. I don't know, ten feet maybe, ten feet tall the flames were." When Strang asked Scott during cross examination "Are you as sure of that as you are of anything you testified to here today?," Scott replied, "I guess not. I don't know."
On March 30, 2006, Scott told Dedering that on October 31st "Barbara spent the night at his residence and did not go home; he stated Barbara did go directly to work from his residence, to his knowledge" (page 723). This means that both Scott and Barb lied about events on October 31st. Also on March 30, 2006, Scott told Dedering that Steven had pretty much lost support from all the family members with the exception of Steven's mother, Dolores, and Steven's fiance, Jodi.
Read more about Scott at the link below:
http://georgezipperer.blogspot.com/2016/04/the-steven-schmitz-wendy-schmitz.html
Brendan Dassey Interview (School) – February 27, 2006: Under a clear threat of prosecution, Fassbender tells Brendan he was seen at a bonfire with Teresa’s remains in it.
Brendan Dassey Interview (Police Station) – February 27, 2006: Mentions a regular fire, no specific size.
Bryan Dassey Interview – February 27, 2006: Told police Investigator Baldwin that he noticed smoke coming from behind Steve’s garage.
Bobby Dassey Interview – February 27, 2006 (After Dedering viewed Brendan’s video ”confession”): Initially Bobby does not mention a fire, but then describes a bonfire as high as the garage when he left at 9:30pm.
Brendan Dassey and Barb Janda (Fox Hill's Resort) - February 27, 2006: Brendan tells Sgt Tyson that he does not remember the burn barrels burning on October 31st or the next day. Barb Janda tells Sgt Tyson that she does not remember the burn barrels burning on October 31st or the next day.
Scott and Bobby Dassey were trying to get out of the line of fire as suspects, so they alibied each other. To protect Scott and Bobby, and convinced by law enforcement that Steven was molesting Brendan and was guilty of killing Teresa, Barb agreed to cooperate with police and to lie about there being a fire in Avery's fire pit on October 31st. Scott and Barb backed up each other's lie, saying Brendan was with Steven, standing beside a big fire around 8 PM on October 31st. Barb and Scott also agreed to convince Brendan to tell the story that he saw a body on the fire. This is why Barb brought Brendan to Fox Hills Resort, where they were put up for the night and treated with pizza and soda. Fassbender and Wiegert interviewed Brendan that evening but didn't record it or write reports about it. This is because they were rehearsing the story he later was to tell officially on camera, but it backfired on Barb and Scott when Fassbender and Wiegert coerced a false confession and gruesome story from Brendan about participating in the rape and murder of Teresa and the mutiliation of her corpse. [Source] [Source]
Brendan Dassey Interrogation – March 1, 2006: A fire was burning behind that garage by 4:15pm when Brendan knocked on Steven’s door. Brendan stated that while there was a bit of light out (5:00-5:30pm), he and Steve carried Teresa to the garage and then placed her body in the fire.
Steve Avery Jail Shortly after March 1: Tells Barb on the phone that Brendan came over for a bonfire that night but was home by the time Jodi called at 9:00pm.
Scott Tadych Interview – March 30, 2006: States there was no fire at 5:20pm. Describes a “big fire” at approx. 7:45pm
Bobby Dassey Trial – February 14, 2007: Testified that there had been no fire for about two weeks prior to October 31st.
Blaine Dassey Trial – February 27, 2007: At 3:45 seen Steve bring a plastic bag to his burning barrel. At 11pm sees a 4-5 foot fire behind the garage.
Robert Fabien Trial – February 27, 2007: At trial, Rob testified that at around 5:00-5:20pm he noticed a barrel fire with plastic smells, no bonfire.
Scott Tadych Trial – February 27, 2007: Scott once again states he did not see a fire between 5:15 and 5:20. He describes seeing a fire at 7:45pm that was as tall as the garage or 8-10 feet high.
Brendan Dassey Trial-April 23, 2007: Brendan testified that that there was a small fire to burn some garbage and rags between 7:15 and 8:00pm. Is Brendan saying this because both the defense and prosecution and their witnesses are all accepting or stating there was a fire, or because there actually was a fire?
In addition to the obvious coercion and manipulation of the witnesses, there was also massive media coverage of the bones, the fire pit and burn barrels. The December 6, 2005 preliminary hearing where pretty much all the details of the case were presented was televised live.
[–]magiclougie
Barb Janda interview - November 9, 2005: There should be a DCI report of the interview with Barb by Special Agent Kapitany as Barb was escorted in CASO Sgt. Bill Tyson's squad car to Aurora Medical Center (page 191).
[–]MrDoradus
There have been doubts about the fire for a week or two now, from the get go it seemed like it was such a given that there was a bonfire that night. But reading those transcripts it seems possible there wasn't even a fire that night and the Dassey family, with some extensions, decided to bring the same (prosecution driven?) story to the trial.
Did the defense, or better yet SA, wholeheartedly deny having a fire that night and the MaM just left it out for some reason? Or was even SA unsure about it in the end? That's the main question I have regarding the existence of a bonfire on 31st. Though the defense did make a few attempts to discredit the fire on that day.
PS: and yeah, let's not forget to mention that the Dassey family was quite heavily pressured by the investigation to throw SA under the bus. So there's the possible motivation for the shift in their stories.
[–]Canuck64[S]
According to Blaine's trial testimony, Steve had another firepit elsewhere and that Steve has had only one bonfire behind the garage. This would account for the very shallow ash pile. I do not believe there was a bonfire October 31st.
[–]Account1117
At that meeting Blaine states he now remembers Steve putting a white plastic bag into the burn barrel at 3:45-3:47pm on October 31st.
Funny he (Blaine) should mention that. Because the MTSO report states that TH left a white plastic bag at Zipperer's place.
"Also left on the property was a white plastic bag which contained some brochures for the Autotrader."
[–]HardcoreHopkins
Brendan's family could have been led to believe they was helping Brendan by helping get SA convicted. I think it is very reasonable to want to help a brother or son especially when you know they aren't capable. Could they have been made to believe SA was guilty?
[–]whiteycnbr
SA probably unsure given that it was insignificant for him, e.g wasn't burning a body, so could he really remember when it what time there was last a fire
[–]Dieselanne
Thank you! I've been so confused about the fires and when they did/did not happen.
Everyone in the Avery family: "Nope, no fires that day. No, didn't see no fires. There was a fire last week. Maybe a little fire one day? Can't remember which, but just trash and stuff."
Police: "Yes. There was a fire or you're all going to jail for the rest of your disgusting inbred lives."
Everyone in the Avery family: "Well, shit, I guess there was a fire."
And now it's fact. Psh.
[–]Canuck64[S]
Nobody was lying, it is really hard to remember what happened 10 days ago, on an otherwise uneventful day. I certainly could not tell you if I was working or not working 10 days ago without looking at my work schedule. The fact that everybody had different memories only adds creditably, if everybody said the same thing it would certainly appear like collusion.
[–]Canuck64[S]
Bobby Dassey very definitively said at court that there had been no bonfire in about 2 weeks before October 31. Kratz was fumbling over his words but did not contest that testimony, meaning he took it as true. Kinda flew over the heads of Avery's lawyers because they were preoccupied with what Bobby had said just before about Steve coming over and asking his friend something about moving a body.
[–]mmh150
I've got a close family but looking at that, I'm thinking everybody would sell me out in a heartbeat if they felt like the law might come back on them or their kids, even if they knew that they didn't do anything. In fact, I know my family would sell me out because I always took the blame anyway, and that's how it goes in my family. "You are pissed off that I didn't see a bonfire? Ok, yeah, I saw a bonfire, but I wasn't really around at the time. I had nothing to do with it."
[–]watwattwo
A phone call between Barb and Steven (shown in Episode 3):
Barb: Why would he say this about you then? You tell me. He was over by you that night.
Steven: That night he came over, we had the bonfire and he was home by 9:00, 'cause Jodi called me at 9:00, and I was in the house already.
[–]OpenMind4U
I'll add something to OP but from another perspective. I'm the Killer (SA) and I'm ready to burn the body without knowing who can stop by to join me or simply watch or simply pass by. How 'privately' was TH cremation? ..:
Brendan is helping me from 7-9:30;
my sister Barb just come home from work around 5:00 (she is my next door neighbor, I can see her house from my bedroom window);
ST, Barb's boyfriend is driving me nuts with his coming/going (he stopped at 5:15 to pick up my sister and 7:45 to drop her off);
my nephew Bobby, he just come from hunting and need time to sleep (going to work 9:30);
another nephew Blaine (coming/going to his girlfriend);
Carla with her daughter Kayla visiting my Mom;
Robert Fabian on property with my brother taking ride on golf cart;
my nephew's friend Dad just came to pick-up kids for trick a treat;
my girlfriend Jodi is bothering me with her phones from jail (5:00 and 9:00);
my Mom and Dad probably waiting for me and Chuck for supper (around 6:00)...
You know what?...I rather burn this body tomorrow...I have absolutely no privacy!!! /s
[–]Canuck64[S]
True, true, true. I still can't believe Brendan's case even went to trial with so many alibis and no physical evidence.
During Brendan's trial, the prosecution alleged that he and Steve (although Steve had already been convicted of murdering her while Brendan was a school) had just cut her throat and removed the steel handcuffs and leg irons to wrap a long rope around her arms and chest, carried her naked body out to the garage, shot her, put her in the RAV4, took her out and carried her naked body to the fire where they threw a tire and seat on her and left to move the RAV4 to the pit.
And all this was happening while there was still a little bit of light out. That would be about 5:10pm, when all these people are coming and going just 20 feet away. Fargo.
[–]Fred_J_Walsh
The biggest strike against the "no fire" theory, to my mind, is Steven Avery's eventual ready admission (in a phone convo with Barb after Brendan's 03-01 confession) of such a fire, as well as Brendan's help with it:
Steven: That night he came over, we had the bonfire and he was home by 9:00, 'cause Jodi called me at 9:00, and I was in the house already. Link
The "no-fire" theory would have us believe that not only did the suggestible Brendan concede to the fire (along with other various Dasseys, his mother Barb as early as Nov 14), but Steven Avery, whose life is on the line, also decides to go along with a fire story that he knows to be false. Remember, this is the same man who for 18 years in prison, quite rightfully never conceded guilt in the 1985 rape case.
But now, with the full knowledge that the remains of the woman he's been accused of murdering have been found in a firepit behind his house, this man is going to agree to a false story that he had built and maintained a fire there, the night of the day she had gone missing?
Has there been any indication Steven Avery is the type to go along with a false story that does not benefit him at all, but actually hurts his case very obviously and considerably?
[–]lasym21
if you listen to steven Avery's interview on nov 6th in Crivitz, you can see that he has a hard time remembering details in his life. He's clearly not a person who keeps a journal or tries to go back over his life's events very frequently. It's understandable he would go along with the story if other people were.
For instance in that interview he talks about crushing cars with his brother on Thursday, but then he's like wait....or was that the week before. Like most ordinary people, he doesn't have an exact chronology of the last few weeks of his life in his head at any given moment.
[–]Fred_J_Walsh
In that 11/6 interview, Avery seemed to remember his night of 10/31 as consisting of dinner, some porn (lady-on-lady), and then to sleep around 9pm.
Only later would Avery recall that Brendan had been over, and that they'd assembled and maintained a large bonfire.
Remember too that the general topic of fires was covered in Avery's interview of 11/9, and he'd maintained that his last fire was a week before Teresa had gone missing.
Also, note that the day would have stood out for Avery as (1) Halloween night; (2) the end of a day when he had stopped work in the afternoon, which he professed to never having done before.
Lastly remember that Sgt. Colborn had first come sniffing around on Nov 3. So, as early as 3 days after 10-31, Steven Avery knew that police were interested in that day's activities. It wasn't like asking him to recollect the events of a day weeks, months, or years before.
[–]Odilion
I don't find his leaving early from work that day as nefarious as some people do. Per Jodi's interview and other sources, she was supposed to be with him that afternoon, but at the last minute found out she was not being released from jail for her meeting. Steven also claimed to have been making phone calls that afternoon. It makes sense that he could have been calling the jail, her parole officer, her lawyer, etc. to see what the hold-up was. Just a possibility....
ETA: I'm also skeptical about him not mixing up his days and that Halloween would have been significant in his mind. Honestly, as an adult (before having kids), Halloween was just another night unless there was a party to go to. For those of us in the suburbs, it would easily stand out in our minds because kids are coming around and trick-or-treating. But in that rural area, were there kids going around trick-or-treating? I'm just not sure a single adult with no kids living with him, no party, and no neighborhood kids coming around for candy would recall exactly what they did on Halloween night if it just kind of blended into every other night?
I'm not a fan of SA in the least bit, but I think he could easily be mixing up his days/nights like everyone else seems to be doing in their statements and testimony.
[–]Canuck64[S]
I think that is why Steve has a clearer memory for things, because he was directly involved in speaking to Teresa and being questioned by police. But for others like Brendan it was just another day of playing video games at home, nothing special other than Blaine going out for trick or treating. During the summer and fall, some of my neighbors have backyard fires, the smoke most times is awful and we have to shut the windows, but I know a week later I would not be able to tell you when somebody had a fire last.
[–]Canuck64[S]
The fire was never an issue until the bones were found in the burn pit. If there was no fire than there is no reason to raise it. And if you had no knowledge or involvement in a crime, then you would have even less reason to mention it.
Let's presume you had a backyard fire sometime last week and a police officer knocks on your door asking if you had seen a missing person some time last week, would you answer the question and than add "oh by the way, I had a backyard fire that night"? Now that would be weird.
[–]Canuck64[S]
If you want to know why people would later say there was a fire, all you need to do is read or listen to some of the interrogations.
We know he is guilty, we have the evidence and we have other witnesses telling us you know what he did. If you don't tell us what we want to hear you will be charged along with him. You tell us the "truth" and you can go home. 'Now you can make it look however you want' as long as you help us.
True story.
[–]mursieftw
uhh yes. especially when they ask:
the evening of 10/31...what did you specifically do. Were you with anyone. Did you do anything?
I think if i had a fire...and had one with my nephew...i wouldn't just "forget" that because it wasn't an issue. In fact, his alibi for my whereabouts for some of that evening would be a pretty good thing to have.
[–]Canuck64[S]
All I know from reading the police reports and uncontested trial testimony is that from 3:45 to about 5:20pm, Brendan was with Blaine. Barb was already home by 5pm and left around 5:30pm and from 5pm to 7pm Bryan was home with Brendan.
Brendan answered the home phone at 7:15pm and he was home when Bobby got up at 9pm.
At trial Brendan testifying they had a fire to burn garbage and rags, but what he is describing was not a bonfire.
All the witness statements have been contaminated. Initial statements are always most accurate. I'm surprised they were even admissible in court with so many changes.
[–]c4virus
To me what makes the most sense is this. Generally people don't remember the specifics of what they did on each given day after a few days of said event as long as that event is nothing out of the ordinary. If you ask me right now what I did on Thursday of last week I would have to guess most of it based on what my weekly routine is. I know I run on thursdays, aside from that I have no special recollection of what happened 5 days ago.
Now let's say somebody asked me what I did two weeks ago on a specific day. I honestly can't say. I think I went and saw Zootopia with my kids...but that may have been the week before?? I don't know...
Now I know I didn't see Zootopia last week...but aside from that I would have to check release dates or bank statement or text messages to confirm.
What we're seeing here is how bad memories can be especially regarding dates once just a little time has passed. If my kids were young adults and you asked them when we saw Zootopia, and asked my wife, you'd probably get 4 different answers. We would all likely agree it wasn't last week (I would bet), but aside from that the exact date would be lost to the ether. It would probably be fairly easy to convince some of us that it was on a date that it wasn't if you just said that a different person said it was on that date. The brain does weird things when recollecting memories (wiki the misinformation effect).
My thoughts are that the very first interviews are the most accurate. The ones within a week of 10/31. They all paint the same picture, there was no fire that night. Start adding days to the fog and memories begin to blur, dates merge and then we get what we have now is different stories about the fire, how big it was, what time it was at etc... What people are likely remembering are different events, different fires from that general timeframe (Oct) and recalling those.
If I ask somebody to recall times they dined out recently, a slideshow of memories become accessible. Then if I ask them about a specific event that happened weeks ago the exact day of the dining out experience is not always part of the memory. I would likely remember what I ate, who I was with, generally what time of day it was etc...but on exactly what day? Not likely unless there was some other event tied to it that was special in some way (a birthday or something).
Anyway that's my giant explanation of what I think is going on here. Seems to make the most sense.
[–]c4virus
Yeah it wasn't just a normal day for him which is important yeah. Which still fits everything I'm saying. He says no bonfire happened on 10/31 in all the early interviews as he remembers that day pretty well. If I took an afternoon off work yeah I would remember it too for some weeks after that. But if I took an afternoon off of work 4 months ago my memories of that day would not be perfect. He doesn't say anything about a bonfire until March after Brendan's forced confession. If somebody says you did something on a certain day 4 months ago and you did do something with that person around that time frame (but not on that day) many people would just accept the date and recall the event. Memories blur together very easily.
If you ask somebody a question in certain way, sort of assuming part of the answer, their answers can be easily manipulated. There are studies where people are shown a set of images. Researchers ask half of the people "What color cars did you see?" and ask the other half "Did you see the blue car?". People will report seeing a blue car if asked about a blue car even if there wasn't one in the pictures. The people asked about what color cars they saw will not say "blue" very often.
So Brendan 'confesses' to being at a bonfire with him on 10/31 where they burned a body 4 months after said date. Barb calls Steven about this. Steven remembers a bonfire with Brendan, around that time frame and responds regarding that event. But if we take into account the source, Brendan's confession, of which every single part was fabricated and which contradicts early reports, then what's the likely explanation?
[–]welcometothemachine_
Nobody's first statement mentioned a fire. (Other than Joshua Radandt but that's another can of worms.) Slowly everyone did corroborate LE's story. And I say story because it is fiction. He's innocent.
[–]sjj342
Or, why didn't he tell someone on Nov 3 or Nov 4 after she was reported missing and the TH/SA link was reported all over the news?
Radandt was also on the property Nov 5, 6, 7, so... In fact, he signed in at 5:25 PM, less than 30 min after this discussion.
[–]NAmember81
The cops were going for a "cooked TH in his smelter theory" and then thought it would be more convenient to use this alleged trash fire as the state's theory of disposal instead.
That's why that sikikey note was swept under the rug and downplayed as significant imo: change of plans came up.
[–]OpenMind4U
(Other than JR but that's another can of worms.)
...and informant who points to 2 smelters on SA territory BEFORE any bones have been found...so, we have TWO cans of worms!!!:)
[–]lmogier
Because they hadn't have time to plant the bones yet...
[–]lmogier
I'm thinking this is the first time the issue of a fire has been raised and thinking that from that point forward that is why LE keeps pushing the issue of a fire to witnesses/during interviews. I'll have to check the timelines/interviews but I've always wondered who the first one to was to raise the fire issue. At the same time I'm vaguely remembering something about someone mentioning SA burning brush for JR around that same time period....?
[–]HardcoreHopkins
Very possible the fire story originated with him.
[–]sjj342
I think it's about as close to confirmed as anything gets in this case. It's documented twice, pre-dating Nov 8, and he was on the property 4 times before Nov. 8 (from the logs).
I've floated it a number of times and have yet to be corrected (which I assume would've happened by now). AFAIK there are no other witness statements pre-Nov 8 that mention a fire on 10/31.
[–]parminides
On the same day, the cadaver dog indicated activity at the Janda burn barrel. I've always assumed that this was the reason for LE to start thinking about fires. The dog handler wouldn't let her dog near the fire pit because of Bear.
[–]sjj342
In the MTSO reports, Jost attributes it to Radandt via "someone" else discussing it:
Page 15 - http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/MTSO-Summary-Report-on-Homicide-Investigation.pdf
One problem - Kuss Rd and his deer camp is over 1/2 mile away. That's even farther than the bus to the van distance.
Granted, you could see fire, but certainly not the size of a fire from that distance to get relative size NOR to know actual location or the 'red house'. Impossible in fact.
https://www.google.com.au/maps/place/Kuss+Rd,+Two+Rivers,+WI+54241,+USA/@44.2539631,-87.6988585,1036m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x8803257ae269248f:0x3b3a4c81ccad9fec
[–]OpenMind4U
------he observed a large fire on the STEVEN AVERY property located by the red house ------.
Great!!! Love reliable eyewitnesses...so, where is the 'red house'?
Here is SA 'red' trailer and Bear's 'red' doghouse...
http://imgur.com/hLbs6gh
Here is overall view of Avery's property
http://imgur.com/HhlE2bE
Here is recently obtained frame from fly-over on Nov 4th.
http://imgur.com/z2zQQ9C
Please help me to identify position from which eyewitness could be able to observe a large fire on the STEVEN AVERY property located by the red house.
[–]CopperPipeDream
Did Radandt volunteer this information and if so why would he think it unusual enough to mention a fire when in other statements he's burning brush with Avery in the past?
Maybe it's just me but if I were Radandt, I would be more concerned with bones and human blood DNA mystery stain, CX, found on his property than I would an alleged fire on Avery's.
And if this was such a bombshell, why didn't the state use him on the stand?
[–]OpenMind4U
if I were Radandt, I would be more concerned with bones and human blood DNA mystery stain, CX found on his property than I would an alleged fire on Avery's.
Here! This is exactly why JR was such a 'helper' on 11/5.
[–]honeygirl71
Do you remember where the statement about SA burning brush with him is? I cannot remember...
[–]CopperPipeDream o
"I asked BRYAN how many times STEVEN has burned in that pit and he said about once to twice a month. BRYAN said the reason why he did not think anything of it was because JOSHUA RADANDT, the owner of the gravel pit, was clearing brush and STEVE had offered to burn that for him."
http://imgur.com/a/VroPJ
[–]OpenMind4U
First, Joshua Radandt knows Avery's territory very well. He knows the prior owner of SA's trailer (it's trailer, not house). He knows SA very well too. And yes, SA trailer is red color.
Now, if you'll look on air-view image where JR hunting cabin is and where SA red trailer is and where Bear's red doghouse is and where burning pit is......and than, mentally, make the straight line to connect hunting cabin location to the pit...you'll see that it's impossible to say: 'I saw fire NEXT to red house'.
Two things you need to apply here: JR knows territory and this imaginary line. Makes sense?
EDIT: sometimes, when person a lies, too much not necessary information reveals the lie. jmo
[–]desertsky1
thank you...do you think the fact that him specifically called out the red house was JR's way of adding to the "SA is your guy" narrative?
honestly, the more I think about this, (I know it's been said before and will be said again), but there is no way in hell experienced, honest, truthful LE could possibly believe TH was dead and burning in a fire by 4:30, when JR "sees" the fire. No. way. Maybe they were the ones duped big time.
[–]OpenMind4U
do you think the fact that he specifically called out the red house was JR's way of adding to the "SA is your guy" narrative?
Of course!!! Would be better if he would say: 'I saw fire in SA pit'...but he needs to distance himself from SA...kind of, I don't know this shitty suspect guy at all...never been there...the fire I saw was unusual high/large (and how he knows what was USUAL???) NEXT to his house....
Maybe they were the ones duped big time
IDK. IMO, investigation was soooo BIAS and done unprofessionally that it's thin line between just stupidity and purposely-made stupidity.
[–]GigatronQ
A house up the road from me likes to have summer bonfires at night. It's maybe 1 thousand to 1500 feet west of me. I can see the fire and I can see the people standing around it.
The garage is maybe 25 feet from the burn pit: the garage would have been scorched and the vinyl siding all melted.
Steven Avery's garage should have scorch marks and warping to the garage if he had a huge fire blazing. Than there's that propane tank sitting next to the garage, roughly the same 20 feet from the fire. Seriously, would anyone reading this and know the hazards of fire near propane light a blaze that close to a propane tank and garage.
[–]c4virus[S]
Yes exactly. There's no way a 10' ft fire sat there blazing that day.
[–]foghaze
Agreed. No way he saw a fire. Police suggested it and put it in their report. Eventually if you tell someone something happened on a certain day they will remember it as a false memory. It has been said that this actually happened and even the people in the town all remember a fire as a false memory. It's a bit like the image you had in a dream.
[–]Traveler430
Fabian testified he was there 4:45 p.m. Only thing he saw was a fire in a burn barrel at 5:20.
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/CASO-Investigative-Report.pdf (page 319)
[–]dark-dare
I am the Queen of Bonfires and love hotdogs!!! I burn everything I can get my hands on. What it seems you are missing the point on is: if you have a dried lumber/brush pile, there are huge flames, for maybe less than half hour, then it is just a small fire for an hour, then just coals. We wanted to secretly burn a couch one summer, we waited till after dark, then tossed the couch on the small fire we had going. Well holy hell, lit up the whole valley, unbelievable, thought for sure I would get busted for burning the couch. The flames were maybe twenty feet high for 10-15 minutes while the material burned,then, just the frame had flames, then in an hour just coals. My point is you have to feed a fire, even when I burned some old building they were down to coals in two hours. Without continuously feeding dried material you cannot sustain a ten foot flame, impossible.
[–]c4virus[S]
With your bonfire expertise, when you look at the pics of the burn pit does it look like a huge fire was had there?
Did the couch you guys lit up (cool story btw) burn down to ash completely or was there some remnant of it left after everything was done? I expect the burn pit to show remnants of whatever was fueling such a large fire but the only thing there is that seat. What do you think?
[–]dark-dare
The small black area is the size of the fire, it could have been piled high, but the area where it is black (which is not that big) is the circumference of the fire. The whole pit does not have charcoal, the remains of the fuel source, only the small black area (which doesn't appear to be large enough to lay out a body) and the black pieces are burned wood, which could have been collected and tested (wood would have absorbed the body fluids or tire residue or any accelerant used, as it is very porous material). And further, no one ever would stand around a fire burning tires, that would not be a pleasant experience at all.
[–]WVBotanist
I've stayed clear of the photo interpretations of late, but these are some solid points. I think any courtroom testimony about this, however, would be difficult to introduce. Maybe a wildland fire specialist. Most arson investigators are trained in structure fires, versus outdoor fire behavior and effects. I happen to be a certified prescribed fire ecologist and wildland firefighter (certified in coastal plain only, big difference between that and mountainous terrain). I am FAR from being an expert.
But it would not be difficult for an expert in that field to investigate the extent of damage and/or dehydration of the surrounding vegetation, analyze it in the context of the soil and weather conditions, and generate an intensity/duration index threshold for a fires of various heights.
Height would actually be a VERY important factor in making the scene match; a high-intensity (temperature) fire very close to the ground could burn for a long time without much damage to the surrounding vegetation. But a ten foot tall bonfire would quickly dehydrate the surrounding vegetation via radiant heat, and then oxidize (burn) the small fuels (grasses) rather quickly - that happens pretty quickly in wildland fires, even when no flames are visible in the grasses.
The propane tank that close to a large fire is also laughable. The tanks are already under pressure. Boyle's Law (PV=nRT) establishes pretty clearly that the pressure and volume are proportional to the mass and temperature of a given quantity of gas. The radiant heat from a ten-foot (visible flames) bonfire will vary, but if you have ever been near one you know you don't want to stand nearly as close as that tank is in the photo. I can't say for sure it would have exploded, but I would think that even SA would know better.
[–]CopperPipeDream
I meant bombshell as in drop a bomb of info. Did Radandt just offer up this info? Was he asked specifically? There are so many inconsistent statements about this fire and no mention of one at all in the early statements.
I have to wonder, where did all this 'fire talk' start? Who was the first to mention a fire?
If I'm not making sense, forgive me, Mother Nature is slowly killin' me with tree pollen.
And I'm a 'she', BTW. ; )
[–]Lolabird61
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Kuss+Rd,+Two+Rivers,+WI+54241/@44.2530499,-87.6999494,17z/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x8803257ae269248f:0x3b3a4c81ccad9fec?hl=en-us
[–]PerceivedAnonymity
The reason this was not used was because it did not fit the prosecutions timeline. If they were to say that SA was burning the victim by 4.30 it would have caused a shit load of problems for them.
[–]TERRI8LE
If they were to say that SA was burning the victim by 4.30 it would have caused a shit load of problems for them.
Yup. People coming and going. Phone calls. Daylight. 1000' column of tire smoke. Peculiar statement regardless of how truthful you deem Radandt. If he is truthful, the fire seems way too early to work as prosecuted. Somehow he is the only person that initially noticed this? If he is lying then that is a large can of worms and a big fat mess.
[–]ews0605
The fire, according to Janda, there was no fire when she came home at around 5:00 pm.
[–]TERRI8LE
Well tire fires take forever to go out.
Extinguishing tire fires is difficult. The fire releases a dark, thick smoke that contains cyanide, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, and products of butadiene and styrene. Burning tires are heated, and, as they have a low thermal conductivity, they are difficult to cool down. Moreover, they frequently burn inside even if they are extinguished from outside, and easily reignite when hot. One possible remedy is to cover the fire with soil, reducing the supply of oxygen and the exhaust of smoke. After extinguishing and cooling down (which may last several days), toxic chemicals can be neutralized.
[–]ews0605
Furthermore, a fire lasting 5 hours is nothing. The amount of time to really get a bonfire started, then for all of the embers to burn and all of the fuel on the fire. It takes around 8 hours for all of a wood pile to reduce to complete ash. Tires would take much, much longer.
[–]sjj342
Because they have no timeline.
If they had a timeline, the defense would've poked holes in it and ruined the case.
They essentially just threw up their hands and said "well, he must've seen her last, so he did it guys!"
[–]HardcoreHopkins
Yeah, like Fabian saying there was a burn barrel burning but no bonfire.
[–]watwattwo
If they were to say that SA was burning the victim by 4.30 it would have caused a shit load of problems for them.
When did anyone say that "SA was burning the victim by 4.30"?
[–]PerceivedAnonymity
Ok then. Lets leave the current discussion about the fire to one side for a minute. There has been three distinct perspectives on the fire up to this point. One camp has been saying there was a body in the fire, another camp saying there was no body in the fire and another saying there was no fire at all. Are you suggesting another scenario? Are you suggesting that there was a fire burning for up to five hours that evening?
[–]watwattwo
There has been three distinct perspectives on the fire up to this point. One camp has been saying there was a body in the fire, another camp saying there was no body in the fire and another saying there was no fire at all.
People who believe a body was burned in the fire don't necessarily believe that the body was in the fire from the very start of it.
Are you suggesting that there was a fire burning for up to five hours that evening?
Not in my previous comment, but yes I do believe that the fire was burning for up to, or even longer than, 5 hours that evening. Considering Blaine testifies that he saw the fire still burning around 11pm, why is that so hard to believe?
[–]PerceivedAnonymity
I am glad I could bring you along with me to this point. We are at a point of difference. You believe that the fire could have been burning for that long. I do not. Listen, if you give me sources, showing me testimony stating that the fire was seen throughout the evening, I would stand corrected. Until then I view JR's testimony as a thorn in the side of the prosecution.
[–]watwattwoo
You're asking specifically for testimony now, so I guess you mean from the trials. Makes it a bit more difficult, but here you go.
I'll refer to Brendan's account at his trial summarized by superpickle:
Steven called him again at 7:10pm to see if he'd changed his mind, and Brendan left to go to Steven's burn pit. He saw some tires and branches on the fire, and believed it was about two feet high. - See more at: http://stevenaverycase.com/dassey-trial-transcripts-day-7
Here's Scott testifying that he saw a "big fire" around 7:30-7:45:
Q. About 7:30 to 7:45 p.m., did you notice anything unusual around the property at that time?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Could you tell the jury what you saw at that time, please.
A. I saw a big fire.
Blaine testifying that he saw the fire at 11pm:
Q. Tell the jury what you saw at your Uncle Steve's house, at about 11:00 that night?
A. I seen Steven Avery sitting there watching the fire.
Q. Watching what?
A. Watching the fire, the bonfire.
So that's about 4 hours right there, using only sources from trial testimony. One would assume that the fires did not begin and end when someone first and last witnessed it, so it's a fair assumption that the fire lasted 5+ hours.
[–]PerceivedAnonymity
Ok. Add JR's testimony to that now. 4.30pm to 11pm. Thats about 7 hours. Are you saying that you believe he had a fire for 7+ hours that day?
[–]watwattwo
I believe that's possible, yes.
I believe another possibility is that he saw the fire from the burn barrel.
[–]Traveler430
They clearly provided enough evidence to prove Steven's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to the jury.
They already established that there was a fire lasting for multiple hours with other witnesses.
Where did the prosecution establish this in SA trial? You can't use BD trial in SA trial.
[–]watwattwo
Scott and Blaine's testimony was from SA trial. That's at least 3 hours of "big fire" right there.
[–]dharrell
Must have been quite a fire if he could see behind SA's house while driving through his quarry
[–]misslisacarolfremont
Josh Radandt is the first witness to mention a big bonfire and he is not a relative. He sees it at approx. 4:30 pm. This works in the prosecutions favor who also contended that Brendan goes over there to help get stuff to put on the fire sometime before 5:00pm.
But in Bryan Dassey's statement on 2/27, Bryan gets home at 5:00 pm - he sees Brendan is home and sometime before 6:30pm-7:00pm when he leaves Bryan overhears Brendan talking to Steven who needs help with something. Is that Steven asking Brendan to come back over to help clean up the garage after Brendan was over there earlier? That is what the prosecution believed happened. In a jailhouse conversation, we know Brendan tells his Mom that he was over there earlier before 5:00pm too.
"BRYAN said the night before he had slept by his girlfriend's house and went from there to work. BRYAN said he was home by 5:00 and that BOBBY, BLAINE and BRENDAN were home at the time. He doesn't remember exactly what they were doing but may have been playing video games. BRYAN said he took a shower and got ready to go by his girlfriend's house. He said he overheard BRENDAN talking with STEVEN about needing some help doing something. Between 6:30 and 7:00, BRYAN said he left to go by his girlfriend's house. Prior to leaving BRYAN did notice that there was smoke coming from behind STEVEN's garage but didn't think much of it."
[–]sjj342
Radandt is the only one that was consistent about the fire whose statements pre-date the discovery of the "bones" and clearly wasn't fed the info from the cops/news.
He is the best witness on the fire, period.
Other witnesses are all over the place on timelines, omitted mention of it on their initial statements, varied on size of fire, stated durations for the fire that make burning a body to the discovered state highly improbable if not impossible...
[–]ScousePie
He is the best witness on the fire, period.
But if others are willing to testify that they were closer than Randandt could have been when they saw it why not use those people instead?
[–]sjj342
How about because they didn't say there was a fire at 4:30PM, which is contradicted by Radandt? Why are they lying about when the fire started?
[–]ScousePie
Why are they lying about when the fire started?
Why are they changing their statements about a fire in the first place? How can we trust anything they say knowing they gave inconsistent statements?
[–]sjj342
You just proved the point. He is the best witness.
On the other hand, he's not the best witness, because there was no fire on 10/31.
[–]ScousePie
On the other hand, he's not the best witness, because there was no fire on 10/31.
I still don't understand how the police managed to get everyone to agree to this fire. I've seen the psychology links about inserting memories. I just don't know why those that changed their statements to include a fire later in the investigation did so knowing they had not said anything about it before and that it would incriminate Steven. Why would they risk going along with something they didn't see and incriminate him in the process?
[–]sjj342
Accessory after the fact, obstruction of justice... There is a documented history of the police framing Averys... Barb has that marijuana charge hanging over her head... who knows what else they have going on in their background. Self-interest... they can live without Steven, he'd been locked up for 20 years.
It's not unprecedented.
Classic groupthink - no one wants to be the dumb blind liar.
[–]FineLine2Opine
It's possible the fire may have been on a different day. If asked what they did on Oct 31 they wouldn't think to mention a fire they saw on a different day.
Later when reviewing statements the police come back asking specifically about a fire. Did you see a fire? Yeah. JR says it was on 31st October. I guess it might have been then...
by ScousePie
submitted by boogiewoogie4
RAV4 driven along the Berm Track?
I've noticed that, in separate interviews, both SA and Brendan describe the same route to account for how the RAV4 may have been driven from SA's trailer to the far south east of the Avery Yard where it was found.
This aerial photo from 2005 should help orientate - North is to the left, West at bottom of frame. SA's trailer is in the bottom left (north-west corner).
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Exhibit-25-aerial-1024x618.jpg
The western property boundary of the salvage business runs south from SA's plot and is marked by a treeline at the back of SA's trailer. SA and Brendan both point out that the treeline boundary marks what SA calls a "hill" but is actually a raised dirt rampart berm - with a driveable track on top. In fact, the 'Berm Track' can be seen in the pic as a track running through a double tree/brush line. The Berm Track separates Avery's yard on the east side and Radandt's gravel quarry on the west side. The track runs south and slopes down to a junction. You can turn left there into the Avery 'pit' or turn right running by Radandt's gravel conveyor belt on out westerly to Highway Q.
Here is a wider shot showing the line of the Berm Track boundary between Avery's and the Radandt gravel quarry, the nearby Hunting Camp, and the straight diagonal of the conveyor belt heading south-west towards Highway Q.
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Exhibit-92-Animation-Photos-1024x685.jpg
In his 11-06-05 (Crivitz 2) interview, SA tells police that he and Chuck noticed tail lights by SA's trailer at 8pm on Thursday Nov 3rd. SA suggests the tail lights could have accessed to his trailer plot from west by a road he couldn't remember the name of (Kuss Road) straight across the field. Or, he says, they accessed by driving the track atop the "hill" - what I'm calling the Berm Track. SA explains it is easily driveable, drops down into the "pit" and gives access alongside Radant's conveyor belt to Highway Q. Radandts and Averys have had problems before with trespassers coming in that route. (Crivitz 2 interview 11-06-05 from 36:20 mark)
https://youtube.com/watch?v=VoAF26Ldn9M
Here is another pic showing the Berm Track from the west, and (bottom right) the close proximity of the Hunting Camp where there are a couple of trailers in the trees.
http://static2.techinsider.io/image/5682eb43e6183e591e8b5748-1125-844/screen%20shot%202015-12-29%20at%203.19.42%20pm.png
Brendan Dassey was interviewed on 05-13-06. Towards the end of that interview, Fassbender and Wiegart ask Brendan to draw the route that SA and Brendan drove the RAV4 surreptiously to the far south east of the 'pit' up behind the pond. Brendan immediately asks if he should draw the conveyor belt too.
As Brendan starts drawing his diagram at SA's trailer, they ask him if he's going to draw the fieldtrack west that joins up with a side road (Kuss Road) and does Brendan know where the Hunting Camp is. Brendan knows where the Hunting Camp is but says the RAV4 wasn't driven that way, they drove along the Berm.... "a ledge".
Fassbender: And you went right along that thing?
Brendan: Yeah
Fassbender: Oh. And down here you're able to get off that thing and get into the yard, huh?
Brendan: Mmm, huh.
Fassbender: OK. That makes sense.
(Brendan Dassey interview 05-13-06 transcript, pp 857-860)
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Brendan-Dassey-Interview-Transcript-2006May13.pdf
Once you drive down off the Berm into the 'pit' there are several routes over to the car crusher and the pond. The Berm Track route from the SA, Janda/Dassey trailers avoids driving the RAV4 past Ma & Pa's or past Chucky's.
I'm not sure how potentially identifying the quiet Berm Track route into the Pit is significant, but I'm struck by the remarkable consistency of SA and BD's descriptions. Fassbender and Weigert were obviously unaware of the Berm Track till told in May 06.
And the Berm Track will probably have been known by others familiar with Avery's Yard - ideal for dumping burnt bones without being observed.
Here's another 2005 aerial view which also shows Kuss Road (top left) and Highway Q.
http://i.imgur.com/BqqwkH5.jpg
Prime example of how written reports can deceive and mislead (revisiting Avery's infamous 'fire pit lie')
submitted by Nexious at TickTockManitowoc
A
common theme brought up in select circles is that Steven flat-out lied
about the fire pit and burn barrels. Dassey often gets added to this
expression as a co-conspirator, because he neglected to mention anything
about a fire during his initial interview with investigators.
Putting aside the fact that nobody seemed to recall any Halloween fire before being asked directly about it at a later date (including Steven, Brendan, Bobby, Blaine, Chuck, Earl, Scott--a lot of conspirators) I wanted to highlight this glaring inaccuracy from O'Neill's written report about Steven's November 6th interrogation.
This was Steven's second interrogation with law enforcement and the first time anything about fire was brought up. Emphasis added.
Transcript created from the audio @ 28:30. Emphasis added.
O'Neill states "You just toss garbage back there. Do you guys burn anything?" to which Avery replies "no" with the assumption that O'Neill is still referring to the garbage pit area just referenced. Steven had already stated they don't burn garbage down in the pit, so said "no" to clarify that they don't burn anything down there.
Immediately after O'Neill clarifies the statement by asking about their own residential area, Avery says yeah that they have their own burning barrels and such. He believes it may have been "two weeks" since they burned garbage. Avery obviously struggles to recall specific time-frames of many occurrences, including when the crusher was last used ("I don't know if that was last week...could have been the week before.")
In the November 9th interrogation, of which only a written report is available, he again estimates the last time he burned garbage as possibly "the week before last or over a week ago and before Teresa was there" and goes on to describe the burning of garbage, brush and tires behind his house. It is clear at different points in the interrogations that Avery cannot pinpoint specific dates to events and gets annoyed by this inability, which makes added sense when factoring in his intelligence level compounded by the generally mundane and uneventful days, assuming he did not actually spend them committing heinous crimes and covering them up.
TL;DR: Steven did not say they don't burn any garbage, just that they don't burn any in the pit. Steven did not say that he did not have any burning pits, just that there were none in the pit. O'Neill's written report makes Steven's statements seem substantially more incriminating than they actually are. Exercise caution when reading written reports--unfortunately almost the entirety of all interviews from CASO are unavailable beyond these written reports.
Putting aside the fact that nobody seemed to recall any Halloween fire before being asked directly about it at a later date (including Steven, Brendan, Bobby, Blaine, Chuck, Earl, Scott--a lot of conspirators) I wanted to highlight this glaring inaccuracy from O'Neill's written report about Steven's November 6th interrogation.
This was Steven's second interrogation with law enforcement and the first time anything about fire was brought up. Emphasis added.
We talked also about burning barrels and the disposal of garbage. Steven told us that the garbage goes to a pit area down in the yard, as they do not burn any garbage (Later acknowledged that he and his sister burn garbage). I asked about where the burning barrels were located and Steven indicated their location on the diagram. When I had asked Steven specifically about having any burning pit's Steven told me that there were none. I asked Steven when was the last time that he had burned anything and he replied "two weeks ago". I asked Steven as to what he had burned and he told me "just regular garbage".The highlighted statements establish to the reader two points that look quite bad for Avery:
- Avery initially said that they do not burn any garbage.
- Avery said that he did not have any burn pike when asked specifically about them.
He lied about not having a fire pit in his yard and not burning anything in the barrels ever hoping police would thus not go search.Except, none of this actually happened, based on the actual interrogation.
Transcript created from the audio @ 28:30. Emphasis added.
O'NEILL: How about--do you guys burn stuff, or crush stuff? Or, what do you do with all of your garbage and stuff like that?As is apparent from the recorded interrogation and especially upon listening to it, Steven is referring specifically to the "junkyard pit" area of their property when he says they don't burn anything there and that there are no burning pits in that pit area.
AVERY: Mostly back in the corner.
O'NEILL: Where at?
AVERY: Back here.
O'NEILL: What's back there?
AVERY: This [garbage that] people put their garbage in once-- just garbage.
O'NEILL: So you guys burn the stuff back there?
AVERY: No, we don't burn nothing back there.
O'NEILL: You just toss garbage back there. Do you guys burn anything?
AVERY: No.
O'NEILL: Ok. You don't have any burning barrels, or open pits, or?
AVERY: Not in the pit, no.
O'NEILL: Ok. Down in your residential area, where you guys live?
AVERY: Yeah.
O'NEILL: Do you guys burn your garbage?
AVERY: We got ours. Burning barrels, and that.
O'NEILL: Where at?
AVERY: Um, mom's got one there.
O'NEILL: Mom's got one here?
AVERY: Yeah. And my sister's got some over here.
O'NEILL: Over here?
AVERY: And I think I got one out here.
O'NEILL: You got one out front?
AVERY: Yeah.
O'NEILL: Where at? Right here?
AVERY: Yeah, some place in there, yeah.
O'NEILL: Ok, and where's your sister got some?
AVERY: Umm, behind the house.
O'NEILL: Right here?
AVERY: Yeah.
O'NEILL: How many?
AVERY: Probably three, four of them.
O'NEILL: Three or four?
AVERY: Yeah, somewhere in there.
O'NEILL: She has kids.
(Laughter)
AVERY: Yeah! A lot of garbage.
O'NEILL: Yeah. So your mom has one. Your sister has about three or four. You have one. What about Chuck?
AVERY: Yeah, he's got one too.
O'NEILL: Where at?
AVERY: I think that's over here some place.
O'NEILL: Ok. So this 'X' equals burning barrels, right? How often do you guys burn? When's the last time you burned?
AVERY: Two weeks ago?
O'NEILL: Ok. What did you burn, just regular garbage?
AVERY: Just garbage.
O'NEILL: Ok. How about at mom's? Do you do any of their stuff, like take out their garbage, do things like that? Help them out? Burn their garbage?
AVERY: No.
O'NEILL: Nothing like that?
AVERY: No.
O'NEILL: Ok. So back in the pit area, you guys have a common area where you just dump garbage.
AVERY: Yeah.
O'NEILL: You don't do any burning back there?
AVERY: No, no.
O'Neill states "You just toss garbage back there. Do you guys burn anything?" to which Avery replies "no" with the assumption that O'Neill is still referring to the garbage pit area just referenced. Steven had already stated they don't burn garbage down in the pit, so said "no" to clarify that they don't burn anything down there.
Immediately after O'Neill clarifies the statement by asking about their own residential area, Avery says yeah that they have their own burning barrels and such. He believes it may have been "two weeks" since they burned garbage. Avery obviously struggles to recall specific time-frames of many occurrences, including when the crusher was last used ("I don't know if that was last week...could have been the week before.")
In the November 9th interrogation, of which only a written report is available, he again estimates the last time he burned garbage as possibly "the week before last or over a week ago and before Teresa was there" and goes on to describe the burning of garbage, brush and tires behind his house. It is clear at different points in the interrogations that Avery cannot pinpoint specific dates to events and gets annoyed by this inability, which makes added sense when factoring in his intelligence level compounded by the generally mundane and uneventful days, assuming he did not actually spend them committing heinous crimes and covering them up.
TL;DR: Steven did not say they don't burn any garbage, just that they don't burn any in the pit. Steven did not say that he did not have any burning pits, just that there were none in the pit. O'Neill's written report makes Steven's statements seem substantially more incriminating than they actually are. Exercise caution when reading written reports--unfortunately almost the entirety of all interviews from CASO are unavailable beyond these written reports.
Is this guy driving over to dig a hole? The "charred material" looks dumped to me... (i.redd.it)
ReplyDeletesubmitted 2 days ago by Ductit
https://i.redd.it/f9wyqnqjyp6y.png
[–]Canuck64 5 points 2 days ago
There really is no hole. As Sturdivant and others described it, it was a notch that was scooped out from the south side of the sand rock pile.
The "pit" is actually grade level to the grass. The "ash bed" is exactly what you see in the picture, a black crust from the tires covering the ground. Below that crust was very hard clay almost ceramic like ground. They were unable to dig into it, so after they picked up all the visible bones laying on top of the black crust (which was almost all of them), they used the shovel to scrape the black crust into piles, scooping the material on to the shovel with their hands and then transfering it to the sifter. It's because there was such little burn material that they were able to go through it so incredibly fast.
Here is a collection of pictures and testimony from both trials and preliminaryhearing describing the burn pit.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/4sj3u0/burn_pit_initial_pictures_and_testimony/
[–]LizardFoot83 6 points 2 days ago
One interesting thing to note about the bobcat photo....
It is on the dirt road/path, in the adjacent field off the Avery property, that leads to the Kuss Road cul-de-sac. Were they bringing it over from the quarry to dig out the fire pit? Did JR loan it to them or was it brought into the quarry area by crime lab and then driven over to SA's property?
If it belonged to the crime lab, what were they doing with it in the quarry?
[–]Rossj83 4 points 2 days ago
I think you can see the shadow from the evidence tape in the top photo.
photo of burn pit with evidence tape:
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/exhibit-burn-pit-view.jpg
Here's a photo of them using the bobcat to destroy the fire afterwards. I think LE were more worried about someone looking in the fire pit than Steven.
http://imgur.com/Cpy1aGJ
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/5l3tx9/is_this_guy_driving_over_to_dig_a_hole_the/
Wisconsin Vs. Dassey Argument
ReplyDeleteThe God Honest Truth Behind Brendan’s Biggest Lie…
Will be exposed in the State’s appeal to challenge Judge Duffin of Brendan’s release.
The entire challenge rests on the fact of the following:
Barb, a concerned mother, voluntarily approached Law Enforcement herself, met with them at a hotel in February with concerns of what her minor child, Brendan Dassey witnessed.
Brendan, voluntarily, after his mother drives him to meet LE, freely admits to seeing Teresa Halbach dead in the fire.
Barb remained off camera by choice that day.
Now, what makes this a huge impact for the State is that Barb brought Brendan on her own accord.
As a concerned mother.
This will all come to light in this appeal.
It is the State’s way of saying, hey look, the kid told us there was a body.
A family member, Kayla, learned about what he had said to investigators. We went back later and picked him up from school on March got a confession.
If Barb never brought Brendan to that hotel, Steven Avery nor Brendan Dassey would be in prison at this moment.
Scott Tadych persuaded Barb that Steven was molesting Brendan, and it pissed her off to the point she, on Scott’s advice, took Brendan to lie on Steven to have him arrested.
Brendan, never saw a body.
He was coerced to say he did, but not by LE.
But by his own mother and Scott.
Number one, if a minor child reports in February they saw a body, you have to tell the mother of the statement made.
Secondly, Barb, stayed off camera because she already knew he was going to say it. She brought him there to say it.
Well, guess what… It back fired.
Guess what?
Barb is about to be sourced out by the entire State of Wisconsin.
Now, as far as seeing a body— it doesn’t indicate murder.
However, with Steven still in custody, as a co-defendant, Brendan’s appeal by Duffin could very well be overturned and he could remain in prison.
Duffin, for one, never watched the interrogations in full.
This is where the state is about to take huge advantage.
I’m telling straight from the mouth of Michael Griesbach, current ADA of Manitowoc County, himself…
Barb freely and voluntarily brought Brendan Dassey on her own accord, where Brendan freely and voluntarily witnessed and stated on record with no coercion to LE that Teresa Halbach was seen dead in that fire.
This is the appeal’s case.
Sad thing is, it’s solid.
More sad, Barb tried to get Brendan to lie on Steven because Scott Tadych influenced it.
As well, Scott just refused a buccal swab recently when requested by Zellner.
These two will flee with Brendan if and when Brendan is released.
https://productionsouth.wordpress.com/welcome-readers/wisconsin-vs-dassey-argument/
Brendan Dassey Letter to Judge Fox (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeletehttps://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/5oc0b4/brendan_dassey_letter_to_judge_fox/
submitted 24 days ago by Canuck64
Here is the unedited text of a letter Brendan Dassey sent to Manitowoc County Circuit Judge Jerome Fox, dated June 30, 2006.
Dear Judge Jerome Fox,
Hello. I was going to write to you a while back but I didn’t have a pencil.
The thing I was going to write to you about was that all my statements I gave the investigators are not the truth.
The truth is that me and my brother blaine came home from school at 3:45 p.m. about and walked down the road to our house but while me and blaine were walking down the road we talked about who would get to use the phone to call our friends to see if they were going trick or treating.
So blaine called his friend and while he was calling him I went to my bedroom and played playstation 2 until my mom came home between 5:00 and 5:30.
Then when she left, blaine got picked up by his friend’s mom. I was in the living room watching t.v. until I got a call at 6:00 p.m. from blaine’s boss and I told him that blaine want trick or treating with his friend.
Then I watched some more t.v. until 7:00 p.m. when the phone rang and it was Steven and he asked me if I wanted to come to the bombfire and I did.
Then we drove the golf cart around my mom’s yard to find garbage and junk. We found a van seat, some wood, some tires, and a cabinet, and me and Steven put the stuff on the fire and by that time it was about 9:00 p.m. and my mom came home and called Steven on his cell phone and asked if I had a jacket or sweater on and told Steven that I was to be home at 10:00 p.m.
So me and Steven were standing by the fire till 10:00 p.m. or close to it. Then I went home and talked to my mom about Scott’s mom in the hospital and asked if Scott’s mom is alright.
Then I went to bed and got some sleep for the next day of school. So that is what really happened. And my brother blaine knows that I was home at 4:00 p.m.
Sincerely,
Brendan Dassey
P.S. Me and my mom think you are a good judge. Thank you for your time.
CONTINUED...
COMMENTS
ReplyDeleteThis line bothers me: "Then I went home and talked to my mom about Scott’s mom in the hospital and asked if Scott’s mom is alright." This is either the truth or a lie. There is conflicting testimony from BJ's as to the time she returned from ST's. One version she returned at 11:00 pm another version she spent the night. But she certainly wasn't home at 10 pm. It appears someone helped BD write this.
I doubt think anybody can possibly know if there was a fire that night. But what I do know is that the prosecution did not present any evidence that there was a body in the fire during the time Brendan was there or that Brendan had any knowledge a crime had been committed.
When Carla C. participated in the live event on FB, (several months ago) she said, yes, there was a fire that night.
I believe it was exactly as Brendan stated above. They drove around and collected stuff to burn from the yard. (TH was not anywhere on the property much less burned behind SA's garage.)
I believe this represents BD's honest recollection of what he did that day. Unfortunately this was written after a year had past, after police planted all kinds of bullshit into his head, after a year of exposure to what the media was reporting. I believe there was a fire in which BD helped SA collect these kind of items from the yard and put them into the bombfire. I'm just not totally convinced it happened on October 31st, 2005 though.
If BD really wrote this, it should put paid to the question of whether or not there was a fire that night....unless he was told so often that the fire was that night that he now believes it.
I have a feeling he was possibly prompted. I don't think Brendan's defence every believed him, so probably told him to include the fire, just to make his account more credible, as the prosecution said there was a fire.
I believe during a phone call after Brendan's arrest Steve said Brendan had been over for a bonfire. I think by that time the fire became a reality in everybody's mind.
But Bobby testified at trial that there was no fire Monday night. The defence missed it or ignored it because at that moment Strang made an objection about what Bobby said regarding Mike O.
The only person the testify at trial that there was a fire behind the garage was Blaine and he was the early witness who was the most certain there was no fire. That is until investigators got angry and yelled at him on November 15.
Fassbender tells Brendan that Avery denied multiple times having a bonfire on 10/31 ... Quote this one to the guilters when they say Avery admitted it from the get go. (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeletesubmitted 7 hours ago * by foghaze
I thought this was very interesting. Next time the guilters tell you Avery never denied a bonfire their good buddy Fassbender flat out admits Avery denied it multiple times. They can't counter and say Fassbender is lying because then they would be admitting a form of deception was being used on Brendan. They are in a pickle aren't they?
FASSBENDER: You know Steven said there wasn't a fire that night. He denied that, denied that and denied that until enough witnesses came forward and said that had they seen a fire . ....... you know that?
[–]DarthLurker 10 points 5 hours ago
Its infuriating. Of course as time goes by your recollection becomes less clear and if enough people are telling a story that contradicts with your own, conceding to their memory is not only reasonable, its logical. That is of course until you see how each other person was manipulated into recalling something, or that they simply said they didn't recall and that was counted as a positive affirmation of the new story-line.
[–]Rayxor 7 points 7 hours ago
"He denied that, denied that and denied that until enough witnesses came forward and said that had they seen a fire."
From the transcripts and reports I've read, It didn't seem like all these witness "came forward" and the ones that may have were the people who said SA had a fire in the burning barrel, not the fire pit. I got the impression that those were used to convince others that there was a fire, just like TF is doing to try to convince BD.
In fact, the stooges still use that to try to convince fence-sitters that SA had a fire in the pit
[–]foghaze[S] 7 points 6 hours ago
I got the impression that those were used to convince others that there was a fire, just like TF is doing to try to convince BD.
Yes that was the impression I got as well. Based on what Fassbender is saying Avery denied it many times so I guess eventually after all the intimidation and scare tactics they used like they did with BD, Avery and everyone else had no choice but to agree there was a fire.
[–]MMonroe54 6 points 5 hours ago
W&F didn't concern themselves overly with the truth. They said many things to BD that were not true, in an effort to get him to "tell them a story"....which he eventually did.
CONTINUED...
[–]ThorsClawHammer 6 points 7 hours ago
ReplyDeletewitnesses came forward and said that had they seen a fire.
Other than possibly JR, who came forward to tell of a fire?
[–]Rayxor 6 points 3 hours ago
Thats the only person I can recall who actually came forward, and his description is sketchy as hell. RF seems to have said something was burning in the barrel but I'm not certain if he had the right day. Since nobody else was suggesting the 31st for a fire until many days or weeks later, it could be that police used the JR and RF barrel fires to convince the next person that SA had A fire that day and then those three people to convince the next person, etc. and morph the story from a fire to a fire pit fire.
Or, they could just lie, like they are allowed to do and suggest to each person that many people saw the fire in the pit and suggest that they are covering for SA by denying the fire and that makes them an accomplice.
[–]ThorsClawHammer 3 points 2 hours ago
Or, they could just lie, like they are allowed to do and suggest to each person that many people saw the fire in the pit and suggest that they are covering for SA by denying the fire and that makes them an accomplice.
Just like them getting Brendan to say he saw TH when he got off the bus even though he didn't:
"you get off the bus everyone sees her and you do too"
[–]skippymofo [score hidden] 39 minutes ago*
BJ? She also saw a huge fire /s
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/6c3yg0/fassbender_tells_brendan_that_avery_denied/
[–]Habundia
ReplyDeleteWasn't Brendan there because they both worked on a car and that's why Brendan got bleach on his trousers after they cleaned up spilled oil or some other liquid used by mechanics....and when Barb called Steven to tell that Brendan needed to get his jacket because of the cold and that he had to be home by 9? The phone call can be easily checked if indeed she had called him and what day it was. Barb never remembered a fire untill Scott Tadych told her there was one when he dropped her off...before that she never mentioned it.
[–]AforumAccount
Nearer the start of this call, Barb says she can't recall something she said recently
I can't remember from one day to the next, im losing my mind
Yet when she first told the cops about a fire, Nov 14th, she claimed to recall a comment Scott made to her about the size of the fire. Though a few weeks later she would retract her own claim (edit) of having seen the size, as Scott was testifying it was larger.
[–]strawberryfealds
Steven seems to know what was in the fire barb was confusing for the "late fire" where she calls for Brendan to be home by a certain time. A cabinet and bench seat, and that was the week prior to Halloween.
Steven was asked about the bench seat a week before Brendan was interrogated, because investigators asked Jodi about it. Steven tells his mother he burned the seat and the old broken cabinet the week prior to Halloween, and Brendan was at that one too.
[–]Big-althered
I'll tell you my honest opinion of this.
This is not what Barb knows this is what Barb was told by someone she really trusts, so she is repeating a narrative that's someone else has provided her with. Her language demonstrated some certainty in making definite statements but she qualifies these with ' I think'.
Call 58. Steven Avery Call with Barb - 11-18-2005
Delete23:45
ETA: For additional reference please see Barb's Interview Report with CASO on 11-14 four days earlier, in which she reportedly talked about having seen a fire in Steve's pit on 10-31.
S: I think it'd take a lot to burn a body.
B: Well, of course it would.
S: I think it would take a couple days.
B: I don't know. I couldn't tell ya.
S: Well, I couldn't tell ya either. But you would imagine that.
B: Yeah.
S: Especially with bones.
B: Yeah.
S: And I didn't have no fire there all week.
B: No.
S: The last time I had it was a week--
B: I only remember Monday night. (Note: 10-31-2005 was a Monday - FJW)
S: Huh?
B: I only remember that Monday night.
S: The Monday night before that.
B: The day I went up to the hospital with Scott. To see his mom. That day.
S: What day was that?
B: That was a Monday.
S: The 31st?
B: I don't know, I'd have to look at the calendar.
S: That was on a Monday.
B: That could be. Wait--
S: But I didn't have no fire there, then. Not on no Monday night.
B: Yeah, I think you did.
S: Huh?
B: Yeah I think you did. Because when we came home at 8:00, you were standing outside by the fire.
S: When Brendan was with me.
B: It could be, I don't know.
S: No, I thought that was during the week before that. I don't know. Now you've got me puzzled.
B: No, yeah, I think it was the 31st. Because when we came back from the hospital--
S: Yeah?
B: It was about, I don't know, quarter to 8 or so, 8:00, something like that, when he dropped me off--
S: Yeah?
B: And then later on, I went back. You had a fire when we pulled in.
S: Yeah?
B: Yeah. And I think that was the 31st, that one, when she had her back surgery.
S: I don't know.
B: I don't know, I'd have to ask her.
S: I don't know. I don't remember. Yeah but that was, I didn't have the fire very long.
B: I don't know how long you had it.
S: Well Brendan was home by what?
B: I don't know. I didn't get home until midnight.
S: So he did?
B: I didn't, no.
S: And he was already home already.
B: Yeah.
S: Oh yeah that would have took a long time, like half the night--
B: Yeah.
S: --to burn a body, I would imagine. I thought it was during the week, I had that fire.
B: Well, that would be during the week.
S: No--
B: Monday night--
S: The week before that.
B: I don't know. No, I think you had it that Monday.
S: I don't know.
B: Kitty!
S: All I did was burn that brush. And, what, three or four tires.
B: Yeah.
S: That I picked up from over by you.
B: Yeah. And that car-- that seat?
S: That car seat.
(Automated operator interrupts.)
B: And I still don't think my yard's picked up. My hose is still out there, it's frozen solid ...
(Further discussion about the hose and this and that, followed by goodbyes).
https://old.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/e31mqn/barb_recalling_the_fire_as_having_happened_on/
[–]Glayva123
DeleteWhich statements do you think she's contradicting? On 11/14 she talks about the fire in her first statement to the police. Are there other statements not in CASO?
[–]ThorsClawHammer
her first statement to the police
That wasn't her first statement. There's the one on Nov 9 (or 10?) that was (partially) recorded but we've never seen a report for. They asked her if she saw a fire that evening when Scott picked her up and she couldn't remember one.
She also says things that show her memory of which night is what is wrong, like stating that she told Blaine she was going to Scott's even though we know he wasn't there.
[–]idunno_why
There's an audio recording of an interview in the squad car while they were waiting at the hospital for Bobby to show up for the DNA testing. She couldn't remember sh*t about what she did the week before.
[–]Glayva123
Got a link?
[–]idunno_why
No. It would probably come up in a search of TTM or this sub.
[–]Glayva123
Ah, thanks. I've found it and listened now. Interesting. Barb does indeed say she has no recollection of a fire.
She's very vague about everything, for sure. It sounds like most of her concern is with Bobby and it's clear from the recording that the investigators at that point are heavily focusing on him. Which is interesting for anyone who's been told they were only ever trying to pin everything on Avery and never considered any other suspects. Listening to the audio and how eager they were to get Bobby in for DNA tests and to confirm his whereabouts, it's really obvious they thought Bobby was a suspect at that time.
I'm inclined to think that she's being deliberately vague about anything because she's rattled by the idea anyone in the family, particularly one of her boys, might be involved. It doesn't sound like she even considered Brendan could be at the time and sounds incredulous when they ask about him. I now wonder if she thought she was doing him a favor when she confirmed the fire later, thinking Brendan and Avery could alibi each other.
https://old.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/e31u6d/finally_a_lawyer_tells_sa_to_stop_agreeing_to/
facts about the fire on the 31st. (self.MakingaMurderer)
ReplyDeletesubmitted 3 days ago by chuckatecarrots
The guilty side claims that Avery had a fire on the 31st. And lied about this fire to cops during interrogations.
The Avery family from the salvage yard compound never claimed in initial interviews of any fire on the 31st. Not one!
The only person from outside the Avery salvage yard compound to claim anything of a fire was Josh Radant. And that it 'appeared' to be a burn barrel fire. It could have been an outside yard light that 'appeared' to be a small burn barrel fire too? Who knows....
After initial interviews and after bones were 'possibly' found in the burn pit do any of the Avery family change or add a fire their story of a possible burn pit fire on the 31st.
Now, a fire that could cremate a body weighing 135 pounds would have to be sort of big - in an open burn pit that is. One that would have to last for many hours right?
Here is the fact that sticks out for me: not one other neighbor (besides Radant's 'appearing' burn barrel fire) witnessed this giant body cremating fire on the 31st. Not one other passerby on HALLOWEEN noticed this giant cremating fire on the 31st. How many kids with family would be traveling by on HALLOWEEN? How many older kids with drivers licenses would be out and about fucking around this HALLOWEEN? How many adults going here and there never noticed this giant cremating fire in the gloomy night time sky? Simply - none. How about this; how many cops or concerned (nosey) citizens ever looked into someones garage burning down at the Avery's? - NONE
I want to say with confidence there was no burn pit fire in Avery's burn pit on the 31st that could have consumed and cremated a body. He may have had fire, a much smaller one, but not one that could consume and cremate an entire body. For that time of year it should have stuck out like a pink elephant jumping around in your living room.
Not to deflect from the purpose of my OP however; we will find numerous witnesses that did see the RAV4 or a similar vehicle make. One claimed he saw it enter just south of Avery's into the quarry the day before it was found. All these witnesses are mistaken according to the side of guilt. But all those passerby travelers near Avery's on HALLOWEEN never saw the body cremating fire. A fire that would obviously stick out in the night sky. Not one that bothered calling in and making a statement.
My conclusion: there was no fire that night of the 31st.
PS I live in the country and had a bonfire a couple years ago. It was rather big and my neighbor from a mile away called me to see if everything was alright. just saying.
https://old.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/e2bftp/facts_about_the_fire_on_the_31st/