UPDATE AUGUST 22, 2019 (VIDEO ABOVE OF CASO DISPATCH CALLS)
Lenk and Colborn, as well as others, are by the red trailer at Josh Radandt's deer camp on November 7, 2005: "Is there anyone available to bring us down a roll of barrier tape needed down by the red trailer? We're gonna need an investigator to take a look at something. We've got a burning barrel just off the property. In the debris is a cell phone. Go just down the lane where the trailers are, that's where we are, west of the command post (on Avery Road)."
The image above is from November 8th, the day bones were found in or near Avery's fire pit. There are tire tracks from the field road to the fire pit. The field road connects the Avery property to the cul-de-sac on Kuss Road and the driveway to Radandt's deer camp and his quarry.
The image above is from a flyover on the morning of November 4th by NBC26: there aren't any tire tracks from the field road to Avery's fire pit.
UPDATE JUNE 13, 2017: Regarding the burn barrels, Zellner wrote on page 76 (footnote 8) of her motion filed on June 7, 2017 (page 92 of the PDF):
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.ORIGINAL POST, PUBLISHED ON DECEMBER 14, 2016
The only barrels described as 55-gallon drums came from Radandt's deer camp. Three other barrels were described as "two metal barrels" and "a 50-gallon burn barrel" collected from Janda's backyard.
One of the three deer camp barrels, barrel #2, contained burnt bone fragments (CASO page 248).
Kratz swapped out one of Barb Janda's burn barrels and replaced it with "deer camp burn barrel #2." Or, if there were only three barrels, not four, as Bobby Dassey testified, Kratz shuffled the barrels by adding deer camp burn barrel #2 (or the contents there of) to the three barrels in Janda's backyard.
Kratz relabelled deer camp burn barrel #2 as Janda burn barrel #2 (he added a fourth barrel or he removed a barrel, returned a different barrel in its place, deer camp barrel #2, then recollected that substituted barrel and labelled it as Janda burn barrel #2).
When questioned at Avery's trial about cadaver dogs, Tom Fassbender testified that on November 5th, 6th, and the 7th, during evidence collection, a dog did not alert on the the fire pit behind Mr. Avery's garage, but a dog or dogs did alert on an area at or around the cul-de-sac on Kuss Road (GPS coordinates for this area are N44° 15.263 W87° 42.031, per CASO page 137).
At some point early in the investigation, "deer camp burn barrel #2"became "Janda burn barrel #2."
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, RedditThe following outlines how "deer camp burn barrel #2" became "Janda burn barrel #2."
The barrel with the tag in the photo above does not look like the other barrels, and it appears to have letters stamped on the side. This barrel is newer and in better condition than Avery's barrel and the Janda barrels in the photos below. Is this barrel from Radandt's deer camp? "On 11/12/05, Property Tag #7958, burnt material with the words deer camp burn barrel printed on the container, was turned over to Riemer" (CASO page 248). Did Barb Janda have three or four barrels (pictured below)?
Above is evidence photo 52, the burn barrels from Barb Janda's backyard. There could have been only three, not four barrels.
Steven Avery told Detective O'Neill that Barb Janda had three or four barrels.
Barb Janda was interviewed on November 9, 2005, after Steven was arrested at his brother Earl's house in Whitelaw, WI. She was asked how many burn barrels she has in her back yard: she answered two or three (Barb also was asked how many burn barrels does Steve have, and she answered, "by the field is the only one I know of").
During direct examination, Bobby Dassey told Ken Kratz that there were three barrels (day 3, page 64), which should have been addressed by the defense but wasn't (Kratz simply responded, "Okay," and moved on):
Q. The next exhibit is Exhibit 52. Telt us what that is please?
A. That would be a picture of our burning barrels.
Q. What do you mean "our burning barrels'?
A. My mom's burning barrels.
Q. How many were there?
A. Three.
Q. Are you sure?
A. I don't know. I thought there was three.
Q. Okay. Where were the burn barrel's located?
A. In our back yard, right behind our garage
On Blaine Dassey's map, it shows there were may have been three, not four barrels (Skorlinski wrote a report on his and Wendy Baldwins's contact with Blaine at Cedar Ridge Restaurant in Maribel on November 5th; however, this report was not entered into evidence at Avery's trial). The following map of the property must have been drawn by Blaine during his interview on November 5th, although it was included in the DCI report of his second interview on November 7th (and the date of the map was changed).
Burn barrel from Avery's front yard
To summarize:
- On 11/11/05, DCI Agents Rindt and Pevytoe came to the Calumet County Sheriff's Department to go through five barrels.
- On the same day, 11/11/05, Property Tag #7947, burnt material, was found south of Avery's fire pit.
- On 11/12/05, Property Tag #7958, "burnt material with the words deer camp burn barrel printed on the container," and Property Tag #7963, "burnt material from the deer camp," were turned over to Riemer.
- Three burn barrels that were taken from the deer camp were processed on 11/12/05, per Pevytoe's testimony, direct exam, day 18, page 34.
- On 11/12/05, Riemer, Pevytoe and Ebben processed item #643, along with #642, #644 and #645 (CASO, page 248). Items #642, 643 and 644 were 55-gallon barrels with miscellaneous items inside (the three deer camp burn barrels). When processing Item #643 they found various bone fragments.
- Riemer wrote in the report that material in a burn barrel from Radandt's deer camp included a burnt bone and possible tissue pieces. The burnt bone from the deer camp burn barrel was labelled Property Tag #7963, "burnt bone pieces from Barrel #2."
- Riemer, in his 11/12/05 report, also referred to the deer camp burn barrel, Item #643, as burn barrel #2 (CASO page 248).
- The burnt material found in the deer camp burn barrel was labelled with Property Tag Nos. 7958 and 7963.
- However, Hawkins wrote that Remiker and Dedering found the bone fragments when they sifted Property Tag #7963 on 4/11/06. They
claim to have collected the bone fragments and labelled them Item #21,
Property Tag #7429, but this number is out of sequence and should have
been assigned earlier than #7963, which was processed on 11/12/05. The report below has Riemer listed as the author, but it appears to have been written first by Riemer and then added onto by Hawkins (pages 729-733).We began again on 04/11/06 at 0829 hours. The personnel available on 04/11/06 were Deputy JEREMY HAWKINS of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, Special Agent KEVIN HEIMERL, Det. DAVE REMIKER of the MANITOWOC COUNTY CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, Sgt. BILL TYSON, Inv. JOHN DEDERING and me (Deputy RIEMER) of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT.
At 1108 hours, Inv. DEDERING and Det. REMIKER began processing Item #7963.THE BURN BARRELS AND AVERY'S FIRE PIT
At 1050 hours, Special Agent FASSBENDER checked out and checked in at 1117 hours along with Inv. DEDERING, Det. REMIKER and Inv. WIEGERT.
At 1157 hours, Item #7954 began to be processed by Det. REMIKER.
At 1157 hours, Item #7958 was processed by Deputy HAWKINS and me.
Item #21, Property Tag #7429, bone fragments from sifting of Item #7963, collected at 1140 hours on 04/11/06.
At 1157 hours, Deputy RIEMER and I processed Property Tag #7958, a five gallon pail of debris. When the five gallon pail was finished being sifted through, the contents were placed back into the five gallon pail and then resealed.
At approximately 1230 hours, Deputy RIEMER and I processed Property Tag #8650, debris pile matter in a five gallon pail. All possible bone fragments were taken out of the debris pile and placed into a cardboard pill box. When the five gallon pail was done being sifted through, the possible bones were packaged in the cardboard pill box by Deputy RIEMER. The sifted material was placed back into the five gallon pail where it was then secured.
Once all the pails were sifted through, Deputy RIEMER released the following items back to me:
Property Tag #643, a 55 gallon barrel with miscellaneous items inside
Property Tag #642, a 55 gallon barrel with miscellaneous items inside
Property Tag #644, a 55 gallon barrel with miscellaneous items inside
Property Tag #1102, a 50 gallon burn barrel, one-quarter full of material
Property Tag #7921, a metal barrel with burnt material
Property Tag #7922, a metal barrel with burnt material; the barrel has the number 4 on it
Property Tag #7923, a brown tarp with burnt material inside
Property Tag #8480, burn pile ash
Property Tag #8481, burn pile ash
Property Tag #7946, commingled metal, battery jumper, dog leash
Property Tag #7947, burnt material
Property Tag #7948, burnt material
Property Tag #7958, burnt material, deer camp burn barrel
Property Tag #7963, burnt material
Deputy RIEMER also turned custody of the following items over to me:
Property Tag #7429, bone fragments from Item #7963
Three 55-gallon burn barrels were collected from Radandt's deer camp, but there isn't a report by CASO or MTSO that explains when and how that happened.
One of the three deer camp barrels, barrel #2, contained burnt bone fragments (CASO page 248).
Barrel #2, the one with the bones that was collected from the deer camp, became "Janda's Burn Barrel #2." Kratz swapped and relabelled the barrels.
"The ones were moved. That was admitted. There was a human pelvis found over in the quarry. The bones were in different spots. The body was not burned whole. It's not possible to do that. So you've got the same bone in three different places. You've got only 30% of the bones recovered. You have 29 of the teeth never recovered. The bones look like they were planted. The property was closed down. The coroner from Manitowoc was not allowed on the property and actually was not notified it was a murder -- that violates the Wisconsin statute." - Kathleen Zellner, Press Conference, August 26, 2016
Three 55-gallon burn barrels from the deer camp were given Item Nos. 642, 643 and 644; the "contents" of three of the four Janda burn barrels were given Property Tag Nos. 8314, 8315 and 8317
Dan Kucharski reported that on Sunday, November 6th he collected four burn barrels from what would have been Barb Janda's backyard and that the Calumet County Sheriff's Department took custody of the barrels after they were collected and loaded onto a trailer (CASO page 101):
"At 0947 hours, I collected four burning barrels that were outside of the garage to the southeast of it approximately 50 yards. These barrels were loaded onto a covered trailer and possession was turned over to MARIE OOSTERHOUSE, Badge #604 [Calumet Dispatch, page 5], for transport to the CALUMET CO. SHERIFF'S DEPT. The barrels were loaded and custody was transferred at 1011 hours."On Monday, November 7th, "the cell phone barrel" was collected from the field in front of Avery's trailer and brought to the sheriff's office. Barrel #4, which had just been processed at the sheriff's office, was returned to the Avery property at the same time "the cell phone barrel" was collected (on November 8th, the day the bones were found in Avery's fire pit, Kratz instructed deputies to go back to the Avery property and bring back barrel #4 to the sheriff's office).
Rick Riemer reported that on Tuesday, November 8th between 5:14 and 5:34 PM, the contents of "the cell phone barrel” (8316), barrel #2 (8314), barrel #3 (8317) and barrel #4 (8319) "were collected from the Wisconsin State Crime Lab and transported to Calument County Sheriff's Department" There isn't any mention in this report of barrel #1 (CASO page 174).
At 1714 hours, I did collect from the WI STATE CRIME LAB, who had brought the items up to the CALUMET COUNTY COMMAND POST, Property Tag #8314, which was the contents of barrel #2.
At 1726 hours, I collected the contents of the cell phone barrel, Property Tag #8316.
At 1728 hours, I collected the contents of barrel #3, Property Tag #8317.
At 1732 hours, I collected Property Tag #8318, the contents sifted from burn pit near STEVEN's residence and garage.
At 1734 hours, I collected Property Tag #8319, the contents of barrel #4.
At 1735 hours, I collected Property Tag #8320, a stained rock from the gravel mound [at Radandt's quarry].
At 1737 hours, I collected Property Tag #8321, tissue from a gravel mound [at Radandt's quarry].It is not possible to collect the four Janda burn barrels and the cell phone barrel from agents of the state crime lab and transport them to the sheriff's office in Calumet County because one or two days earlier these barrels already had been collected and transported to the sheriff's office.
Did they purposely misidentify three additional burn barrels that were collected at the deer camp by DCI agents with property tag numbers already assigned to three of the four Janda burn barrels?
- Janda burn barrels #2, #3 and #4: Property Tag Nos. 8314, 8315 and 8317
- Three deer camp burn barrels: Item Nos. 642, 643 and 644
The three 55-gallon burn barrels from Radandt's deer camp are not mentioned in any CASO report until November 12th, CASO page 248 (Items #642, 643 and 644). This report describes the processing of the barrels at the Calumet County Sheriff's Department. There isn't an earlier report by CASO that describes when and how the deer camp barrels were collected and how they arrived at the sheriff's office.
If DCI agents were the ones to collect the deer camp barrels into evidence, then there should be a report in their files. After Manitowoc County claimed to have removed itself from jurisdiction, it was the DCI that took lead of the case, not Sheriff Pagel and Calumet County.
From CASO file, page 248, they found bone fragments in one of the 55-gallon burn barrels from Radandt's deer camp:
On 11/12/05, Riemer, Pevytoe and Ebben processed item #643, along with #642, #644 and #645 (CASO, page 248). Items #642, 643 and 644 were 55-gallon barrels with miscellaneous items inside.
When processing Item #643 they found various bone fragments.
Riemer wrote in the report that material in a burn barrel from Radandt's deer camp included a burnt bone and possible tissue pieces.
The burnt bone from the deer camp burn barrel was labelled Property Tag #7963, "burnt bone pieces from Barrel #2" (CASO page 1073, 1076 and 1079). Riemer, in his 11/12/05 report, also refers to the deer camp burn barrel, Item #643, as burn barrel #2 (CASO page 248).
The overall subject of Riemer's report is material found in a burn barrel from Radandt's deer camp. Although Riemer doesn't make it clear, Item #643, the 55-gallon burn barrel, would have to be the deer camp burn barrel.
The burnt material found in the deer camp burn barrel was labelled with Property Tag Nos. 7958 and 7963.
Property Tag #7958 and Property Tag #7963 were turned over to the outside secure storage and the remainder of the items were turned over to the evidence lockers.
From CASO file, page 249, they found "burnt garbage in the area that we refer to as the deer camp located at Radandt's property":
On November 12th, Lt. Kelly Sippel wrote that the state arson team finished collecting several items of evidence, including "burnt garbage in the area that we refer to as the deer camp located at Radandt's property" (page 249).
On January 15, 2017, John Ferak of wrote:
"Lt. Kelly Sippel's regular presence around these off-site quarries has drawn Zellner's attention. Reports of his activities, though vague and short, indicate he was aware of the recovery of the charred pelvic bones and the recovery of suspicious burnt material at a burn barrel kept by the Radandt deer camp property. On Nov. 10, 2005 — the day after Avery was taken into custody — Sippel threatened to arrest a Green Bay television camera man who was positioned south of Avery's property in the vicinity of the quarries. “I informed (the cameraman) the road that he was coming off of was posted as closed and that another breach like that would result in his arrest.”Property Tag #7958, "burnt material from the deer camp burn barrel," was also identified as "a five gallon pail of debris"
On 11/12/05, Property Tag #7958, burnt material with the words deer camp burn barrel printed on the container, which was found at the deer camp near the location, was turned over to Riemer. On 04/10/06, Riemer and Hawkins processed Property Tag #7958, a five gallon pail of debris. When the five gallon pail was finished being sifted through, the contents were placed back into the five gallon pail and then resealed.
How can #7958 be both "burnt material from the deer camp burn barrel" and "a five gallon pail of debris"? Was the burnt material from the deer camp burn barrel put into a five gallon pail?
Property Tag #7958 (deer camp burn barrel #2); Property Tag #7963 (the contents of the barrel); and Property Tag #7429 (the bone fragments recovered from the sifted contents of the barrel)
Burnt material, bearing Property Tag Nos. 7954, 7963, 7958, 7948 and 7947.
On 11/12/05, Property Tag #7963, burnt material from deer camp was turned over to Deputy Rick Riemer. On 04/10/06, Riemer and Dedering found bone fragments from sifting of Item #7963. They collected the bone fragments and labelled them Item #21, Property Tag #7429.
- Property Tag #7958, burnt material, deer camp burn barrel (the actual barrel)
- Property Tag #7963, burnt material from deer camp (the contents of the barrel)
- Property Tag #7429, bone fragments from Item #7963 (the bone fragments recovered from sifting throught the contents of the barrel)
- A brown tarp with burnt material, bearing Property Tag No. 7923, and four 5-gallon buckets of burnt material, bearing Property Tag Nos. 7947, 7948, 7958 and 7963
Kathleen Zellner's August 2016 Motion and Joshua Radandt's November 5, 2005 Written Statement
Zellner included Radandt's November 5th written statement in her motion. Radandt wrote:
"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 (gallon) drum."Radandt wrote specifically that he saw a fire in a 55-gallon drum in the proximity of Avery's home (see his written statement below). However, the only 55-gallon drums documented in Avery's case were the three found at Radandt's deep camp.
CASO pages 174, 907, 988, 1073 list four burn barrels:
- Property Tag #8315, contents of Barrel #1
- Property Tag #8314, contents of Barrel #2 (Item #643 from Radandt's deer camp, CASO page 248)
- Property Tag #8317, contents of Barrel #3
- Property Tag #8319, contents of Barrel #4 (Property Tag #7922 has the number 4 on it)
- Property Tag #643, a 55 gallon barrel with miscellaneous items inside (burn barrel from Radandt's deer camp, CASO page 248)
- Property Tag #642, a 55 gallon barrel with miscellaneous items inside
- Property Tag #644, a 55 gallon barrel with miscellaneous items inside
- Property Tag #7102, a 50 gallon burn barrel, one-quarter full of material
- Property Tag #7921, a metal barrel with burnt material
- Property Tag #7922, a metal barrel with burnt material; the barrel has the number 4 on it
Property Tag #8316, contents of the cell phone barrel
Fire Pit Near Avery's Garage:
CASO page 157, November 8th, Kelly Sippel's report of finding the first bone near Avery's fire pit:
Shortly after 1340 hours, on Tuesday, 11/08/05, I had the opportunity to speak with Sgt. JOST with the MANITOWOC CO. SHERIFF'S DEPT. Sgt. JOST indicated to me there had been a large burned area behind the red garage on the AVERY property located in the northwest corner of the property. He felt that this area may not have gotten searched properly based on the fact that there was a large German Shephard in the immediate area. I then responded to that location with him where we took a look at the burn area.CASO pages 174, 1073 and 1074:
Inside the burn area, I observed a small grayish material that appeared to be bone. Sgt. JOST also pointed out a piece located in front of me and to my right at which time I could tell that the item he was referring to appeared to be bone. He also pointed out a large piece, which was directly in front of me and to my right. This bone, from looking at it, appeared to be part of a person's spinal column. In these two items, I could observe from where I was sitting a honeycombing and their center mass. This honeycombing was familiar to me due to the fact that as a child my parents owned a butcher shop and at times we would burn some of the bones of the animals that we butchered; and when cleaning out a our burn area, I had the opportunity to observe this same type of event happen in those bones as what I was seeing in the bones within the pit.
As we were looking at these particular items, two STATE OF WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION (DCI) agents approached our position; one individual I know as TOM STURDIVANT and the other individual is a female agent and I do not have her name. I informed the agents that we observed what we felt were several pieces of bone.
It should also be noted that prior to checking the burn area, I observed that the area had not been disturbed. It appeared that due to the previous heavy rains we had through the weekend, that being Saturday night/Sunday moming where we received approximately an inch plus in rain, there was a crust over the top of the burn area, the burned ash and materials. It did not appear as if anybody had previously dug into or moved anlthing within the pile. The two items that we observed were lying directly on the top. With the two agents on scene, I then moved out of the location and advised the command post that we had possibly found some bones. Sgt. JOST remained back with the two DCI agents. When we located the WI STATE CRIME LAB, they later returned to the location to excavate it. I (Lt. SIPPEL) went off duty at approximately 1500 hours.
- Property Tag #8318, contents sifted from burn pit near Steven's residence/garage.
- Property Tag #7947 and #7948, burnt material.
- Two bedsheets that contained burnt material were in plastic bags bearing Property Tag Nos. 7947 and 7948.
- Property Tag #7947, recovered on 11/11/05, was burnt material found south of the fire pit.
- Property Tag #8135, an AA battery
- Property Tag #8136, a metal piece
- Property Tag #8137, a suspected hair fiber
- Property Tag #8138, a zipper pull
- Property Tag#8141, a spent .22 caliber shell
- Property Tag #8143, a clothes snap
- Property Tag#8147, an unknown material with perforations
- Property Tag #8148, a suspected bone fragment
- Property Tag#8149, a clothes snap
- Property Tag #8150, teeth
- PropertyTag#8151, a clothing fiber
- Property Tag #8161, an AA battery
- Property Tag#8162, a clothing fiber
- Property Tag #8163, paper pieces
On November 6th, burn barrel #4 was one of the four Janda burn barrels collected (CASO file, page 101).
On November 7th, JOHN ERTL, CHARLES CATES and GUANG ZHANG got through barrel #4 and were in the process of going through barrel #2 when they were called back to the scene. Barrel marked #4 was placed back on the trailer to be returned to the crime scene. (CASO file, page 142)
On November 7th, Wendy Baldwin stood by Avery's burn barrel at his house until Matuszak came to collect it and deliver it to the sheriff's office. WENDY BALDWIN "was requested to standby the garbage burn barrel at STEVEN AVERY's house until evidence technicians arrived on scene." She "did standby with this until approximately 1539 hours, when the barrel was recovered by CALUMET CO. SHERIFF'S DEPT. Deputy KEN MATUSZAK." (CASO file, page 135)
On November 7th, MATUSZAK delivered Avery's burn barrel to the sheriff's office. "The three barrels that were remaining at the sheriff's office, a barrel Deputy MATUSZAK had brought back from the AVERY property." (CASO file, page 152)
On November 8th (the day the bones were found in Avery's fire pit), KRATZ instructed deputies to go back to the Avery property and bring back barrel #4. "DA KRATZ also wanted the barrel marked #4 that was returned to the AVERY property to be brought back." (CASO file, page 152)
The three burn barrels that were taken from the deer camp were processed on November 12th, per Pevytoe's testimony, direct exam, day 18, page 34.
To summarize:
- On November 6th, four barrels that had been collected were taken for processing: CASO pages 101, 116, 135 and 142.
- On November 7th around 8 a.m., MTSO Siders discovered a burning barrel with a Morolla cell phone in the corn field in front of Avery's trailer (MTSO page 13).
- Later on November 7th, barrel #4 was processed and put back on the trailer; and that trailer was brought back to the Avery property.
- Also on November 7th, after processing barrel #4 and as they are about to start processing barrel #2 -- the one from the deer camp in which bone fragments would be discovered -- Ertl, Cates and Zhang were called back to the scene and to the possible burial site at Kuss Road (they were at the Kuss Road scene until around 5 p.m.).
- Around 3:30 p.m. on November 7th, barrel #4 was returned to the Avery property and a new barrel was collected from the NE corner of the property (CASO page 143); this would be the "cell phone barrel" discovered by Siders earlier in the day. It then was delivered to the sherrif's office.
- On November 8th, Kratz asked that barrel #4, which had just been returned to the crime scence, be brought back to the sheriff's office (CASO page 152).
CASO investigators claimed to have collected four burn barrels from Barb Janda's property on November 6th at 9:47 a.m. (page 101).
- They claim to have collected four barrels on November 6th, and loaded them on the trailer and brought them to CASO.
- When they brought back "barrel #4," to the Avery property on November 7th, they collected Avery's burn barrel from the corn field in front of his trailer; this barrel had a Motorolla cell phone in it and it would come to be known as the "cell phone barrel."
- When they "recollected barrel #4" from the Avery property on November 8th, they claim to have "recollected" another barrel. How could they "recollect" two barrels if only one had been brought back from the sheriff's office?
- They couldn't have "recollected" two barrels; however, they could have collected the fourth barrel that Kratz added to the Janda's barrels, which was deer camp burn barrel #2. This would explain how deer camp barrel #2 became Janda burn barrel #2.
- They never reported on when and how the three 55-gallon burn barrels from Radandt's deer camp were collected (they reported on the "processing" on November 12th).
- The barrel with the bones from Radandt's deer camp was identified as barrel #2 on page 248 of the CASO file; however, it was referred to as "Janda burn barrel #2" at Avery's trial.
- Radandt's deer camp barrel with the bone fragments must have been the one that was brought back to the the salvage yard on November 7th, at which time it was swapped out with one of Janda's barrels.
- November 7th would have been the earliest date that the deer camp was searched.
- They found the bones in Avery's fire pit on November 8th.
From the CASO file:
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/CASO-Investigative-Report.pdf
Pg 101
Sunday 11/6/05
At 0947 hours, I collected four burning barrels that were outside of the garage to the southeast of it approximately 50 yards. These barrels were loaded onto a covered trailer and possession was turned over to MARIE OOSTERHOUSE, Badge #604, for transport to the CALUMET CO. SHERIFF'S DEPT. The barrels were loaded and custody was transferred at 1011 hours.
Pg 116
On 11/06/05 at approximately 1:11 a.m., I (Deputy JEREMY HAWKINS of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT) arrived as the evidence custodian to prepare to log items found at the AVERY property and the HALBACH residence into evidence. Once I arrived at the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, I was informed by dispatch that trailer with four barrels would be arriving from Manitowoc County. I was advised radio operator MARIE OOSTERHOUSE would be giving me two keys for the lock of the trailer.
Pg 135
11/7/05
At approximately 1315 hours, I was requested to standby the garbage burn barrel at STEVEN AVERY's house until evidence technicians arrived on scene. I did standby with this until approximately 1539 hours, when the barrel was recovered by CALUMET CO. SHERIFF'S DEPT. Deputy KEN MATUSZAK.
Pg 142
11/7/05
On 11/07/05, I (Deputy JEREMY HAWKINS of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT) met with forensic scientist JOHN ERTL, CHARLES CATES and GUANG ZHANG from the WI STATE CRIME LAB located in Madison so they could go through the four barrels that were located in the trailer. During the time that JOHN ERTL, CHARLES CATES and GUANG ZHANG were going through the barrels, I remained at their location to get items when needed. The four barrels and also a rear door of a Suzuki Samurai were released to JOHN ERTL while they were processing the barrels. JOHN ERTL, CHARLES CATES and GUANG ZHANG got through barrel marked #4 and were in the process of going through barrel#2 when they were called back to the scene. Barrel marked #4 was placed back on the trailer.
Pg 143
Upon arrival at the sheriff's department, the trailer was backed into the maintenance garage. The garage was then secured and evidence tape was placed on the doors. It should be noted on the trailer in which the burning barrel was placed, there are three doors. All three doors were secured with a padlock. The keys for the padlocks were placed in an evidence locker at the sheriff's department.
Pg 152
11/8
On 11/08/05, JOHN ERTL, CHARLES CATES and GUANG ZHANG from the WI STATE CRIME LAB arrived at the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. The three barrels that were remaining at the sheriff s department, a barrel Deputy MATUSZAK had brought back from the AVERY property and the Suzuki Samurai door were signed over to JOHN ERTL. While JOHN ERTL, CHARLES CATES and GUANG ZHANG were going through the barrels, I again continued logging in evidence once it arrived from the crime scene at the AVERY property.
...contacted District Attorney (DA) KENNETH KRATZ and asked DA KRATZ about keeping the barrels. I was advised by DA KRATZ that the barrels from the AVERY properly would remain in evidence. DA KRATZ also wanted the barrel marked #4 that was returned to the AVERY property to be brought back. After talking with DA KRATZ, arrangements were made for long-term storage in the back garage of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT.
Pg 153
Once JOHN ERTL, CHARLES CATES and GUANG ZHANG were finished with the four barrels, the barrels and the Suzuki door were signed over to my custody. The barrels were put into the long-term secure area of the back garage. The Suzuki door was brought down and placed behind the locked cage.
Pg 173
On November 8th, at approximately 1630 hours, Sgt. BILL TYSON, Deputy NICHOLAS J. SABLICH and I recovered two burn barrels from the AVERY property. One of those was marked burn barrel #4.
At 1726 hours, I collected the contents of the cell phone barrel, Property Tag #8316
At 1728 hours, I collected the contents of barrel #3, Property Tag #8317 .
Pg 180
Properly Tag No. 8315, the contents of barrel #1
Property Tag No. 8314, the contents of barrel #2
Property Tag No. 8377, the contents of barrel #3
Property Tag No. 8319, the contents of barrel #4
Property Tag No. 8316, the contents from the cell phone barrel
Pg 226 - THIS WOULD BE ONE OF THE THREE BARRELS COLLECTED FROM THE DEER CAMP
11/11
On 11/11/05, DCI Agents MIKE RINDT and ROD PEVYTOE came to the Calumet County SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT to go through five barrels. They went through barrel marked #4 and retrieved a red, cutoff shirt, which was handed to me to be placed into evidence... a burn barrel without any markings, MIKE RINDT and ROD PEVYTOE retrieved an unknown burnt cloth, which I placed into evidence. MIKE RINDT and ROD PEVYTOE also recovered a bone, which was not suspected to be of human origin. I placed the bone into evidence.
After DCI Agent RINDT and PEVYTOE were finished with the barrel with no markings and barrel marked #4, they went back to the crime scene.
Pg 404
On 01/06/06, I (Deputy JEREMY HAWKINS) was asked by Inv. WIEGERT to get the box containing the contents of the cell phone barrel, bearing Property Tag No. 8316
Pg 888
4/10/06 - PROCESSING OF THE DEER CAMP BARRELS BEGINS PLUS THREE OTHER BARRELS, INCLUDING BARREL #4
o Property Tag #643, a 55 gallon barrel with miscellaneous items inside
o Property Tag #642, a 55 gallon barrel with miscellaneous items inside
o Property Tag #644, a 55 gallon barrel with miscellaneous items inside
o Property Tag#7102, a 50 gallon burn barrel, one-quarter full of material
o Property Tag #7921, a metal barrel with burnt material
o Property Tag #7922, a metal barrel with burnt material; the barrel has the number 4 on it
Pg 889
Property Tag #7958, burnt material, deer camp burn barrel
Pg 892
o Property Tag #643, a 55 gallon barrel with miscellaneous items inside
o Property Tag #642, a 55 gallon barrel with miscellaneous items inside
o Property Tag #644, a 55 gallon barrel with miscellaneous items inside
o Property Tag #7102, a 50 gallon burn barrel, one-quarter full of material
o Property Tag #7921, a metal barrel with burnt material
o Property Tag #7922, a metal barrel with burnt material; the barrel has the number 4 on it
Pg 893
o Property Tag #7958, burnt material, deer camp burn barrel
Pg 921
On 06/26/06, I (Deputy JEREMY HAWKINS of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT) received Property Tag #8316, contents of burn barrel, the cell phone and camera barrel, from Inv. DEDERING. Custody of Property Tag #8316 was signed over to me and I then took the item and placed it into secure storage.
PEVYTOE'S TESTIMONY, DIRECT EXAMINATION, DAY 18, PAGE 34
20 Q. Directing your attention, then, to Saturday,
21 November 12th, did you continue to assist in this
22 investigation on that day?
23 A. I did.
24 Q. And on Saturday, November 12th, who assisted you,
25 if anyone?
35
1 A. Special Agent Ronald Evan was with me at a couple
2 points.
3 Q. And did you have the opportunity to examine other
4 potential debris locations on that day?
5 A. Yes, sir, we did.
6 Q. And what areas -- Did you come to examine an area
7 that's been referred to as the Radandt deer camp?
8 A. Yes, sir.
9 Q. And tell us about your examination of that area.
10 A. There were a couple burn barrels there. And we
11 went there with the intent of examining those to
12 see if there were any items that could be of
13 significance. So we went through that and the
14 immediate area around that.
15 Q. And did you find any items of evidentiary
16 significance there?
17 A. As I recall, there was one unburned bone. It
18 looked like a steak bone that was there, but we
19 did take that, just in the possibility that it
20 could be important.
21 Q. Now, was there another location for one of the
22 Radandt Sand and Gravel operation that you
23 examined some debris?
24 A. I don't recall. I believe it was right at the
25 trailer, there was a burn barrel there. And it
36
1 was around that area that we were looking.
2 Q. Okay. In terms of your investigation of these
3 areas and items, you indicate you didn't require
4 -- excuse me -- you did recover some men's
5 clothing. If you found anything you thought of
6 significance, who was your contact with the
7 Calumet Sheriff's Office for receipt of any
8 information you determined of evidentiary
9 significance?
10 A. That would be Deputy Riemer.
11 Q. Now, in your examination of the burn barrels, I
12 think you said your first task in this -- Well,
13 let me ask you, did you have an opportunity to
14 investigate or to examine some burn barrels as
15 part of this?
16 A. Yes, on Saturday, the 12th, I believe it was.
17 When I was done at the fire pit at the Avery
18 property, I came back over to the Sheriff's
19 Department and there were several 50 gallon
20 barrels that they asked us to go through.
21 Q. All right. And tell us about those burn barrels.
22 A. Those barrels were here at the Sheriff's
23 Department here in Chilton and Special Agent Evan
24 and I, along with Deputy Riemer, went to an area
25 and Deputy Riemer would produce a 50 gallon
37
1 barrel and its contents and we would conduct an
2 examination of it. If we found anything that we
3 suspected would be potential evidentiary value,
4 we separated that from the barrel. The barrels
5 were being retained for evidence. But we
6 separated out things that might have been
7 important and set them aside and gave them
8 directly to Deputy Riemer for preservation.
9 Q. Now, of those barrels, how many of them did you
10 actually find anything that had some potential
11 evidentiary significance?
12 A. I think only one barrel. We recovered some bone
13 fragments at the time.
14 Q. Now, those bone fragments which were recovered,
15 how did those bone fragments compare with the
16 fragments that you found that were sifted from
17 the burn pit itself; was there anything distinct
18 in your mind about the condition of those
19 fragments or the size of those fragments compared
20 to those in the burn pit debris?
21 A. Yes, the fragmentation that I was finding from
22 the burn pit was very small. Much of it was --
23 in some cases was the size of half of your little
24 fingernail, if you will. Most of the bones were
25 very fragmented in there. Where the bones that
1 were recovered from that barrel on Saturday, the
2 burn barrel, they were of larger mass.
3 Q. All right. In your examination of materials from
4 the burn barrel, did you find anything such as
5 rivets, or grommets, or any other articles of
6 clothing?
7 A. No.
8 Q. In terms of your examination of the -- of the
9 items from the burn pit itself, did you find
10 evidence of clothing such as rivets, or grommets,
11 or things?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Tell us about that.
14 A. Well, during this process of the burn pit debris,
15 we looked at several things that were small, bone
16 fragments, couple dental fragments, as well as I
17 recall, at a later date in the examination where
18 we were going through it, if you will, in a very
19 fine dedicated manner to look for small items, we
20 recovered a couple brass colored rivets that --
21 like what you might see on a pair of blue jeans
22 or jean type clothing.
23 Q. All right. And when did that occur?
24 A. That was in December.
25 Q. And where?
39
1 A. At the State Crime Laboratory in Madison.
PEVYTOE'S TESTIMONY, DIRECT EXAMINATION, DAY 18, PAGE 40
25 Q. A third possibility would be that bone fragments,
61
1 after the body was burned, not on top of the
2 wires, bone fragments could have been moved into
3 the wires or tossed into the wires, somehow
4 disturbed, so that they were introduced into the
5 wire mesh you have described?
6 A. That's a possibility, yes.
7 Q. And we probably could go on, but the reality is,
8 you can't narrow down to any one of the
9 possibilities we could identify?
10 A. That's correct.
11 Q. Neither could you assign a time frame within
12 which the rusty steel wires that you saw were
13 burned?
14 A. That's correct.
15 Q. You could not assign a time frame within which
16 the bone fragments, or suspected bone fragments
17 you saw, were burned?
18 A. Correct.
...
11 Q. Do you remember whether you went through debris
12 from what we've called here the quarry pile? And
13 if that doesn't make any sense to you, because
14 you weren't here --
15 A. You're right, that doesn't make any sense to me.
16 Q. Okay. We have identified a -- or had identified
17 for us a site that was, oh, I don't know,
18 somewhere southwest of the Avery property
19 altogether, in or near the Radandt property to
20 the south?
21 A. Okay.
22 Q. Is that a site you went to?
23 A. At one time on Thursday, maybe on Friday, I went
24 to multiple sites, not to examine them, but to
25 check on the welfare of my fellow agents who were
65
1 doing those sites. So I didn't participate in
2 those areas, but it's possible I may have stopped
3 and asked if they needed some water, or
4 assistance, or special tools to complete their
5 job.
6 Q. All right. I'm just going to -- I'm going to pop
7 up here the -- an Exhibit 402 and see if --
8 this -- now this is just a schematic diagram.
9 A. Okay.
10 Q. All right. But, again, north is still up in
11 this, to get you oriented.
12 A. I believe you.
13 Q. And you see the little -- there's a little box
14 there that shows the Avery residence and the
15 garage area?
...
21 Q. You had no opportunity to see the burn barrels
22 behind the Janda house before they were
23 disturbed?
24 A. Correct.
25 Q. But you did testify on direct examination that
70
1 there -- you saw suspected bone fragments from a
2 burn barrel behind the Janda house, later?
3 A. I believe my testimony was, is that if you are
4 referring to the examination of Saturday the
5 12th, that we examined some barrels, whether that
6 barrel was from behind the Janda house or not,
7 but one of the barrels we looked at, there was
8 some bone material in it.
9 Q. You looked at a total of four barrels or was it
10 more?
11 A. Four sounds correct.
12 Q. What you are sure of is that only one of them had
13 bone material in it?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. That bone material -- And it's Saturday,
16 November 12, and we're in the Calumet County
17 Sheriff's Office now, correct?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Examining material there?
20 A. Mm-hmm, yes.
21 Q. So the barrels have been transported, somehow, to
22 the Calumet County Sheriff's Office, obviously?
23 A. Correct.
24 Q. There has been a sifting process?
25 A. By myself, or previous, or?
71
1 Q. If you know?
2 A. I don't know what happened to them. All I can
3 tell you is that when I got there the barrels
4 were there, we removed the contents and went
5 through them.
6 Q. Did you actually remove the contents from the
7 barrel?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Okay. Did you sift at that point?
10 A. Much of that debris was too big to sift. Our
11 screens are quarter inch in size so.
12 Q. Okay.
13 A. In -- I don't think any of it could have been
14 sifted, the debris was so massive.
15 Q. Would it have been on tarps on the floor?
16 A. Correct. We would lay a clean tarp down and then
17 go through it. And then I think we would wrap
18 all the material up from the barrel in that clean
19 tarp and then place that into the barrel as a way
20 of making sure that we were recovering everything
21 we looked at.
22 Q. Okay. In spreading the material from the barrel
23 onto the tarps, you did this with caution?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. I mean, you know, to avoid further breakage of
72
1 whatever might be in there?
2 A. Yes, some of the stuff, you know, at least
3 initially, I believe the tarp -- the barrel was
4 upright and we were just hand removing it, so to
5 speak.
6 Q. Okay. Again --
7 A. Yes, yeah.
8 Q. Again, for good cautious handling?
9 A. Correct.
10 Q. Spread it out on the tarps, carefully?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And the things that you identified as possible
13 bone fragment from one of the barrels, you
14 thought, in general, looked larger than, in
15 general, the suspected bone fragments from the
16 burn pit behind the garage had looked?
17 A. Correct.
18 Q. Now, obviously there's some variation in size in
19 both -- in bone fragments from both places?
20 A. Correct.
21 Q. And these aren't uniformly sized pieces by any
22 means?
23 A. No, you're correct on that.
24 Q. But taking it on the whole, it looked to you like
25 most of the fragments from the barrel were a bit
73
1 larger than most of the fragments from the burn
2 area?
3 A. Well, from the barrel, as you are describing it,
4 there were only a few bones recovered. I don't
5 know the exact number. It might have been four,
6 or three, something like that. It was certainly
7 single digit numbers. From the burn pit, there
8 were, you know, tens of hundreds found of small
9 fragmentation, and probably by the end, in the
10 high hundreds of small fragments.
11 Q. Well, and we have had Dr. Eisenberg, so we have
12 got, you know, a better sense of what she
13 eventually identified as human as opposed to
14 nonhuman bone. So I don't need to try to get
15 numbers out of you.
16 A. Okay.
17 Q. Okay. But in general, little bit bigger bone
18 fragments from the barrel than from the burn
19 area?
20 A. Yeah, they were noticeably larger.
21 Q. Burned in both cases?
22 A. I believe, yeah, they looked like they had some
23 thermal exposure.
24 Q. You have had experience, obviously, as an arson
25 investigator, with burnt human bone?
74
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. From sort of light burning on through complete
3 incineration?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. You know that as burn -- as bone, human bone,
6 becomes progressively more burned or charred, it
7 becomes fragile?
8 A. Yes, and it shrinks and you get some spiral
9 fracturing of it as you go.
10 Q. Right. It shrinks because you are losing
11 moisture?
12 A. Right. The fire dehydrates the body process as
13 part of that incineration.
14 Q. Exactly. And so you will get some spiral
15 fracturing of the bone, all on its own?
16 A. Correct. And some shrinkage of the bone.
17 Q. Which again causes breakage?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. But beyond that, once the fire is out, you know
20 that those pieces are fragile once burned or
21 calcined?
22 A. Right.
23 Q. Part of the reason for the care with the
24 contamination paths, and getting down on hands
25 and knees, and the grid system of recovery?
75
1 A. That would be one of the reasons for doing it in
2 that manner, yes.
3 Q. The bones, in general, which you saw in the burn
4 area, looked like they had been subjected to
5 additional breakage, to which the bones in the
6 burn barrel had not?
7 A. There were smaller fragmentations so, yes.
8 Q. The work that you did in the burn area,
9 ultimately -- not ultimately -- but later, after
10 you had gone through for all items of possible
11 evidence you could see, it included actually
12 removing that pitcher's mound, so to speak?
...
21 Q. You didn't see any bone fragments, or anything of
22 interest, sort of intermingled into the
23 components of that seat?
24 A. That's correct.
25 Q. The springs or anything like that?
88
1 A. I did not.
2 Q. So what was of interest was that it was a car
3 seat?
4 A. Correct
...
2 Q. Okay. You are not an expert here to tell us
3 about the composition of tires?
4 A. No, I have information data about it that I use
5 as a resource, but I'm not into tire
6 manufacturing.
7 Q. They can be used as an accelerant in a fire,
8 growing in the same way that I suppose crumpled
9 newspaper can be used?
10 A. Well, it can be, but I think a tire is better
11 because the tire, in its solid format, burns with
12 great intensity for a longer period of time than
13 crumpled newspaper.
14 Q. Sure.
15 A. So it's giving off a lot of energy in a
16 concentrated area over a given period of time,
17 much longer than paper, so I would consider it to
18 be a much better product for that purpose.
19 Q. Right. And so would I, you know, newspaper burns
20 pretty quickly. But the idea is when you say
21 accelerant here, this is something used to get a
22 fire going?
23 A. Or to enhance its combustion process.
24 Q. All right. And you -- you -- you have acquired
25 your knowledge about the BTUs generated by a tire
94
1 through your professional training?
2 A. Correct.
3 Q. You have, just in the same way, I guess, you have
4 acquired knowledge about other possible
5 components of other accelerants in a fire?
6 A. Correct.
7 Q. This isn't knowledge you came to the job, a
8 quarter century ago, with?
9 A. No, I don't think so.
OTHER CASO REPORTS ABOUT THE BARRELS
Page 248
TYPE OF ACTIVITY: Supplemental Report
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 11/12/05
REPORTING OFFICER: Deputy Rick Riemer
On Saturday, 11/12/05, I (Deputy RICK RIEMER, Unit #832, of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT) in the company of myself, assisted Special Agent ROD PEVYTOE and Special Agent RON EBBEN in processing items #642, #643, #644 and #645. It should be noted that in processing item #643, a 55-gallon burn barrel with miscellaneous items inside, they did find various bone fragments.
Also turned over to me was Property Tag #7958, burnt material with the words deer camp burn barrel printed on the container, which was found at the deer camp near the location.
- Property Tag#7960, burnt bone from the deer camp area, was turned over to me at 1017 hrs.
- Property Tag#7961, burnt material from Site E10 was turned over to me at 1019 hours.
- Property Tag#7962, burnt material from Site E9 was turned over to me at 1023 hrs.
- Property Tag #7963, burnt material from deer camp was turned over to me at 1027 hours.
The collection of burnt bone pieces and possible tissue pieces was turned over to me.
Property Tag#7958 and Property Tag #7963, were turned over to the outside secure storage and the remainder of the items were turned over to the evidence lockers.
I then cleared from evidence technician duties.
Deputy Rick Riemer
Calumet Co. Sheriff's Dept.
RR/bds
Page 249
TYPE OF ACTIVITY: Supplemental Report
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 11/12/05
REPORTING OFFICER: Lt. Kelly Sippel
On the morning of 11/12/05, the state arson team returned to the AVERY property to finish collecting several items of evidence. The first item of evidence they were able to collect would have been that of the burned garbage in an area that we refer to as the deer camp located on the RADANDT property west/southwest of STEVEN AVERY's residence. The final two pieces would have been that of some bone and flesh located in the MICHELS MATERIALS QUARRY to the northeast of the AVERY property. At 0900 hours on 11112105, I pulled all officers into the command post. We then began to breakdown the area, and at 1 1:28 a.m. on llll2l05, Special Investigator TOM FASSBENDER turned the property back over to the AVERYS.
Page 275
TYPE OF ACTIVITY: Supplemental Report
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 11/21/05
REPORTING OFFICER: Deputy Jeremy Hawkins
On 11/21/05 at approximately 8:15 a.m., I (Deputy JEREMY HAWKINS of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT), along with Inv. MARK WIEGERT of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, went to the secured room located in the back garage at the CALUMET CO. SHERIFF'S DEPT. to retrieve items to be sent down to the WI STATE CRIME LAB in Madison.
Twenty-six five-gallon buckets of debris were taken out of the secured area located in the rear garage and placed on a trailer to be transported to the WI STATE CRIME LAB. The five-gallon bucks were bearing the following Property Tag Numbers:
8649 through 8659
8661 through 8664
8684 through 8687
8484
8695
8698 through 8699
8480 through 8481
795
Also put on the trailer were two bedsheets that contained burnt material. These two bedsheets were in plastic bags bearing Property Tag Nos. 7947 and 7948.
A rear door off a Suzuki Samurai, bearing Properly Tag No. 641, and three firearms, a Marlin Model 60 .22 caliber semi-automatic with serial number 04229713, bearing Property Tag No. 6909, a Glenfield Model 60 .22 caliber rifle with serial number 27323959, bearing Property Tag No. 647, and a Connecticut Valley Arms Hawkin .50 caliber black powder rifle with serial number 86373055, bearing Property Tag No. 648, were placed on the trailer to be transported to the WI STATE CRIME LAB in Madison.
The 32 items that were placed in the trailer to be sent down to the WI STATE CRIME LAB in Madison were released to and signed off by Deputy JENNIFER J. BASS of the CALUMET COLINTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT.
Deputy Jeremy Hawkins
Calumet Co. Sheriff's Dept.
JH/bde
Page 357
On 12/20/05, the DCI personnel processed Property Tag #7947, which was burnt material found south of the fire pit recovered on 11/11/05.
Property Tag #7947 generated the following items:
Property Tag #8135, an AA battery
Property Tag #8136, a metal piece
Property Tag #8137, a suspected hair fiber
Property Tag #8138, a zipper pull
Property Tag#8141, a spent .22 caliber shell
Property Tag #8143, a clothes snap
Property Tag#8147, an unknown material with perforations
Property Tag #8148, a suspected bone fragment
Property Tag#8149, a clothes snap
Property Tag #8150, teeth
PropertyTag#8151, a clothing fiber
Property Tag #8161, an AA battery
Property Tag#8162, a clothing fiber
Property Tag #8163, paper pieces
Page 402
TYPE OF ACTIVITY: Supplemental Report
DATE OF ACTIVITY:
REPORTING OFFICER: Deputy Jeremy Hawkins
On 12/19/05, I (Deputy JEREMY HAWKINS of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT) was requested by Inv. WIEGERT to locate the following items for transport to the WI STATE CRIME LAB in Madison by Deputy RICK RIEMER of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. With the help of Deputy RIEMER, the following items were loaded onto an enclosed trailer:
- Three 55-gallon barrels with miscellaneous items inside, bearing Property Tag Nos. 642, 643 and 644
- A 50-gallon burning barrel that was one-half full of material, bearing Property Tag No. 7102, and two other metal barrels with burnt material, bearing Property Tag Nos. 7921 and 7922
- A brown tarp with burnt material, bearing Property Tag No. 7923, and four 5-gallon buckets of burnt material, bearing Property Tag Nos. 7947, 7948, 7958 and 7963
- Some commingled metal, battery jumper and dog leash, bearing Property Tag No. 7946, and also some commingled wire and metal, bearing Property Tag No. 7950.
MARK WIEGERT signed over custody of the following items that he received from the WI STATE CRIME LAB, which are as follows:
- A Toyota key, bearing Property Tag No. 7620
- A single key, bearing Property Tag No. 8114
- A set of two keys on a2003 key ring, bearing Property Tag No. 8012
- A box with the contents of the cell phone barrel, Property Tag No. 8316
On 12/20/05, Deputy RIEMER retumed from the WI STATE CRIME LAB where he retumed 39 items from the WI STATE CRIME LAB. Deputy RIEMER returned 5-gallon buckets of the debris pile, bearing Property Tag Nos. 8656, 8699, 8484, 8659, 8687, 8685, 8684, 8662, 8698, 8658, 8651, 8686, 8652, 8653, 8695, 8650, 8654, 8644, 8657, 9655, 9649, 9663 and 9661.
The 23 5-gallon buckets of debris from the debris pile were all signed over to me and placed into secure storage.
Burn pile ash, bearing Property Tag No. 8481 and 8480, burnt material, bearing Property Tag Nos. 7954, 7963, 7958, 7948 and 7947, were also signed over to me and placed into secure storage.
The three 55-gallon barrels with miscellaneous items, bearing Property Tag Nos. 642, 643 and 644, the 50-gallon burning barrel that was one-half full of material, bearing Property Tag No. 7102, and also the two metal barrels with burnt material, bearing Property Tag Nos. 7921 and 7922, were unloaded, signed over to me and placed into secure storage.
The brown tarp with burnt material, bearing Property Tag No. 7923, and also the commingled metal, battery jumper and dog leash, bearing Property Tag No. 7946, and the commingled wire and metal, bearing Property Tag No. 7950, were unloaded, signed over to me and placed into secure storage.
Deputy RIEMER also brought back a box, bearing Property Tag No. 8313. The box with Property Tag No. 8313 was empty when Deputy RIEMER released it to me. The contents of the box remained at the WI STATE CRIME LAB.
Deputy Jeremy Hawkins
Calumet Co. Sheriff s Dept.
JH/bdg
Page 637
FASSBENDER: Oh. So he told you that he used the shovel to break up bones?
BRENDAN: Yeah. (nods "yes")
FASSBENDER: And then buried some of the bones? (Brendan nods "yes") Did he take some of her bones some, anvwhere else?
BRENDAN: On the other side of the, like that, there was like in the back of the yard, there was like this steep hill there, like in the pit, there was some there that he threw there.
FASSBENDER: OK, we're gonna, we're in a little bit, we're gonna have you draw on some sketches and stuff and we're a, we're gonna wanna these places. How do you know that there were some bones there?
BRENDAN: He told me that he threw some there.
FASSBENDER: Did he tell you how he did that?
BRENDAN: He had 'em in a bucket.
FASSBENDER: And what I'm understanding is then in the back of both your yards or his yards, down toward into the pit, over that area?
BRENDAN: In like Radandt's pit.
FASSBENDER: Oh, Radandt's pit, (Brendan nods "yes") not into your ah, (Brendan shakes head "no") the salvage yard area? (Brendan shakes head "no") You think you'll be able to show us that?
BRENDAN: (nods "Yes") Yeah.
FASSBENDER: Anything else that you did with the bones (Brendan shakes head "no") that he told you or that you helped him, di-did you help him do any of this?
BRENDAN: (shakes head "no") No.
FASSBENDER: Did he have anyrnore fires that week?
BRENDAN: (shakes head "no") Not that I know of.
FASSBENDER: We talked about Monday night about, um, bad smells and stuff, do you remember any smells coming from that fire, after she was put on there?
BRENDAN: Just that it smelled bad'
FASSBENDER: You remember that? (Brendan nods "yes")
Page 653
WIEGERT: OK. You said that he had taken some bones (Brendan nods "yes") and put them in a five gallon pail then he dumped 'em.
BRENDAN: Yeah.
WIEGERT: Where would that be? Which way?
BRENDAN: Probably like, his house was like be a little bit right here .
WIEGERT: mm huh.
BRENDAN: It would be like over here somewhere.
WIEGERT: OK. Did you actually see him do that?
BRENDAN: (shakes head "no") uh uh.
WIEGERT: How do you know he did that?
BRENDAN: He told me that he put 'em a bucket and he p-threw 'em over there.
WIEGERT: OK. OK, anything else you wanna add in there? (Brendan shakes head "no") OK, why don't you sign that. (pause)
BRENDAN: Well when we got the seat, we put it right, we set it down right like here.
WIEGERT: Did you sit there and watch the fire burn or anything like that?
BRENDAN: (shakes head "no") uh uh
WIEGERT: You iust set it there?
BRENDAN: 53?
WIEGERT: That's pretty good. OK.
FASSBENDER: Brendan, gots a few more questions to cover here, (Brendan nods "yes") then the worst is over, as far as um the questions. Can you describe Steven's house for me? The color and stuff like that.
BRENDAN: It's like a red and the top is like silver and the bottom is like cement.
Page 729
TYPE OF ACTIVITY: Evidence Processing Duties
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 04/10/06 and 04/11/06
REPORTING OFFICER: Deputy Rick Riemer
On 04/10/06 at 0932 hours, the evidence processing began on the assorted 5-gallon pails. The individuals at the scene were DCI Special Agent RON PEVYTOE, DCI Special Agent KEVIN HEIMERL, Dr. LESLIE EISENBERG, a forensic pathologist, DCI Special Agent TOM FASSBENDER, Inv. GARY STEIER of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMETN, Inv. JOHN DEDERING of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF,S DEPARTMENT, HALEY (ph) KREBS, an intern working with DCI, Inv. MARK WIEGERT of the CALUMET COTINTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, Deputy JEREMY HAWKINS of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, and I (Deputy RICK RIEMER of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT).
We performed the evidence processing duties in the garage area located to the north of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. The items were sifted on top of scaffolding that was covered with tarps. All of the scaffolding was draped with tarps. Everybody entering the building was required to wear a Tyvec suit and gloves.
At 0932 hours, Special Agent PEVYTOE and Intem KREBS began processing Item #8484. Special Agent HEIMERL and Inv. DEDERING processed Item #8658. Dr. EISENBERG and Inv. STEIER processed item #8652. Items identified as nonhuman, such as metal objects, were placed in a ziplock bag and back into the original container. The items were sifted through with putty knives, bamboo skewers, one- eighth inch screens and also by hand.
At 1105 hours, Inv. DEDERING had checked out and rechecked in at 1115 hours.
At 1121 hours, Special Agent PEVYTOE and Intern KREBS began processing ltem#8644.
At 1150 hours, Special Agent HEIMERL and Inv. DEDERING began processing Item #8653.
At 1225 hours, all personnel were out of the area except for me (Deputy RIEMER) for a lunch break. They returned at 1330 hours.
At 1350 hours, Special Agent FASSBENDER checked in. Also, at 1350 hours, Special Agent PEVYTOE and Intern KREBS processed Item #8699.
At 1460 hours, Inv. STEIER checked in.
[...]
We began again on 04/11/06 at 0829 hours. The personnel available on 04/11/06 were Deputy JEREMY HAWKINS of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, Special Agent KEVIN HEIMERL, Det. DAVE REMIKER of the MANITOWOC COUNTY CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, Sgt. BILL TYSON, Inv. JOHN DEDERING and me (Deputy RIEMER) of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT.
[...]
At 1108 hours, Inv. DEDERING and Det. REMIKER began processing Item #7963.
At 1050 hours, Special Agent FASSBENDER checked out and checked in at 1117 hours along with Inv. DEDERING, Det. REMIKER and Inv. WIEGERT.
At 1157 hours, Item #7954 began to be processed by Det. REMIKER.
At 1157 hours, Item #7958 was processed by Deputy HAWKINS and me.
[...]
Item #21, Property Tag #7429, bone fragments from sifting of Item #7963, collected at 1140 hours on 04/11/06.
[...]
All items were properly labeled and turned over to the evidence custodian. It should be noted several digital images were taken of the processing of these items.
Page 892
TYPE OF ACTIVITY: Processing of Evidence; Return Custody of Evidence
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 04/11/06
REPORTING OFFICER: Deputy Jeremy Hawkins
On 041/11/06, I (Deputy JEREMY HAWKINS of the CALUMET CoUNTy SHERIFF's DEPARTMENT) assisted in sifting through five gallon pails to locate possible bone material.
Deputy RIEMER and myself sifted through the five gallon pail with Property Tag #8698. Any possible bone fragments were taken out of the debris pile and placed into a cardboard pill box. After the five gallon pail with Property Tag #8698 was completed, the pill box was then sealed by Deputy RIEMER.
At approximately 1025 hours, Deputy RIEMER and I processed Property Tag #8686. Both Deputy RIEMER and I sifted through all debris matter in the five gallon pail. Possible bone fragments were taken out of the debris and placed into a cardboard pill box. After the five gallon pail with Property Tag #8686 was completed, the pill box was sealed by Deputy RIEMER.
At 1157 hours, Deputy RIEMER and I processed Property Tag #7958, a five gallon pail of debris. When the five gallon pail was finished being sifted through, the contents were placed back into the five gallon pail and then resealed.
At approximately 1230 hours, Deputy RIEMER and I processed Property Tag #8650, debris pile matter in a five gallon pail. All possible bone fragments were taken out of the debris pile and placed into a cardboard pill box. When the five gallon pail was done being sifted through, the possible bones were packaged in the cardboard pill box by Deputy RIEMER. The sifted material was placed back into the five gallon pail where it was then secured.
Once all the pails were sifted through, Deputy RIEMER released the following items back to me:
Property Tag #643, a 55 gallon barrel with miscellaneous items inside
Property Tag #642, a 55 gallon barrel with miscellaneous items inside
Property Tag #644, a 55 gallon barrel with miscellaneous items inside
Property Tag #1102, a 50 gallon burn barrel, one-quarter full of material
Property Tag #7921, a metal barrel with burnt material
Property Tag #7922, a metal barrel with burnt material; the barrel has the number 4 on it
Property Tag #7923, a brown tarp with burnt material inside
Property Tag #8480, burn pile ash
Property Tag #8481, burn pile ash
Property Tag #7946, commingled metal, battery jumper, dog leash
Property Tag #7947, burnt material
Property Tag #7948, burnt material
Property Tag #7949, frame from a seat
Property Tag #7950, commingled wire and metal
Property Tag #7954, burnt material
Property Tag #8695, debris
Property Tag #8698, debris pile
Property Tag #8699, debris pile
Property Tag #8484, debris pile
Property Tag #8644, debris pile
Property Tag #8645, tire and rim
Property Tag #8649, debris pile
Property Tag #8650, debris pile
Property Tag #8651, debris pile
Property Tag #8652, debris pile
Property Tag #8653, debris pile
Property Tag #8654, debris pile
Property Tag #8655, debris pile
Property Tag #8656, debris pile
Property Tag #8657, debris pile
Property Tag #8658, debris pile
Property Tag #8659, debris pile
Property Tag #8661, debris pile
Property Tag #8662, debris pile
Property Tag #8663, debris pile
Property Tag #8684, debris pile
Property Tag #8686, debris pile
Property Tag #8685, debris pile
Property Tag #8687, debris pile
Property Tag #7958, burnt material, deer camp burn barrel
Property Tag #7963, burnt material
Property Tag #8606, paint thinner containers
Property Tag #8611, gas containers
Property Tag #8389, True Test paint thinner metal container, 32 oz. can
Deputy RIEMER also turned custody of the following items over to me:
Property Tag #7409, two glass slides originating from Item #8658
Property Tag #7410, a bobby pin from Item #8658
Property Tag #7411, possible bone fragments from Item #8658
Property Tag #7412, possible bone fragments located in the five gallon pail, Item #8484
Property Tag #7413, nonhuman bone fragments from Item #g653
Property Tag #7414, bone fragments from Item #8653
Property Tag #7415, suspected nonhuman bones from Item #9652
Property Tag #7416, suspected human bone fragments from rtem#9652
Property Tag #7417, red coagulated substance that is charred from Item #8663
Property Tag #7478, suspected nonhuman bone fragments from Property Tag#8687
Property Tag #7419, suspected human bone fragments from Property Tag#8687
Property Tag #7420, suspected charred items resembling bone from Item #8654
Property Tag #7421, unidentified suspected bone from Item #8661
Property Tag #7422, suspected nonhuman bone fragments from Item#8662
Property Tag #7423, nonhuman bone fragments from Item #8657
Property Tag #7424, bone fragments from Item #8657
Property Tag #7425, fibers from sifting of Item #8480
Property Tag #7426, bone fragments from Item #8698
Property Tag #7427, bone fragments from Item #8480
Property Tag #7428, bone fragments from Item #8681
Property Tag #7429, bone fragments from Item #7963
Property Tag #7430, bone fragments from Item #8686
Property Tag #7437, bone fragments from Item #8659
Property Tag #7432, bone fragments from Item #8656
Property Tag #7433, bone fragments from Item #8655
Property Tag #7434, bone fragments from Item #8650
Property Tag #7435, bone fragments from Item #8655
The items were all signed over to me by Deputy RIEMER.
Deputy Jeremy Hawkins
Calumet Co. Sheriffs Dept.
JH/bds
THREADS ABOUT THE BURN BARRELS AND BONES ON REDDIT
"Suspicious incident." CASO report, page 133
submitted by res_ispa_loquitur
April 19, 2016
While searching BJ's residence, Tyson receives a call at 1058 about a suspicious incident. Tyson (836), Colborn (432), and Lenk (204?) are told they need to leave BJ's residence and respond to Kuss Rd. After clearing the "incident," they return to BJ's at 1450...almost 4 hours later. After clearing BJ's residence at 1508, they are told to go BACK to the suspicious scene on Kuss Road to meet with the crime lab personnel (even though they already cleared the suspicious incident) and they assisted the crime lab with digging up dirt in what they thought was a "possible grave or burial site." Was the suspicious incident the fact that they found disturbed soil and if they cleared the incident, why was the crime lab called to the site and why did they start digging? Or was the suspicious incident the fact that someone create a distraction, forcing Tyson, Colborn, and Lenk to leave the area near BJ's and SA's residences?
I did a quick comparison to the logs, and this happens to be the timeframe where ins and outs are the most screwy. And ironically, the same timeframe when Ryan and Scott are unaccounted for. This also happens to be the timeframe when Tyson, Colborn, and Lenk should be checking in and out at the same time, since Tyson claims they're serving warrants together and somehow arrive together. But they don't log in or out together. After 1246 hours, Tyson operates on a different schedule than Colborn and Lenk, and he appears to start running around with Riemer (somewhat illegible on log). And I'm having a hard time finding a check out for Tyson between 1246 and 1715 (5:15 on log). I see two check ins instead. Any thoughts?
This post by /u/treefortress addresses some of the timeline.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/4g5i5q/plot_and_plant_a_timeline_of_117/
The gathering of the Avery property burn barrels
submitted by MrDoradus
April 17, 2016
Edit: this has been covered already on this subreddit and here is a google docs which contains even more information if anyone prefers less words and more info.
Almost all of the information in this post comes from the CASO report. I was curious about any information about the burn barrels and checked out how they handled collecting them. I searched for the keyword barrel in the report and didn't manually check all of the report so some entries could be missing. This is the story about how all the barrels ended up in Calumet county sheriff's dep.:
(p. 101, 11/06/05), by Dan Kucharski
At 0947 hours, I collected four burning barrels that were outside of the garage to the southeast of it approximately 50 yards. These barrels were loaded onto a covered trailer and possession was turned over to MAR1E OOSTERHOUSE, Badge #604, for transport to the CALIJMET CO' SHERIFF,S Dept. The barrels were loaded and custody was transferred at 10.11 hours.
11/06/05, supplemental report by Jeremy Hawkins
When the trailer arrived, I had the Manitowoc County deputy park the trailer behind the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. The keys to the trailer's lock were signed for and released to me. The trailer had two doors secured by evidence tape by the locking portion of the handle and one door secured by a lock.So on 6th the first 4 barrels are collected, only the four Janda barrels which Ertl mentions in his testimony during the Avery trial:
Well, from there we were escorted up to a place where there were four burn barrels behind a residence.So the arguably most important burn barrel, Steven’s, is left behind on the property on the 6th and only the burn barrels of the Janda residence were collected that day.
ATTORNEY FALLON: I'm going to ask the record reflect that the witness is pointing to the area behind the residence previously identified as the Janda residence.
(p. 135) 11/07/05, by Wendy Baldwin:
At approximately 13.15 hours, I was requested to standby the garbage burn barrel at STEVEN AVERY's house until evidence technicians arrived on scene. I did standby with this until approximately 15.39 hours, when the barrel was recovered by CALUMET CO. SHERIFF'S DEPT. Deputy KEN MATUSZAK.Only the next day this completely visible burn barrels becomes of such great importance it gets it's own personal guard, who stands vigilant guard for 2 hours and 24 minutes. Hope she didn't go off looking for foot impressions during this period.
(p. 142) 11/07/05
On 11/07/05, I (Deputy JEREMY HAWKINS of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT) met with forensic scientist JOHN ERTL, CHARLES CATES and GUANG ZHANG from the WI STATE CRIME LAB located in Madison so they could go through the four barrels that were located in the trailer. During the time that JOHN ERTL, CHARLES CATES and GUANG ZHANG were going through the barrels, I remained at their location to get items when needed. The four barrels and also a rear door of a Suzuki Samurai were released to JOHN ERTL while they were processing the barrels. JOHN ERTL, CHARLES CATES and GUANG ZHANG got through barrel marked #4 and were in the process of going through barrel #2 when they were called back to the scene. Barrel marked #4 was placed back on the trailer.Apparently the #4 burn barrel is was put into trailer here because Ertl & company were done with it and was sent back to Avery property after this, but there is no mention of said transport. This possibly could be the “losing of barrels” that the defense mentioned during the trial.
(p. 143)
On Monday, 11/07/05, at approximately 1545 hours, I (Deputy KENNETH R. MATUSZAK of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT) took into evidence a 50-gallon burning barrel. It was located on the northeast comer of STEVEN AVERY's property. The burning barrel was filled approximately one-quarter way with burned debris. The burning barrel was placed in an enclosed trailer. I then transported the burning barrel to the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT.It’s worth noting this is possibly could be the barrel that will later be labelled the “cell phone barrel”, the barrel which contained parts of clearly visible electronics once a rim was removed from the top of the burn pile inside it.
(p.144) 11/07/05, by Dan Kucharski
After entering the evidence, I stood by at the north garage while WI STATE CRIME LAB personnel processed several burn barrels for evidence. I was present from 19.45 hours until they finished the processing for the night at 21.13 hours.Several, could mean only the three remaining Janda barrels, or that they added the “cell phone” barrel (with completely visible electronic remains according to the trial photos) to the collection of barrels they were searching on the 7th already. Again, no rim which was pictured in the photo is mentioned here. It’s possible it wasn't put back and the electronics were even more visible.
(p. 152) 11/08/05, by Jeremy Hawkins
On 11/08/05, JOHN ERTL, CHARLES CATES and GUANG ZHANG from the WI STATE CRIME LAB arrived at the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. The three barrels that were remaining at the sheriff s department, a barrel Deputy MATUSZAK had brought back from the AVERY property and the Suzuki Samurai door were signed over to JOHN ERTL. While JOHN ERTL, CHARLES CATES and GUANG ZHANG were going through the barrels, I again continued logging in evidence once it arrived from the crime scene at the AVERY property. I contacted District Attorney (DA) KENNETH KRATZ and asked DA KRATZ about keeping the barrels. I was advised by DA KRATZ that the barrels from the AVERY properly would remain in evidence. DA KRATZ also wanted the barrel marked #4 that was returned to the AVERY property to be brought back. After talking with DA KRATZ, arrangements were made for long-term storage in the back garage of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT.
Once JOHN ERTL, CHARLES CATES and GUANG ZHANG were finished with the four barrels, the barrels and the Suzuki door were signed over to my custody. The barrels were put into the long-term secure area of the back garage. The Suzuki door was brought down and placed behind the locked cage.At this point the cell phone and camera parts were probably already recovered from SA’s burn barrel. Four barrels were in evidence at this point.
(p. 172) 11/08/05, by Rick Riemer
At approximately 1630 hours, Sgt. BILL TYSON, Deputy NICHOLAS J. SABLICH and I recovered two burn barrels from the AVERY property. One of those was marked burn barrel #4.They recovered two (?) more burn barrels from “Avery” property making the total of the burn barrels six, not reported five. One of these two was barrel #4, which was returned to the Avery property because Ertl & company finished with it. The other was possibly the Radandt deer camp burn barrel other users have been theorizing about. In any case the sixth, "new barrel", probably wasn't from the Avery property.
All in all, according to the report, there were six burn barrels collected, all poorly labelled and some of them passed around excessively. And three of the six burn barrels possibly wasn't even from the Avery property, as stated in the reports.
What bothers me personally is also that SA's barrel wasn't taken into evidence the first they they started paying attention to the burn barrels. This gives another day window to the theorised planting of electronics theory.
Timeline: follow the barrels!
submitted by gg-ls
April 2016
Attempting to put together a timeline for the barrels…it is getting pretty insane though and I am too tired to do more tonight. Hopefully this helps figure things out!
Starting off - out of nowhere they mention they collected "Contents of the cell phone barrel, Property Tag #8316" (Pg. 174). Every other barrel is given a number identifier and there is literally no other mention of it previously that I could find. This is the same day they went back to get barrel #4 at 4:30 from the "AVERY property" (pg. 173) and mentioned they recovered 2 burn barrels from the property. This is noted at the bottom as like a side note after a long list of GPS coordinates for every other item collected with property tags given.
Okay on to the timeline! Enjoy.
Timeline 11/6: Mentions Barrel #1, #2, #3, #4 taken into evidence. (4 BARRELS)
9:47AM, 4 burn barrels collected which are reported as being “outside of the garage to the southeast of it approximately 50 yards”. (pg. 101)
10:11AM, the 4 burn barrels are taken to CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF. (pg.101)
11:11AM, report states, "Once I arrived at the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF, I was informed by dispatch that a trailer with four barrels would be arriving from MANITOWOC COUNTY. (pg.116)
11:30AM, MANITOWOC CO. SHERIFF are en route to the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPT. (pg.117) *mentions trailer has passenger side door lock and 2 keys for it.
11:38AM, trailer is stopped because it was “pulling very rough”. (pg.117)
12:24PM, Trailer arrives at CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF. (pg. 117)
Timeline 11/7: Mentions “garbage burn barrel”/“50-gallon burn barrel” aka “MATUSZAK barrel” taken into evidence. Barrel #4 taken back to AVERY’S. Barrel #1, #2, #3, remain at CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF. (5 BARRELS)
1:15PM, “garbage burn barrel” at STEVEN AVERY'S house is guarded. (pg.135)
3:39PM, “garbage burn barrel” is taken into evidence by CALUMET CO. SHERIFF'S DEPT. Deputy KEN MATUSZAK. (pg.135)
3:45PM, 50-gallon burning barrel located on the northeast corner of STEVEN AVERY'S property is taken into evidence to CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S by MATUSZAK. (pg.143) *mentions trailer has 3 padlocked doors
NO TIME GIVEN, State Forensics begin processing 4 barrels at CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF. They complete barrel #4 and are midway through #2 when they are called away. Barrel #4 is put back onto trailer and brought back to Avery's. (pg.142)
7:45PM-9:13PM, WI STATE CRIME LAB personnel processes “several burn barrels” for evidence at CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF. (pg.144)
Timeline 11/8: Barrel #1, #2, #3, and “MATUSZAK barrel” processed by WI STATE CRIME LAB. Barrel #4 and “Unknown barrel” taken into evidence. Barrel #2, #3, #4, and “cell phone barrel” transported to CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF from WI STATE CRIME LAB. CONCLUSION: “cell phone barrel” has to be barrel #1, or “MATUSZAK barrel”. (6 BARRELS)
NO TIME GIVEN, WI STATE CRIME LAB process “3 barrels that remained at CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF, and a barrel Deputy MATUSZAK brought back from the AVERY property”. Report States Kratz requests barrel #4 be put back into evidence from AVERY’S. (pg.152)
NO TIME GIVEN, 4 barrels (#1, #2, #3, and “MATUSZAK barrel”) placed into long-term storage at CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF. (pg.153)
4:30PM, barrel #4 and “Unknown Barrel” are collected by CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF. (pg.173)
5:14PM-5:34PM, the contents of Barrel #2 (8314), #3 (8317), #4 (8319), and "cell phone barrel” (8316) are collected from the WI STATE CRIME LAB and transported to CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF. (pg.174)
Timeline 11/9: Barrel #1, #2, #3, #4, and “cell phone” to be sent to WI STATE CRIME LAB. Cell phone barrel can’t be barrel #1. HAS TO BE MATUSZAK BARREL. (5 BARRELS)
NO TIME GIVEN, the contents of Barrel #1 (8315), Barrel #2 (8314), #3 (8317), #4 (8319), and “cell phone barrel” (8316) are made ready for transport from CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF to WI STATE CRIME LAB. (pg.180)
Timeline 11/11: DCI agents process Barrel #4 and “Barrel without any markings”. Only FIVE barrels mentioned as being at CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF. Where is #6? (5 BARRELS)
NO TIME GIVEN, DCI Agents go through FIVE barrels at CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. Barrel #4: retrieved red cut-off shirt. Placed into evidence. “Barrel without any markings”: retrieved unknown burnt cloth and a bone not suspected to be human origin. After DCI Agents were finished with the “barrel without any markings” and barrel marked #4, they went back to the crime scene. (pg.226)
Timeline 11/12: “55-gallon burn barrel” (643) = BURN BARREL #2. Barrel #1 (642?), Barrel # 3 (644?), Barrel # 4 (645?). Dear camp burn barrel contents (7958) = which barrel? (6 BARRELS?)
NO TIME GIVEN, DCI AGENTS process (642), (643), (644) and (645). 55-gallon burn barrel (643) found with miscellaneous items inside, including various bone fragments. Dear camp burn barrel contents (7958) turned over to CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF.
10:17AM, Burnt bone from the deer camp area (7960) turned over to CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF.
10:19AM, Burnt material from Site E10 (7961) turned over to CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF.
10:23AM, Burnt material from Site E9 (7962) turned over to CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF.
10:27AM. Burnt material from deer camp (7963) turned over to CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF.
10:38AM, First piece of bone located in the burn pile from Item #643, burn barrel #2. The collection of burnt bone pieces and possible tissue pieces was turned over to Rick Riemer, CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF.
NO TIME GIVEN, Dear camp barrel contents (7958) and Burnt material from dear camp (7963) are turned over to the outside secure storage and the remainder of the items turned over to the evidence lockers. (pg.248, all of the above)
Timeline 12/10: Camera remnants found in WHICH barrel??
5:38PM, WIEGERT receives phone call from FASSBENDER, stating WI STATE CRIME LAB had analyzed, the parts of, what was believed to be, a cell phone and a camera, which were taken from a burn barrel from the AVERY'S AUTO SALVAGE yard. TOM stated that KEN OLSON (ph) from the WI STATE CRIME LAB had examined pieces of the camera and determined them to belong to a Canon PowerShot 4310 digital camera (7836). He stated that there were also three flashcards, which were recovered. Along with the Canon camera, KEN OLSON from the crime lab determined the phone to be a Motorola flip-phone. (pg.280)
Timeline 1/6: Cell phone/Camera remnants (8316) = contents of “cell phone barrel”
1:30PM, WIEGERT meets with FBI Agent GERALD E. MULLEN to turn over remnants of the cell phone and camera, which had been recovered from the burn barrel on the STEVEN AVERY property. Weigert states, “I had been provided with a key to a locked storage unit in the CALUMET COLINTY EVIDENCE ROOM by Sheriff PAGEL on 01/05/06 and Sheriff PAGEL had received that key on the same date earlier that morning from Evidence Custodian JEREMY HAWKINS. I took custody of that key and it remained in my possession until the date of 01/06/06 when I went down and retrieved the box containing the cell phone and camera remnants. I did take into possession Property Tag No. 8316, which was the box containing those items. That box was turned over to FBI Agent MULLEN for transfer to the FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION LAB for analysis”. (pg.333)
Timeline 12/19: Mentioned three 55-gallon barrels = (642), Barrel #2 (643), (644); one 50 gallon barrel = “MATUSZAK barrel” (7102); and 2 other barrels = (7921), (7922). (6 BARRELS)
NO TIME GIVEN, JEREMY HAWKINS of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT was requested by Inv. WIEGERT to locate the following items for transport to the WI STATE CRIME LAB in Madison by Deputy RICK RIEMER of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. With the help of Deputy RIEMER, the following items were loaded onto an enclosed trailer: 3 55-gallon barrels with miscellaneous items inside, bearing Property Tag Nos. 642, (burn barrel #2) 643 and 644, a 50-gallon burning barrel that was one-half full of material, bearing Property Tag No. 7102, and two other metal barrels with burnt material, bearing Property Tag Nos. 7921 and 7922. A brown tarp with burnt material, bearing Property Tag No. 7923, and four 5-gallon buckets of burnt material, bearing Property Tag Nos. 7947, 7948, 7958 and 7963. Some commingled metal, battery jumper and dog leash, bearing Property Tag No. 7946, and also some commingled wire and metal, bearing Property Tag No. 7950 The thirteen items that were loaded onto the enclosed trailer were signed over to Deputy RIEMER. Inv. MARK WIEGERT (pg.402)
Things of Interest:
1) CONTENTS of Barrels 1, 2, 3, 4, and cell phone barrel are made ready and transported from CALUMET to WI STATE LAB on 11/9. Yet on 11/11 Barrel 4 (not contents) is processed by DCI and a red cut-off shirt is retrieved. How the hell was that not seen/removed and placed into the CONTENTS of barrel 4 evidence? On 11/12, barrel 1, 2, 3, 4 (not contents) are processed yet AGAIN and this time found with miscellaneous items inside, including various bone fragments.
2) No deer camp barrel is ever placed into evidence. ONLY the contents are. The 55 gallon one mentioned right before it is Barrel #2. First bone is identified on the 12th, from barrel #2 that had been in evidence since the 6th. It had been processed several times yet bone isn't found until it is searched yet again the SAME day the deer camp evidence is brought in. Deer camp burn barrel is never placed into evidence. ONLY the contents are. We have no idea when or even who processed the deer camp because there isn't even a report documenting it??
3) Cell phone barrel has to be MATUSZAK barrel (7102) and contents (8316). AKA Barrel 5. Barrel 6 being the "unknown barrel" collected from Avery's with barrel 4 (when taken back to evidence). (7921) & (7922) barrels still a mystery.
4) DATE OF ACTIVITY: 11/12 REPORTING OFFICER: Lt. Kelly Sippel "State arson team returned to the AVERY property to finish collecting several items of evidence. The first item of evidence they were able to collect would have been that of the burned garbage in an area that we refer to as the deer camp located on the RADANDT property west/southwest of STEVEN AVERY's residence." (pg.249)
5) 4/10, Property Tag #7922, a metal barrel with burnt material; the barrel has the number 4 on it"!!! (pg. 888)
The Bones at the Quarry
submitted by snarf5000
December 29, 2015
In the Dassey trial transcripts, forensic anthropologist Leslie Eisenberg testifies about the bone evidence. There is no mention of the quarry burn location in that trial.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/3y6jzw/brendan_dassey_trial_transcripts/
(Day 4 page 49)
However the subject does come up in the Avery trial. In episode 6 at about 35min Dr. Eisenberg says that she "suspected" that a couple of bone fragments from the quarry site "appeared to be" from a human pelvis.
Here's what she says in the documentary:
[Eisenberg] There were no entire bones that were found, but at least a fragment or more of almost every bone below the neck was recovered in that burn pit.
[Q] Did you find evidence of any human bone identified as being collected from a site other than the burn pit behind the defendant's garage?
[Eisenberg] Human bone also was collected from what was designated "burn barrel number two."
[Q] Now, you did offer an opinion that you believe the location for the primary burning episode was the burn pit behind the defendant's garage, is that correct?
[Eisenberg] That is correct.
[Q] There was a third site, was there not?
[Eisenberg] Yes.
And this would be the quarry pile.
[Eisenberg] Yes, sir.
You found in the material from the quarry pile two fragments that appeared to you to be pelvic bone.
[Eisenberg] That's correct.
You suspected them of being human pelvic bone.
[Eisenberg] That's correct.
[Q] The charring and calcined condition that you saw was essentially consistent with the charring and the calcined condition in the Janda burn barrel and behind Steven Avery's garage.
[Eisenberg] That is correct, sir.
[Q] Nowhere did you find evidence that you were looking at bone fragments from more than one body.
[Eisenberg] That is correct, sir.
[Q] So what you conclude is that by human agency, bone fragments here were moved.
[Q] Some bone fragments identified as human had been moved.
[Eisenberg] That's correct.
[Q] On this page:
http://www.convolutedbrian.com/testimony-notes-1-march-2007.html
we hear that her testimony also included this:
"She said that the bones recovered in the gravel pit were mostly animal bones. There were some that were inconclusive."
Here is an image of the location taken from the documentary:
https://i.imgur.com/yyUuhNU.jpg
Estimating with Google Earth, the quarry burn location is about 2,900 ft or 885 meters (as the crow flies) from the firepit behind Avery's garage. It's about 2400ft or 730 meters from where they found the RAV4.
I might hazard a guess that there was a burn site already in the quarry for animal bones, possibly for deer carcasses/remains. Two small bone fragments may or may not have been positively identified as from a human pelvis. They certainly weren't positively identified as Teresa Halbach's. Dr. Eisenberg seems completely qualified, but is it possible that neither of those bone fragments were actually human bones?
Perhaps this area was previously known to the killer(s) as a burn site. Was anyone known to have burnt bones there before? How big is the pile of bones in the quarry? Are there any exhibits from the Avery trial, possibly pictures of the site?
Would the killers have burnt animal bones along with the human remains in an attempt to camoflauge them? If they later moved the human bones, how did they prevent the animal bones from getting into the Avery firepit?
If the prosecution's theory is that the firepit behind Avery's garage was the one and only burn location, how do they explain human remains at the quarry? Have they opened an investigation?
Did Brendan actually "confess" that Steven took a bucket of bones (two bone fragments) and drove them half a mile away and dumped them in the quarry on top of a bunch of burnt animal bones?
I think only the Avery trial transcripts and exhibit info would be able to shed more light on this. What was Eisenberg's confidence in identifying those bones as human?
[–][deleted]
I read the Dassey transcripts. There were two broken pieces of one tooth that the forensic dentist pieced together, but he could not definitively say for certain that it was TH's tooth.
[–]snarf5000[S]
Just to expand on this mention of the dental records:
The forensic dentist Donald Smiley glued two pieces of a molar root together, and matched it up with Teresa's X-rays. There was no other evidence he could really check. He said it was consistent, a probable match, but stayed short of a making a full positive ID.
Complete Dassey Trial Transcript - 9 Days
https://www.dropbox.com/s/6pjd6kpq5o5mx40/Dassey%20Trial%20Transcript.pdf?dl=0
Donald Smiley (forensic dentist)
Pg 216 (744)
Um, there were, I believe, 24, uh, dental structures, root fragments, um, crown fragments. There was not one whole tooth that I was able to examine.
~~
There were two root fragments that I was able to fracture match back together.
Pg 231 (759)
Fallon: ... based on your analysis of Tooth No. 31, the one that you were able to fracture match back together, do you have an opinion on whether the root and bone fragments from Tooth 31 recovered, uh, from the burn pit, are consistent with the dental x-rays of Teresa Halbach that you obtained from Dr. Krupka?
A Yes, I do.
Q And what is that opinion?
A In my opinion, they were very consistent.
~~
A To me, very consistent means that it's a probable identification.
~~
Q ~ How close are -- were you to making a positive identification here?
A I was very close. I mean, it was right there, and --and probably the only thing holding me back is that I'm, again, ultra-conservative in my opinion.
[–]nexttime_lasttime
The only thing I can think is that a cadaver dog lead them to the quarry site. After finding the car at the far end of the lot, they may have starting looking for a body by expanding their radius from the Rav4. From the Rav4 to the quarry is not very far.
[–]snarf5000[S]
I think the Arson Investigator estimated that it could take hours to get the bones in that condition by burning in a bonfire, depending on conditions (fuel/dismemberment/etc).
Rodney Pevytoe Dassy trial transcripts 4/19/07
[–]WiretapStudios
Remember, they used tires on the fire too, which are accelerants because they are basically oil / petroleum in solid form.
[–]snarf5000[S]
I've expanded a bit on the use of tires in this post:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/40p459/burning_a_body_with_tires_check_my_math/
SA and BD could both get off on technicalities. The fact that you can't reconcile tag numbers with crime lab IDs, FBI IDs, and exhibits is a problem. We don't know where crime lab items were taken from etc
submitted by Amberlea1879
March 9, 2016
A massive reconciliation needs to take place. Which tag number is BZ, where did it come from, where did it go after. Eisenburg also sent it to the FBI on 11/16. It's FBI Id number is q1 and q2. It's also exhibit 385 and in the DNA PowerPoint.
[–]dorothydunnit 9 points 7 months ago
Except I wouldn't call it a "technicality" because "technicality implies a trivial lapse in paperwork.
This is not a technical glitch. It is a huge substantive discrepancy that renders the evidence invalid.
[–]dorothydunnit 3 points 7 months ago
Okay. I was concerned I might sound critical but I just don't want anyone underestimating the importance.
Is there a way you can summarize the implications? I don't know the evidence and get confused easily. If not, that's fine. I would rather you spend your time on the sleuthing!
[–]ahhhreallynow 3 points 7 months ago
Exhibit 312: State lab report dated 12/5/05: Two pieces of apparent charred material. "Human deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) was isolated from the apparent charred remains (item BZ).
Exhibit 385 is listed as: Photo of bone fragment and muscle tissue. Not sure if thats what you are looking for.
[–]Amberlea1879[S] 15 points 7 months ago
Yes. I have spent a stupid amount of time on item BZ and exhibit 385. They are infact the same item. I was able to confirm it in the dassey trial. In Dassey they both testify its exhibit 150. Kratz prepared the DNA slides and used Eisenburgs picture (exhibit 385). Eisenburg testifies that she sent it to FBI in Nov 2005. FBI report says received 11/16. Culhane testifies she got it on 11/11/05. From a pre-trial motion I discovered that FBI items q1 and q2 (also exhibit 385) were tag numbers 7926 and 7927. Now I only need to confirm those are not the tag numbers for item BZ and you have conclusively proven prosecutor misconduct and falsified evidence. However, I can't figure out tag number to BZ.
[–]djfo77 2 points 7 months ago
Can you ELI5? You kind of lost me. What exactly would prove prosecutor misconduct?
[–]Jmystery1 3 points 7 months ago
Hi I am looking for info and came across this on BZ you may have already
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5Ae0TE6AP9GZnNzQjRKajFiUTQ/view?usp=docslist_api
[–]Amberlea1879[S] 8 points 7 months ago
I did see that and it was a breakthrough for me. Because they both confirm Eisneburgs picture (exhibit 150) was the same thing. This item was with the FBI on 11/16. Culhane never had this item. Zellner just liked my reply to her tweet to check tag to BZ. She know exactly what I am talking about. I Had also got a email response from her when I sent it to her.
[–]foghaze 3 points 7 months ago
Culhane never had this item.
Wow. So she is blatantly lying. Maybe this is just one of the few people who KZ is referring to when she says they were lying under oath?
Very nice work.
[–]Amberlea1879[S] 8 points 7 months ago
Eisenburg knows the truth. She could expose Culhane. I emailed Eisenburg to tell the truth. Hahaha
[–]Jmystery1 2 points 7 months ago
Awesomeness!!! Good for you!! I found this also you may have already it my screen shot notes from Transcript. I didn't know bone with flesh was found in pit thought only pelvic or might be pelvic? I learned something again.
http://i.imgur.com/Q80dvZK.png
[–]truthseeker2016 2 points 7 months ago
Amber, I read in the transcript that Pevytoe also "found" a golf ball sized piece of charred tissue while rooting through the ash at the sheriff's department on I believe it was the 10th of Nov. I wondered if that was the tissue sent to Culhane. Again, no photo was taken to document it as far as I can tell.
[–]momofdjb 1 point 7 months ago
In Culhane's testimony, a picture of the charred remains is introduced as exhibit 338.
Page 162/163
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1nzus-fCQcodmdtUTFUdS1ESG8/view?pref=2&pli=1
It was identified as item BZ on page 158.
How BZ could prove falsified evidence and prosecutor misconduct
submitted by Amberlea1879
March 9, 2016
I put it in word and then took pictures. There are 10 pictures in order. I had emailed Zellner like a week ago about this and got a reply. Additionally she did like the tweet. I also sent the information to Brendan's attorneys. I was led to this because I hated the fact that we don't see any pictures that Sherry took in the DNA slides and Kratz did the PowerPoint. That was very suspicious to start with.
http://imgur.com/a/APbCX
Eisenberg sends the bone-with-tissue sample to the FBI and explicitly states it never went to the crime lab (Sherry). This bone-with-tissue sample was labeled "exhibit 385" in SA's trial and "150" in BD's trial.
KK presents and Sherry testifies saying she tested that bone-with-tissue sample, referring to it as item "BZ". The evidence log, however, shows that "BZ" is simply "charred material." Also, the photo of item "BZ" in SA's trial is a zoomed in/cropped/rotated image of "Exhibit 385" (AKA, 150).
What this suggests...
Sherry never tested the bone with tissue. (Eisenburg said it went straight to FBI).
KK and Sherry misrepresent the bone with tissue as item "BZ" in SA's trial.
Even if Sherry tested this same example, she definitively ID's TH while the FBI (FBI!!!) could only make a general mitochondrial DNA match connected the bones to a relative of TH's mother.
KK and Sherry lied about the bone-with-tissue sample being tested, which would suggest they lied about knowing who the bones belonged to. Or SC actually DID test the same sample and came up with a definitive result that even the FBI couldn't manage.
[–]truthseeker2016 7 points 7 months ago*
I wondered about the bone/tissue exhibit as well. What I think happened is that the tissue referred to as BZ was actually from another specimen.
Pevytoe testified about finding things while sifting through the burn pit material that had been transferred to the Calumet Sheriff's Office. This would have been on November 10.
"Well, I encountered numerous items that I suspected were bone fragmentation. I also recovered something I believed was part of a tooth. And then a couple other items that were a darkened mass roughly the size of, let's say, a golf ball, maybe a little larger, that I felt was charred muscle tissue."
I believe this is what was sent to the crime lab. However, Amber has provided irrefutable evidence that the state elicited false testimony from Culhane about the tissue having originated from the exhibit photo with the shin bone.
Honestly, everything about the bone evidence is so unreliable that it simply can not be trusted as any match to anyone.
[–]truthseeker2016 7 points 7 months ago
Well at that point he is only making visual observations. Again though - there is no photo documenting the discovery of the golf ball. We really do not know what became of it. Is it item BZ? As Amber pointed out, it is all very difficult to trace the evidence. There is no chain of custody for item BZ. I think they tricked the jury.
[–]OliviaD2 2 points 7 months ago
This is great, thanks for putting this together. I will have to read it about 6 times to get all the letters straight :)
This has been driving me crazy.. and I'm not sure we will ever know... what was actually "tested" in these "tests". And then reading the FBI report... then only testing one piece.. but how the hell one can know exactly what that was??
What a mess of documentation......
Oh, I just realized it's you... amberlea.. hi, that's great you sent this.. I have been working on an email about the DNA related to this and I will refer to this.. because it is related....
Beyond this, and if this is not misconduct, I don't know what is, putting together (prosecutorial and beyond).. putting together Culhane's STR analysis, the death certificate, the FBI report, the press conference, the Kratz to Culhane email, the Avery trial testimony (and ppt).. and the Dassey trial testimony...
the death certificate was fraud, that is definite. There was no body officially ID's. I believe they "thought" there would be, but Klaeser was a bit too quick with the pen before learning Sherry's results were not quite good enough.
Then the DNA..
The FBI test was actually good. In mtDNA language "not excluded" would kind of be considered a "match". For context, there was another case at the same time, in the state; the pregnant lady and fetus), they discussed the bones (well they were wrong in this case :P) However if they "matched the mother "(they were going to FBI for mtDNA testing) that would be confirmation, as as would be expected that was usual at that time. It is typically considered a "confirmation" in missing persons cases. However, there is not usually all the collateral business to be dealt with. As there his here.
Sheriff Pagel (directed by whom ?? :)) called the news station and arranged this big show.. a week after receiving the FBI report... WHY? The information given the news station was very accurate... but it was a 'hybrid" between the fbi reports and Sherry's... (well her stat wasn't accurate, but it is what she is going to use in court). Anyway, trying to be brief and summarize). The reporters would not know to say the "right things" They said "remains confirmed to be Halbach correct. "matched her mother" correct. But then, there is that infamous 1 in a billion that get thrown in... This was not on the FBI report, has nothing to do with the mtDNA (which isn't a population thing like the nuclear DNA, it isn't about the probability of finding another "profile" in the population, it is about how close the match is to family (it's kind of the reverse logic). For STR analysis, you don't need a family member, for mtDNA, that is how you are going to assess your results..
Mike Halbach thanks the "state lab" etc. etc., because as you can almost see in the transcripts you copied; there is going to be confusion between 'state lab" and fbi" . The public is not going to necessarily catch that they are 2 different things. They aren't going to know about mtDNA and what that is. They are going to remember "confirmed" and 1 in a billion.
I don't think this was a "mistake". I believe Kratz planned this because it covered their 'arses with the death certificate. The date of death was the same as Sherry's report. No one is going to question it now, b/c it body is now "confirmed" to the public and probably a lot of officials, etc. b/c they don't know that it is not Culhane doing the "confirming".. and for whatever reason he is going to use Sherry's results.. again with that one in a billion... and some vague language (basically lying but not outright that the remains are those of TH (although per lab protocol she cannot say that). The jurors, who all heard that press conference, just remember "confirmed.. one in a billion... The FBI report was never mentioned......??
Kratz "jokes" (speculation - but that is the "tone" I got) about how they fooled the public in his email
In the Dassey trial, when it isn't as critical, b/c the "murderer" have already been convicted, hence there was a 'murder" legally.; she tells the truth. When asked by attorney Gahn if she could ID the remains, she answers "NO".
There is a lot of sleaziness going on here,, and put that together with that menagerie of "remains" you illustrated.....this is one big mess.
I agree, (assuming you are implying that :) ) there were no photos in the DNA slides because I don't even know what they tested.. or if they know.. :).. I need to go back, but also, I am not sure the date when Sherry actually did the testing... she has like 40 things on one page.. there is a report date,, but did she test this bone piece before it went to the FBI,?
It does make sense that she took the tissue near the bone, which was likely tendon/cartilage/muscle perhaps. I don't know how much bone grinding Sherry does .. I don't know what goes on in that lab. That means that that "bone" was not burned as badly burnt, as it still had some tissue left on it. Supposedly BZ came from just outside of the pit... where they had planted flags (that the news reporter was standing in)...
I think she called it "charred' remains because that was what she actually tested, the tissue; not the bone.
I personally don't think there ever were bones in the Avery burn pit, so I don't know where BZ came from.
I wish I had nice photos like do to easily show this,, I don't know how to use that Image app (is that what it is, an app ?) I am technology 'retarded'. :) Anyway, I am back to study your 'exhibits' and see what if anything I can figure out ... :P
And now of course, we have the CB to the puzzle. I would love to see her DNA... and it could be possible that her mother has some somewhere. I read about a case where they found material to test from a person who had been dead for 30 years.... (something with DNA on it in their house). Anyway I'm digressing a bit here.....
But suspicious... is putting in mildly... this was a mess, and I think Kratz wanted people intentionally confused...
He did a good job.. I know either Kratz or Buting said at one point they were having trouble making sense of the "cryptic lab reports' A good description...
[–]cgm901 1 point 7 months ago
If SC tested the charred material in Dec then how do we know it's not the same piece that was sent to the FBI?
I'm confused.
[–]truthseeker2016 5 points 7 months ago
She reported it in December. Eisenberg testified that the shin bone exhibit material was all sent to the FBI in November. Those results did not come back until January.
The deception here is that Kratz used the SAME exhibit for Eisenberg and Culhane testimonies and it is impossible that item BZ (reported by Culhane) was from the shin bone exhibit because it would have been sent to the FBI and NOT to Culhane.
[–][deleted] 5 points 7 months ago
Because Eisenberg testified that no material went to the crime lab and SC testified that she was working on it on Nov. 12.
Lab report states item BZ was "two pieces of charred material" yet Culhane testifies she cut the tissue from the bone
submitted by Amberlea1879
March 2, 2016
https://imgur.com/a/pWJp3#7Hmn4Zy
[–]CopperPipeDream 7 points 7 months ago*
So, the bones shown in the photo were collected from the gravel mound, would that happen to be the same gravel mound that unknown male blood/dna was found? Item CX?
Then this:
Just finished commenting on the death certificate thread where it states,
under ‘Body Found,’ they have ‘No’ checked, but under ‘Autopsy Performed,’ they check ‘Yes.’ The immediate cause of death is listed as ‘undetermined,’ but that gets crossed out and under manner of death, ‘homicide’ is checked. The certificate was issued on November 10, 2005 even though the Calumet County coroner only received the bone fragments on the 9th. Same day that Kocourek was to be deposed.
They filled out their portion of the documents positively identifying the remains as Halbach’s on December 5, six weeks before the bones were positively identified on January 19. http://wbay.com/2016/01/15/video-jan-19-2006-teresa-halbachs-remains-confirmed/
I honestly wouldn't be at all surprised if the bones came back belonging to someone else.
I just can't with this case anymore. Insane.
[–]OliviaD2 6 points 7 months ago
I don't think there was much consistency in the terminology that was used for the "remains" evidence - bones, charred remains, charred bones... who knows... She did say she used tissue that was attached to the bone, which could have been cartilage, tendon, maybe muscle..? Supposedly this 'bone" was found outside of the Avery pit, at one of those red flags a reporter was standing on in a news cast ;P. Although there is no photo of the 'bone' there.
It doesn't really matter what the tissue was, the DNA would be the same. Her profile was not complete enough to make an official ID, however they used the press "leak" of the FBI results (why else?), knowing the public would not understand the difference between mtDNA, FBI/state lab, etc. etc.; and assume that Culhane's results were this "confirmation". Especially when Mike H is so thankful to the state lab for identifying his sister.
When the trial comes... all they need to do is put Sherry's results on a ppt slide... and with some vague language, imply that body is ID'd. Through in a one in a billion. No mention of the FBI report at all.
She does come clean in the Dassey trial, when directly asked if she could ID the body,; she says no.
[–]Amberlea1879[S] 10 points 7 months ago
No. The results page says DNA was taken from item bz. I think culhane is lying and never cut anything from a bone. A piece of unidentifiable material with a partial DNA match is completely different then a partial match cut from a bone
[–]justagirlinid 1 point 7 months ago
wow....why has this not been brought up/noticed?
[–]AlpineBlues 7 points 7 months ago
It seems like in Kratz email he tells Sherry that "we were careful not to say........" Something about the bones being a match or something.
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Trial-Exhibit-343-Kratz-Email-to-Culhane.pdf#page=1
[–]justagirlinid 2 points 7 months ago
yes, I recall what you are talking about, the MtDNA....but this is different than that...what u/amberlea1879 is talking about is that the dna that was 'matched' or 'consistent with' didn't come from item BZ, because BZ wasn't the tissue item, BZ was charred remains, according to the report above.
[–]Amberlea1879[S] 3 points 7 months ago
Even more interesting is I think (but not certain) that the bone shown in the PowerPoint is also exhibit 385. Which was examined and then sent to the FBI by eisenburg. She sent it to FBI on 11/7. Culhane testified the bones in the picture were received on 11/11. Impossible.
[–]OliviaD2 4 points 7 months ago
I think the defense summed this up the best, and make me feel not so bad about not being able to track these 'remains"...'cryptic reports" is the best term I've seen to describe any of the lab reports regarding the ID of these remains. I don't know if it will ever be truly known what was tested and where it came from. There is NOT ONE photograph of any burned/charred or otherwise remain in the Avery burn pit. Item "BZ"..supposedly tested by Sherry, things were sent to the FBI, but exactly what, when, ??? They give everything a different code... The poor defense was trying to sort it all out.. Finally saying in this motion to exclude evidence: " It is unclear whether some, all, or none of the fragments had been previously determined by the state's forensic anthropologist to be human or not. In short, the defense has no way of knowing from this cryptic report what was sent to and examined by the FBI Lab"
I do not understand the legal going on here.. so if anyone can help me... I understand the DNA... but don't know what to make of it, because I can't know what was actually tested. The FBI received the "remains" that they were able to get a result from on Nov 23th. Sherry got results from her item BZ on Dec 5th. Were these from the same "bone", from the same location? Sherry took tissue that was near the bone.. probably muscle.. but the FBI...
I sure hope this is not typical. Because I would never believe such horrible lack of documentation and record keeping could occur....
and 'cryptic reports' says it all....
[–]Amberlea1879[S] 3 points 7 months ago
Read question starting on line 25 first page. He asks if she sends it to crime lab. Eisenburg says no. This exact same "mistake" on questioning happens in Dassey trial. The bones would have never went to crime lab first, perhaps eisenburg to ID as human or coroner.
http://imgur.com/a/Lu4PG
[–]OliviaD2 1 point 7 months ago
What do you mean by "received" on 11/11? By the FBI? By her? There were bones, etc. sent to the FBI on various dates in November.
[–]AlpineBlues 1 point 7 months ago
Okay. I need to go back & look closer. So is AN the shin bone w/ tissue, or is it something else?
[–]justagirlinid 1 point 7 months ago
It looks like that, I'm not positive, but it says AN is possible tissue collected from gravel mound, while BZ is charred remains.
[–]AlpineBlues 2 points 7 months ago
Okay. I jumped the gun. I had that Kratz email lingering in my brain waiting to use it. Thank you.
[–]Amberlea1879[S] 1 point 7 months ago
Not to mention kratz put together the PowerPoint!
"THE BONES FOUND IN AVERY'S YARD MAY NOT HAVE BEEN THERESA HALBACH"
submitted by Lamarwpg
March 15, 2016
[–]applepeachpumpkinpie 17 points 6 months ago
It seems to me the easiest explanation would be--if it turned out they were not her bones, for the sake of argument--that no one knows what happened to her. They never found her body, so they substituted another to 'seal the deal' against Avery.
My gut instinct (and interpretation of the evidence) says that they're her bones, but if they turn out to not be, it doesn't seem likely that they substituted one set of bones for another and just tucked her away some place else. The only reason I can find as motivation for such a move is that it's hard to prosecute for a murder without a body.
[–]onepieceofgumleft 16 points 6 months ago
The remains found at the Quarry were most likely TH's "less" burned remains. Most likely discovered after LE implemented a plan to create their own "body" on the property in form of Carmen Boutwell's cremated remains. LE figured bones would be impossible to identify if burned to that extreme extent.
When TH's burned remains were discovered at Quarry, LE got everyone aware of the find to stay quiet, by using the "body on the property makes a stronger case" argument. Even the Halbach's bought in because they were desperate for what they "thought" was justice. They didn't resist too much because it was LE themselves creating the "scheme".
[–]TheBarefootGnome 13 points 6 months ago
Did they document the bones found in the quarry while collecting them or was that collected in a box with the others from the burn pit?
[–]onepieceofgumleft 15 points 6 months ago
That's a great question. Best answer I can give is that I don't remember seeing any pictures of the quarry burn site, and there seemed to be no explanation given about how they stumbled onto to that site with all of the attention on SA's property , or who found the bones there.
There seemed to be a significant lack of information (or pictures), and that's a major contributing factor to my theory, but there are "many" other factors that led me to that theory as well.
[–]TheBarefootGnome 10 points 6 months ago
[SPECULATION] If the bones were planted in order to frame Avery, was there even a need to take them to the quarry or even the burn pit? Not one photograph exists from the Avery property of TH bones. The coroner was not allowed to be there for the documentation and collection. The first picture of the bones is LE sorting through the boxes to 'find bones'. Perhaps this could explain why bones were found in three locations. The bones were never there. They were tossed into the boxes thinking all the boxes were from the same location. Seems easier to toss in a box than to sneak onto the property.
[–]onepieceofgumleft 12 points 6 months ago
[Speculation] - My theory is that they found the car on Nov 3 (as per Colborn's call to run the plate). But knew they had no "body". LE knew that car alone was a weak case.
I believe they stalled until Nov 5 to officially "find" the car by sending in Pam Sturm. I think they stalled until the 5th to produce their own "body", thinking they wouldn't find TH on SA property.
Manitowoc County only "accidental" drug overdose in all of 2005 happened on Nov 3. And was a 24 year old female ...??
http://www.htrnews.com/story/news/local/2014/06/08/drug-death-a-painful-memory/10177139/
Once they put this plan in place, I think they found something at the quarry that they weren't expecting to find ... TH badly burned (but not cremated) remains.
Recorded call to MTSO dispatch at 25:50 of these calls .... When officer is put on hold, someone says, "That was at a burn pile, an entire bracelet ... sticking out the side". The very next call talks about a flurry of activity at "the pits" (quarry). Something major was found there for that type of activity. And there was no mention of a "bracelet" being found at SA pit, and nothing entered into evidence.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLPfZpP4Dpv_n0uIriIdu9h-dQQO7nevSk¶ms=OAFIAVgC&v=GrzJQq2EkO4&mode=NORMAL
No pictures of the quarry burn site, no police reports written (to my knowledge). I think TH remains were removed discreetly from the quarry, and everyone with knowledge (including the Halbachs), bought into LE argument to remain silent, because a "body" on SA property made for a stronger case. Halbachs went along with the plan to ensure justice for their daughter, and LE went ahead with planting Carmen Boutwell's "cremated" remains in SA's pit once they commandeered the property on Nov 5.
No pictures of either site, no report written on quarry find, coroner banned from SA property after bone fragments found, and the fact that remains were in "cremated" condition ...? Paints an obvious picture, IMO.
[–]radarthreat 4 points 6 months ago
I can't imagine they'd be so stupid as to consider substituting a different body if they couldn't find Teresa's. What if a hunter or whoever found her body after the charges were laid? They'd have all kinds of egg on their face. Too risky. I wouldn't put "augmenting" the bones with those of another person past them, though.
[–]justagirlinid 3 points 6 months ago
The bracelet was the tire wire
[–]BeatingOffADeadHorse 3 points 6 months ago*
My super super super crazy theory is that Manitowoc county paid off the Halbach family a lot of money. A lot of money but significantly less money than what they would owe Avery if he was compensated.
And that maybe they utilized some kind of witness protection program to change her identity and get her out of the public eye.
I wanna know what year that recording of Teresa saying that she lived a full life if she were to die young or something, I wanna know when that was recorded.
[–]raptor9999 1 point 6 months ago
I always wondered why she would record herself saying some weird shit like that.
[–]nmrnmrnmr 2 points 6 months ago
Because her dad died when she was only 8, at age 31, I believe. The age she says in the video. And apparently the video was part of a school project. There's nothing particularly weird about the videos in context.
[–]virtualGeek01010101 39 points 6 months ago
First and foremost, prosecutors play an important ethical role during an investigation.
According to the ABA Prosecutorial Standards, Standard 1.5 (Contacts with the public during the investigative process) states: (b) Except as a proper part of a court proceeding and in accordance with applicable rules, the prosecutor should not publicly make the following types of statements or publicly disclose the following information about an investigation: (iv) admissions, confessions, or the contents of a statement or alibi attributable to a person or entity under investigation;
Furthermore, the ABA Standards on the Prosecution Function Standard 3-1.4 (Public Statements) states: (a) A prosecutor should not make or authorize the making of an extrajudicial statement that a reasonable person would expect to be disseminated by means of public communication if the prosecutor knows or reasonably should know that it will have a substantial likelihood of prejudicing a criminal proceeding.
The bottom line? Kratz needs to answer for it.
[–]k4aic 4 points 6 months ago
except prosecutors are exempt from "answering for it" and often cannot have charges pressed against them. They are basically 100% immune which is bullshit and something that the system needs to change.
[–]Mr_Precedent 4 points 6 months ago
Not if he participated in the investigation (and he WAS on the Avery property the day the RAV4 was found).
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/opinions/wp/2014/01/30/7th-circuit-pokes-a-hole-in-prosecutorial-immunity/
[–]Hurray0987 7 points 6 months ago*
These are standards and not laws, so there's no real way to make Kratz pay except through the court of public opinion, and this has already happened. Kratz is probably one of the most hated men in America right now. He receives nothing but spite on all public fronts. Everyone knows he's a skeezy pervert. His career is ruined. Even he admits that the press conference was a bad idea. I mean, I think this battle (making Kratz pay) is already won.
Edit: thought you said "pay for it" instead of "answer for it" but eh, I'll just leave this here
[–]harmoni-pet 0 points 6 months ago
Thanks for the info. I wonder if the press conference falls into the applicable rules:
Except as a proper part of a court proceeding and in accordance with applicable rules
It is my understanding that the details of Brendan's interrogation would be made public regardless of Kratz's meddling. There's no doubt that the press conference added to local prejudice, but could they argue that that message would have gotten out anyway?
[–]virtualGeek01010101 11 points 6 months ago
Since the standard states "except as a proper part of a court proceeding and in accordance with applicable rules", both conditions would need to be met to comply, and that was not the case with the press conference.
Details of an interrogation or confession should never be disclosed by officials to the public until a case is closed. A defendant has a right to a fair trial, and disclosing such information will put a fair trial in jeopardy. The evidence, whether it is confession evidence or not, should be presented in court and evaluated only by a jury.
[–]harmoni-pet 4 points 6 months ago
Interesting. It's frustrating how vague yet precise legal speak can be.
I'm not saying the press conference was anything but terrible. Did they do nothing to Kratz for that? It seems like Strang and Buting would have made a bigger issue of the press conference if it was illegal.
[–]KennythePrize 11 points 6 months ago
Kratz claimed he was trying to spare the family pain. Given the press conference it's pretty much bullshit.
What I was pointing out was that in the email to Culhane he remarks how local opinion was swayed by the way they presented information about the bones. That was February 7th, less than a month before his press conference. When you take that into account with other factors, like they knew that parts of the confession couldn't have happened, he doesn't have a leg to stand on.
Everyone knows what he was doing. The only question has been how do you prove it? Him acknowledging that he was keenly aware how local perception could be manipulated before giving a ridiculous press conference is a really good place to start.
[–]harmoni-pet 15 points 6 months ago
For me, the worst part about the press conference is the tone. Kratz begins by dramatically asking for children to leave the room. Then proceeded to read the criminal complaint like its a ghost story. If he was trying to spare the family any pain, he did it in the most backwards, tasteless way possible.
[–]MzOpinion8d 5 points 6 months ago
He proceeded to read the criminal complaint like it was his own submission to an erotic fiction publication...
–]OliviaD2 3 points 6 months ago
Not that he would tell the truth, but perhaps there is some correspondence? It was probably a phone call :P. Sheriff Pagel, per the news reporter (I'm talking Jan 19 PC) called in the big story. I believe "someone" gave Pagel the information to give them - it is too "accurately wrong" to be a mistake. They say 'FBI confirms' (which is close, at least they have a good test that suggests), "matched to mother" correct. but then "one in a billion". That's not from the FBI report. That's from SHERRY's report. Of the results that CAN'T ID the remains, per lab protocol, her test was INCONCLUSIVE.
IMO, this is a "Kratzian maneuver". He is intentionally intertwining the results.. people will remember "confirmed" and "one in a billion".. public perception being what they will.
There must be people who will talk.. secretaries.. scorned lovers?....
I'd like to see the REST of those emails.. why was just that one put in evidence? And it wasn't very flattering.... Someone forget to shred?
[–]virtualGeek01010101 3 points 6 months ago
The press conference was not illegal; it was unethical conduct according to the standards (the Wisconsin standards are modeled after the ABA standards). If a grievance was filed about the incident, then it would have been handled by the Office of Lawyer Regulation in Wisconsin. However, I would imagine we (the public) would have discovered the information by now if a grievance was filed.
[–]parminides 4 points 6 months ago*
That's exactly what Kratz argued. He said that all the details were in the criminal complaint, so the media would get them anyway. His press conference was a way to "control" the volatile information.
Kratz himself claims he regrets the press conference and that he wishes he'd let the complaint speak for itself.
I think he knew what he was doing. I think he wanted to taint the jury pool, pure and simple. I find it nearly inconceivable that a DA wouldn't know about the ethics rules governing press conferences. I found his excuse that he wanted to control this volatile information less than convincing. [EDIT: or that he wanted to control it to affect public opinion.]
I don't know the exact rules for WI, but in my state an allowed exception for lawyer press conferences is if it serves the public good in some way. For example, if someone confessed to a murder and named his accomplice who was still at large. Or someone admitted to poisoning the water supply. Something like that.
Clearly nothing like that was at play here, as SA had already been locked up for months.
[–]disguisedeyes 7 points 6 months ago
Kratz had a limited window to act.
That is, he had to have already known that the confession, as stated, was extremely 'unlikely' due to the lack of visible blood evidence in the trailer/garage. However, even though he 'knew' this in a general way, he had a day or two before police could 'investigate' the claims made in the confession and rule them out.
His decision to immediately make the claims known seems to me to be indication that he wanted to get that specific, horrific story out before anything might get in the way.
The only clear, obvious purpose of that conference was to prejudice the town and jury pool and snip the 'framing talk' in the bud. This worked.
It's supremely unethical. The prosecutor should be working to find the truth, not to secure a win.
[–]Tentapuss 2 points 6 months ago
I don't think I said that at all. I said that the ABA standards don't govern his conduct. The Wisconsin Rules of Professional Conduct do, and it if Wisconsin is like most other states, a violation of the RPC gives rise to a disciplinary proceeding, but not a civil suit.
Probably violative of the rules of professional conduct, and could result in discipline, from a reprimand to disbarment. Probably not a criminal action. Could have formed the basis for a libel suit, though the statute has almost certainly passed.
[–]Noonproductions 6 points 6 months ago
It seems to me, that given the amount of people in this town and the relative number of missing women in this area at this time, it still seems very likely that the bones are most likely those of Theresa Halbach. Even if the bones were from a crematorium and the bones were planted, the chances that they would find someone with that number of genes the same (the rest of the unmatching genes being destroyed by the fire) seem unlikely. That being said, I am basing my understanding of what the tests said based on articles presented here and my own understanding from college biology from 25 years ago, so I am no expert.
[–]OliviaD2 9 points 6 months ago
It's complicated. I would really need to see the raw data to know just how bad that profile is.... But.. there are more "missing" loci, than not. The "test" if you will. did not work because the sample was degraded..(you can tell this because the only the shortest loci got results, because the longer ones were broken up).. which means there could be problems with the amplification step, (when many copies are made of the DNA, there are factors that can mess this up)..
This test should have been reported as INCONCLUSIVE. Even the lab protocol did not allow results this poor to be called a "match" to anything.
You can not honestly say anything other than inconclusive. The mtDNA test is stronger, at least in links the purported remain to the mother., therefore , for a missing persons case, that would be considered a strong ID. FBI didn't confirm that Bone matched a standard from TH though, which bugs me, seems like you would check... damn government labs.....
What the family should do.. for peace.. if they want to know, is try to get whatever material they can, try to get someone to tell them the truth about what came from where, take it to a decent private lab and have it tested. There is more sensitive testing.
Or, if they are good with the results.... they are good. This case is actually an incredible (intellectually) ethical debate... perfect for an ethics committee.....
With the mt DNA supporting them Culhane's results, one can have more confidence. Without that... only inconclusive... It is not black and white..... one in a billion means nothing when you want to know if it is your daughter...
[–]ixid 2 points 6 months ago
You're assuming the test result was legitimate, unless the charred flesh item BZ can be tested again and shown to contain DNA that would seem questionable given the level of possible contamination and evidence planting as well as the broken chain of custody.
"The Box" - Part 1
submitted by foghaze
June 29, 2016
Given all the concerns I've laid out it is very rational and logical to assume that what we see in property tag 8318 most likely contains no human bones at all and is just a disastrous collection of fragments of rock, cement, possilbe animal bones and wood among other things you might find in a junkyard.
Under these strange and unusual circumstances how can anyone in their right mind possibly believe the state's ridiculous story that "this box" contains the majority of Teresa Halbach remains supposedly sifted and sorted from Steven Avery's pit on 11/8/05 with not one piece of photographic proof? If there is any conspiracy in this whole case it's to believe the state's narrative without skepticism of how TH fragemented bones were found in the dark in less than two hours in Avery's burn pit behind his garage on 11/8 while using flashlights with no forensic anthropologist or coroner in site. Only Pam Sturm of god would believe that ridiculous story.
NOTE: It appears the zip lock baggie inside "the box" would contain the "other questionable materials" that were collected. (metal grommets/zippers/etc).
For a visual, below is what a professionally cremated body looks like burned at almost 1500 degrees in hurricane speed winds in a controlled environment before being ground up. Next to it you will see the size of the box TH supposed "fragmented bones" were in. It's a small box as you can see and is nowhere near 40% even if "the box" contained just TH fragments.
http://i.imgur.com/aenMcFE.gif
Is it bone fragments?
[–]violet-sunshine 26 points 3 months ago*
Dr. Simley’s testimony, Brendan Dassey trial
Q: Would you tell us or describe for us the condition of – – uh, these — the 24 tooth fragments and the three bone fragments that you examined?
A. They were all burned. They were all charred. Uh, they were very brittle. Um, again, they didn’t look like normal tooth like we would normally see, and essentially, the crowns were all gone. What we were looking at was just the root structure, which was, um, part of the tooth that’s buried in the bone. There was one portion of a crown, um, but that portion was from a — cuspid or an eyetooth and was not able to be identified.
You can even tell, just by reading it, how uh .. um how that testimony was .. umm .. not very.. um.. ya..
Further, crime lab analyst, Sherry Culhane testified that a partial DNA profile was obtained from a charred piece of tissue (item BZ) alleged to have been found in the burn pit ash, presumably collected by Rodney Pevytoe with the Wisconsin Department of Justice Criminal Investigations Unit, who arrived and, ignoring the material from the burn pit, began sifting through the burn barrel remains that had been transported to the Sheriff’s Department. Ahem... Luckily... he found the muscle tissue – used for the positive DNA determination.
Sherry testified that since the specimen was degraded (likely due to extreme heat) she only obtained peaks for seven markers of the fifteen plus the gender marker, so less than 50%. Yet the FBI CODIS database does not even record DNA profiles with less than nine identified markers. The partial profile matched Teresa's, but since it’s a partial profile it can’t be conclusively reported as matching only Teresa’s profile, an important distinction.
Culhane reported that the probability of a random unrelated person matching the same seven markers is 1 in a billion in the Caucasian population.
However, since the documentary has come out, others have chimed in and said this was bad science. Some experts assert even with 12 of 13 markers matching there would be an occurrence of 1 in 65,000 — much more common than 1 in a billion.
I also cannot accept Eisenberg's assertions that the skull remains, specifically the remains of the eye socket, would definitively be diagnostic of sex. IMO they desperately needed this opinion to be presented in court in order for them to explain how they knew the bones were human and female long before they were ever tested.
Further Eisenberg gave the opinion that the bones could not have been planted due to the condition of the bones. She said they did not show any signs of being moved. Unfortunately for her she neglected to take into account that before she had examined the bones they had been shoveled and sifted and sent in a box to her office ... again, all before her examination.
We have that email from Kratz to Culhane wherein he admits he knows the FBI never positively identified the remains, but that public perception of who those bones were would be enough for trial. That is evidence enough, IMO, that Avery needs, at the very least, a new trial.
As well, the Manitowoc County coroner was forbidden from entering the scene (due to the conflict of interest. I wonder if Lenk and Colburn called her and told her that from inside the trailer) and still Calumet coroner was not called to the scene during the excavation! Good God. None of the forensic experts were summoned until after the bones had been disturbed. This does not, IMO, excuse the complete lack of photographic evidence surrounding the many bone locations, it only intensifies the speculation and possibility of serious misconduct being uncovered.
We know that bone fragments from all over TH skeleton were found in the Janda burn barrel. They included a diagram of the skeleton in the documentary. The fragments came from the shoulder, the toe, the leg, the arm — it was a complete mix. Setting aside the 'why?' for a moment, how could Avery have managed this if the movement of the bones was first from the fire pit and later moved to the barrel?
The evidence is more consistent with the reverse: the theory that the body was burned elsewhere, scooped up into the barrel, and dumped on Avery's property.
No photos of the burn pit, burn barrel or quarry prior to recovery, and no attempt to grid and examine the location. This, IMO, is not a case of mistake after mistake after mistake. This was deliberate, and indicative of an attempt to obscure what the evidence would show.
[–]gt5717b 9 points 3 months ago*
I believe this picture of the bones includes one end of the box (possibly turned upside down). The edge of the ruler along the bottom of the photo is the metric side so I have drawn a green line along the width of the box and rotated that line on top of the ruler to get an approximate measurement. It appears to be 91 mm or 3.58 inches wide. Much smaller than I guessed in foghaze's other post. Of course this assumes it's the box in question. Regardless, it again illustrates just how tiny these bones/fragments are. For reference, my business card is 3.5" wide.
Picture of the bones:
http://imgur.com/yZongQJ
[–]gt5717b 2 points 3 months ago
I definitely think it's a box. It may not be the same evidence box the bones were photographed in, however. It does look like it might say "CALUMET" in red tape around the edges and the bone box clearly has red tape on it. But, foghaze did some rough estimates on that box's size from the other picture that are bigger than what I calculated.
The box in my photo appears to be something along the lines of what I've found here; 5 1/4" x 3 3/4" x 7/8".
edit: as I mentioned above, the relevant point is that these bones are extremely small and for most of us they are smaller than we previously were led to believe.
[–]gt5717b 2 points 3 months ago
I think you're right it's an evidence tag (possibly on a box?). 7430 is listed as 'bone fragments'.
[–]Strikeout21 11 points 3 months ago*
Great post FogH. After your post last night, I couldn't wait to see what your brain was cooking up. I don't think I'm the only one who thought those bones (and the box) were MUCH larger than what they are. I have no doubt that the intention of LE was to fool the public into believing they had close to a whole skeleton, when in fact.. they had less than 4 measuring cups. This is why there are no pictures. They wouldn't have been as dramatic when shown being held up by a pair of tweezers as they are in (what looks like) a big huge box. This whole thing is just so damn unreal.
[–]7-pairs-of-panties 3 points 3 months ago
If they only had a couple of measuring cups full of bones it shows a few things
1) TH was not burned there 2) Its very possible that those bones aren't TH's. 3) If it is TH it shows the framing. They would have had to have know who killed and burned her and where, than moved them or some where they wanted them 4) Halbach family was given bones back to them by Weigert. Since they had so little does that mean there is nothing left in evidence to test? Maybe we'll find some rocks there? 5) Holy crap! I can't believe there is still so much to discover w/ the case!
[–]foghaze[S] 1 point 3 months ago
Since they had so little does that mean there is nothing left in evidence to test? Maybe we'll find some rocks there? 5) Holy crap! I can't believe there is still so much to discover w/ the case!
There was nothing left to really test anyway. It would have been nice if KZ could actually see the "bones". She could have got another opinion on if they were human. With fragments it's very easy to get them mixed up with certain bones from animals. It can be much easier than we all think.
I belive the box we see is a collection of rocks, bark, twigs, animal bones, minerals and trash.
[–]21Minutes -1 points 3 months ago
fool the public into believing they had close to a whole skeleton
It's just that I started comping a list of names and titles awhile back.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/40pibn/is_this_the_complete_list_of_people_involved_in/?ref=share&ref_source=link
I thought maybe you had new names to add.
[–]dillstar 2 points 3 months ago*
I just dug up the pretrial testimony, and from the pretrial testimony, her coworker signed for the box and left it on her desk in her locked office overnight from Nov 9 to Nov 10.
I haven't checked the actual trial testimony yet, but are you thinking of the brief visit the bones had to Dr. Kenneth Bennett? (Where he identified that one of the bones in the box was an ilum and was able to make a determination of female gender of the bones.) Eisenberg mentions it (and references the bag) on page 117:
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Preliminary-Examination-2005Dec06.pdf#page=117
Edited for formatting, and because I misread a thing about count of bones in the bag as bones in the box.
[–]Canuck64 1 point 3 months ago
Yes that is the one, thanks. He is again mentioned on Day 13 of the Avery trial page 190.
[–]foghaze[S] 4 points 3 months ago
So first, yes, I was referring to the criminal complaint and to Eisenberg's testimony that Dr Bennett had a hand in her box (before she did) with identifying the ilum and bagging some pieces.
Well technically we don't even know if this is even the box he was given. He identified an ilum bone. There is nothing in the box that looks like an ilum. She also never identifies any bones as part of the pelvis much less an ilum bone. So if she's so darn good at identifying bones more so than someone who had been doing it for years longer where is the ilum bone and where did it come from? I think whatever was at the quarry was sent to Bennet. JMO though.
EDIT: Also remember Bennet was retired so he wasn't working for anyone. If they took any bone to him it would have been to his home. Not at the crime lab. Nothing makes sense with all this.
[–]dillstar 2 points 3 months ago
To make this less confusing, let's ignore the ilum altogether, just for now. Eisenberg specifically says this box that was sealed and waiting for her on her desk was in his hands at one point. From page 117 pretrial:
Within the box there was one plastic bag into which several bone fragments had been placed by another forensic anthropologist, Dr. Kenneth Bennett, to whom the box was initially brought, for a brief examination, to determine whether the fragments in the box were of human origin.
As you've brought up, it's not possible if the box went from pit to Command Center to CASO locker for overnight storage (end of the 8th) to crime lab on the 9th. I had assumed somewhere before CASO storage they took it to Bennett's house, and maybe that could have happened. We just don't know, or at least I just don't know. :(
Here's another question: the whole item BZ chain-of-custody-photoshop-powerpoint thing hinges on the box of bones going from pit to Eisenberg to FBI without stopping anywhere where Sherry Culhane can cut off her sample. So a specific question here is, did Joy take the box to Crime Lab, or to Eisenberg's office? They aren't the same place, right? If they went to the Crime Lab, then Culhane could have had an opportunity to cut off a piece before Eisenberg. Of course, now like Bennett, this is all just speculation.
I am concerned with the number of times that this box appears to have been unsealed and resealed.
[–]foghaze[S] 2 points 3 months ago*
and maybe that could have happened. We just don't know, or at least I just don't know. :(
Well I think the correct thing to say is no one knows. Not just you. If that box moved anywhere on 11/8 there should have been a report on it and there isn't. So if it's not there then we can assume it stayed at Calumet until the 9th.
So a specific question here is, did Joy take the box to Crime Lab, or to Eisenberg's office? They aren't the same place,
Correct they are not in the same place. In Eisenbergs testimony she said she received them at her "office" and then TOOK them to the coroner's office where she does her work. I have also been trying to figure this one out as well. She also says the box was TAPED. That tells me it had not been opened by anyone. At least that is how she makes it sound. I belive the narrative is Joy takes it to the crime lab to Eisenbergs Office and then she transports them to the Coroners office herself before opening. She makes it sound like no one else had opened it from transport from Calumet until the moment she opened it at the coroner's office. She never says Bennett opened it at crime lab. I think she is saying he did it the day before it went to crime lab.??
Definitely an issue with the chain of custody on this. It's very very suspicious to me. I want to know what exactly is in that ziplock bag and WHERE did it come from? You know what I mean?
[–]chromeomykiss 4 points 3 months ago*
I believe they are referring to the burn barrel trailer which also had to make an unexpected stop at an on ramp to I-43. It is somewhere in the CASO Report.
Edit: pg 117 in Oosterhouse Supplemental Report (M.Oost is CASO Dispatcher who also took 11/5 call from POG to Pagel)
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/CASO-Investigative-Report.pdf#page=117
Upon arrival at the CALUMET CO. SHERIFF'S DEPT., I met with Deputy JEREMY HAWKINS of the CALUMET CO. SHERIFF'S DEPT. We arrived at the CALUMET CO. SHERIFF'S DEPT. at approximately 1224hours. At approximately 1245 hours, I did sign the secured trailer and its contents over to Deputy HAWKINS. It should be noted that at approximately 1138 hours while we were en route with the trailer, we did stop on the southbound off ramp of I-43 off of STH 147 to check on the trailer because it was pulling very rough. At approximately 1139 hours we were again en route to the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPT.
But you are correct about Joy transporting bones and the Rav4 transport also taking a long time due to trailer isuues. Just add the burn barrels trailer stop being mentioned as more WTF? and "CYA".
[–]Chesa007 2 points 3 months ago
Page 101, CASO report;D. Kucharski collected 4 burn barrels, loaded them onto a covered trailer and custody handed over to Marie Oosterhouse, Calumet Radio Operator (why is she even there?),this is at 9:47am. AT 11:30am she and Gary Tackes "Manitowoc Deputy" depart the Avery property. Marie notes that they had to stop due to the vehicle not driving properly while on the way to CC (pg 117). Sometime after 11:11 am, he only reports his arrival time at work - no specific time for the trailer arrival, Deputy Hawkins has the Manitowoc Deputy park the trailer behind CC Sheriff's Department and takes possession (pg 116)...
[–]foghaze[S] 3 points 3 months ago
When do we get to see a skeleton reconstruction like this: sample Forensic Anthropologist photo
She didn't do one. She was supposed to nomatter how little she had to work with. I think the amount was literally so startlingly small that the state didn't even want to use the photo. They deliberately tried to make it sound like they found a lot more of her remains than they really had.
[–]Canuck64 5 points 3 months ago
Most of the fragments were no bigger than a fingernail. The largest was 2.5 inches. I think a lot of people believe an actual skeleton was found, when it was only a small portion of fragments. And she made the determination just through a visual examination. She used no references to compare the fragments to a skeleton in order to say this came from there etc.
Pictures would gave certainly cleared this area up.
[–]foghaze[S] 6 points 3 months ago
Pictures would gave certainly cleared this area up.
Agreed. She did use a rendering of a skeleton and had arrows pointing to the area on the skeleton where the fragments came from. This is not acceptable either. Unbelievable how the state manipulated all the evidence.
[–]MMonroe54 3 points 3 months ago
You know, if that little of the entire skeleton was found, I think it calls into question whether the remainder burned to ashes or was somewhere else. Maybe someone did dump bones into Lake Michigan or bury them somewhere. Or if the body was burned elsewhere, maybe the majority are there. Was the Zander Road location ever really examined? Where the neighbor saw the smoke/explosion/smell/whatever scared his cows?
[–]Lolabird61 2 points 3 months ago
I think THIS has convinced me that there's no way in hell the remains could be identified as those of TH.
[–]SilkyBeesKnees 2 points 3 months ago
I agree. And where is the one bone that supposedly had some tissue on it that was used to prove it was Teresa? Have we ever seen it? Did the jury see it? And how the hell did that tissue even survive a fire that supposedly reduced an adult women's remains down to 2 cups (less than one cup if they'd been ground in cremation).
[–]Canuck64 2 points 3 months ago
On November 10th Agent Pevytoe finds a mostly unburned bone with some tissue on it. He thinks it's a steak bone but decides to send it in for testing anyways.
On November 11th Culhane received a mostly unburned bone with some tissue on it. This would now be referred to as item BZ.
Coincidence?
[–]Account1117 1 point 3 months ago
It's the one on the left here. Exhibit 385 in the Avery trial, exhibit 150 in the Dassey trial, also known as Item BZ.
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/exhibit-bones-1.jpg
[–]SilkyBeesKnees 1 point 3 months ago
She wouldn't have had enough bones to even pretend it was an entire hand let alone a complete body!!! It would have been quite dramatic to see these wee "bones" sprinkled over a full size autopsy table.
[–]SilkyBeesKnees 1 point 3 months ago
Are you saying the jury only saw the photo? They didn't see the actual wee "bones?"
[–]foghaze[S] 2 points 3 months ago
Are you saying the jury only saw the photo? They didn't see the actual wee "bones?"
No he had photos only. I'm pretty sure of it because when Eisenberg is on the stand they never bring any exhibit out for the jury to look at. He shows all his exhibits up on the screen (Elmo). So no they actually did not see the entire collection of the bones in person. Just photos. Good question and I never even thought of this. They should have seen them personally yet they didn't. That is also very telling if you ask me.
[–]Account1117 1 point 3 months ago*
It's quite not what you asked, but there is this.
Found in the burn pit: http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Exhibit-400-Graphic-Showing-Bones-Found-in-Burn-Pit.jpg
Q And with respect to Exhibit 400, is this, um, representative of the variety of human bone that you found in this area?
A Yes, sir.
Q So you have some rib bone, some hand, some legs, clavicle --
A There is --
Q -- or shoulder bones?
A Yes. Um, obviously, no entire bone, but, uh, enough, um, of a bone or bones -- uh, enough of the anatomical landmark that I can say this is part of the spine, or this is part, uh, of a rib, or this is part of a -- a collarbone. Yes, I can.
Found in the Janda barrel: http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Trial-Exhibit-401-Eisenberg-Pics-of-Cut-Marks-on-Halbach-Remains.pdf
Q Okay. Um, scapula --you identified part of a human scapula --
A Yes, sir.
Q -- in that burn barrel? Or the shoulder blade, as you said?
A A portion of the shoulder blade.
Q Okay. You identified one or more portions of, uh, the spinal column or the vertebrae?
A Fragments from the spinal column, yes.
Q More than one?
A I believe there were.
Q Okay. Uh, identified one or more bones from the hand? Metacarpals?
A At -- at least one.
Q And more than one fragment of long bones?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, these fragments of long bones were small enough that you weren't able to decide which of the long bones in the human body they came from?
A That's correct. Q Or even whether they all came from the same long bone in the human body? A That's correct.
[–]Rayxor 1 point 3 months ago
Why is it that the report lists them as possible human bones but the testimony seems to be certain of their origin? Whoever wrote that up obviously was not certain of their origin.
The 40% of a 2 liter bottle in volume is about the size of a housebrick, or if you still get them, a checkbook refill box of checks. That is shocking.
But when you have fragments this small, http://imgur.com/yZongQJ , it's quite possible, when you remove the animal bones and non-bone material (note the chicken bones in the photo).
[–]foghaze[S] 2 points 3 months ago*
The 40% of a 2 liter bottle in volume is about the size of a housebrick, or if you still get them, a checkbook refill box of checks. That is shocking.
Are you measuring ashes or actual bone fragment volume? See this is where she is getting sneaky. She's not saying the fragments GROUND into ashes fills the bottle 40%. She's saying the actual fragments themselves fills the bottle 2/5ths. It's absurd and misleading because ashes and bone fragments have entirely different volume.
I'm with you on the fragments, not ashes.
I was trying to come up with a US understood equivalent volume. We have 1 liter boxes of milk, so I have an idea of what that looks like. Some are like elongated bricks, some more like a chocolate box. In between I came up with 'brick'.
She did write a 344 page report because pages of it were entered into evidence. Trial exh 401.
Would this be accessible under FOIA, /u/skipptopp ?
[–]makingameow 2 points 3 months ago
She did testify that there were avian bones mixed in. That lil factoid drives me nuts. Avian bones would not survive a fire that distroyed large human bones.
[–]e-gregious 2 points 3 months ago
Avian bones seems pretty generic.
Are they from a bucket of KFC?
A wild turkey? (I used to seem them in SE Michigan)
Which bones are avian?
Any thing from a finch to a goose?
Certainly any kind of avian bones would not survive an incineration that calcined human bones and reduced them pretty much to ash.
[–]SilkyBeesKnees 1 point 3 months ago
Right. Good point.
Look at the ones in the middle of the picture. Looks like a chicken bone to me, part of a wing.
[–]SilkyBeesKnees 1 point 3 months ago
Good Lord!!!! I see what you mean.
[–]foghaze[S] 1 point 3 months ago
Look at the ones in the middle of the picture. Looks like a chicken bone to me, part of a wing.
I've been looking at this bone for several days and comparing it to the diagram exhibit 400 which is a list of all the bone fragments she found in the box. There are only 17 areas listed. This bone that looks like a chicken Ulna (wing bone) does not match any of the bones she has listed. Out of everything she has listed I narrowed it down to a possible metacarpal or metatarsal. However I do not even believe it's either one of these simply because the bone is way too curved to be either one of these bones. I'm pretty convinced at this point it's an old worn Avian ulna bone. Probably from a chicken. From what I can tell it would even be the same size. This page shows every single bone of a chicken. It's interesting.
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/1911_Encyclop%C3%A6dia_Britannica/Bird
[–]MMonroe54 2 points 3 months ago
the box the pistol is in, which you provide for comparison, looks like it's made of wood. The box the bones were in was cardboard and, I believe, considerably larger. May I ask where you determined the size of the box holding the bones in the photo?
[–]foghaze[S] 3 points 3 months ago
the box the pistol is in, which you provide for comparison, looks like it's made of wood.
No it's cardboard and no I measured it. http://www.uline.com/Product/Detail/S-20042/Special-Use-Boxes/13-x-8-x-2-Evidence-Box-Handgun?pricode=WY797&gadtype=pla&id=S-20042&gclid=Cj0KEQjwncO7BRC06snzrdSJyKEBEiQAsUaRjKkgsLKTtVwvj1KuUVqQdcr2ypliv3C2Zjs8KMoFPZIaAim48P8HAQ&gclsrc=aw.ds
Here is how I figured out the size. It was completely ghetto but I got close enough to figure it out.
http://i.imgur.com/tZriOMF.png
[–]MMonroe54 1 point 3 months ago
Sorry, but I still don't understand. What made you think it was the size of the pistol box you reference? And where did you get the dot grid? Is that supposed to be the bottom of the box the bones are photographed in?
[–]foghaze[S] 2 points 3 months ago
I'm using the dots on the paper the evidence is lying on. For every 8 dots you get 1cm approx. I zoomed in on the box and counted 8 dots and I used that as my reference 1cm scale. I then used red and green lines (alternating) to represent and mark 1cm from one end to the other of the box. Once I was finished I counted approx 30 cm. I realize this could be off an inch or two but it gives us an idea the size of the box as opposed to just seeing a box and not knowing anything because we have no reference. So my rough estimate was 12 inches. The Gun box is 13 inches.
[–]MMonroe54 1 point 3 months ago
I couldn't see the paper or anything beneath the bones, so weren't sure where you got your sample. The box in the photo looks like a larger shallow box to me, but apparently the size of it was never mentioned. I'd estimate at least 12 inches and possible more. But without a ruler or something to compare, I agree we don't know.
[–]foghaze[S] 1 point 3 months ago
I'd estimate at least 12 inches and possible more.
The box is 13 inches long
[–]Chevron07 1 point 3 months ago
Doing some math, if the box is about half full, then that's about 1.5 liters of bone by volume.
KZ should buy one of these and send it through a wood chipper:
https://www.amazon.com/Disarticulated-Skeleton-Medical-Quality-Height/dp/B00RLTL2HI/ref=pd_sim_sbs_328_6ie=UTF8&dpID=41ClkYhukIL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR160%2C160_&refRID=W42CVVJDNDSXZ88VYRQH
Product Dimensions: 17 x 18 x 14 inches
[–]foghaze[S] 1 point 3 months ago
Doing some math, if the box is about half full, then that's about 1.5 liters of bone by volume.
But this is the box that was given to Eisenberg before she went though it. She verifies it in testimony. Says there was a ziplock bag as well. Plus you can tell they have not been cleaned. That would be the first things she does. So this box has all kinds of black charred material in it. One of the points of the post was to show this. They didn't know what was bone and what was not. So everything was thrown in this box that was questionable. What you see in the box is: Questionable charred material behind Avery's pit sorted and sifted. NOT Human bone fragments from Avery's pit.
The box is 13 x 8 x 2.
[–]Chevron07 1 point 3 months ago
Yeah, if every piece of unknown charred material was TH bone, that's still a very tiny portion of skeleton. That would easily fit in a 2 liter soda bottle, where a mock skeleton is shipped in a box that's 70 liters in volume.
13x8x2 = 33cm x 20.3cm x 5.1cm = 3408cm3, or 3.4 liters. Looks like the box is half full, so 1.7 liters.
17x18x14 box is 70,202cm3
[–]foghaze[S] 1 point 3 months ago
That would easily fit in a 2 liter soda bottle, where a mock skeleton is shipped in a box that's 70 liters in volume.
Also not sure if you caught this but when Eisenberg was doing her calculations for 2.2 liters it was if her remains had been ground down into "ashes". Which they had not been. She didn't grind down the actual bone fragments so her analogy is completely wrong to begin with. Had she ground them down into the powder substance it would have filled probably only 5-10% which would be the correct answer. she was literally putting the bone fragments into the bottle. Misleading isn't it?
[–]lrbinfrisco 2 points 3 months ago
I've read more believable stories about Elvis still being alive and hanging out with Big Foot than the prosecution's account of the bones. Seriously whoever wrote this script should be fired. The writers of Sharknado could have done a more believable job.
[–]Redditidiot1 9 points 3 months ago*
Eisenberg actually says this:
Q "Okay. Fair enough. Um, so something, perhaps -- and this is all very rough -- uh, but perhaps two- to three-fifths, 40 to 60 percent of what might be a -- a complete skeleton --
A Correct.
Q -- in total?
A Um, no, that's -- I'm sorry. That's -- That's not what I said. In terms of expected volume from, uh, human remains of the stated weight for Ms. Halbach.
Q Yes.
A I believe if -- if you filled or put those fragments into a two-liter bottle, about 40 to -- 40 percent of that bottle would be filled"
Hmmm. "If you put those fragments into a 2 liter bottle, then 40 percent of the bottle would be filled." Its just basically a little bit of nonsense. Edit: clarity
[–]foghaze[S] 5 points 3 months ago
She was literally saying to put the actual fragments in the bottle. Not the ground fragments. Pretty shady huh?
[–]katekennedy 3 points 3 months ago
That's what a got hung up on. I asked that exact question on SAIG; were they talking about the actual bones put into a 2 liter bottle or were they saying that IF everything was ground up it would fit in that bottle?
I couldn't imagine they meant the actual bones in the bottle so I assumed it was after they were ground.
[–]foghaze[S] 1 point 3 months ago*
I couldn't imagine they meant the actual bones in the bottle so I assumed it was after they were ground.
IMO there are several reasons we can be confident she means the actual fragments in the bottle. For one cremation to an Anthropologist does not mean modern cremation where bones are ground down. When we as layman think of cremation we think of the fine powder. To her any human body that has been burned to that level is considered cremation. The whole grinding is simply another step completely independent of cremation. Also if you pay attention to her wording carefully she means the actual fragments.
Here is her correcting Buting when he states about 40% of a human skeleton was found. She immediately says no and gives the analogy again but makes it more clear. . She is very careful not to say ANY percentage of TH at all. She is careful to always refer to the percentage of the BOTTLE.
"A. I believe if -- if you filled or put those fragments into a two-liter bottle, about 40 to -- 40 percent of that bottle would be filled" Notice she says "if you put THOSE fragments into a 2 liter".
That right there pretty much proved she was talking about bone frags and not "ashes". She is very careful about her wording and does not say 2/5 - 3/5 of TH remains were found. I believe it was deliberate because technically if she put the frags in the bottle it would fill 2/5ths so she's not really lying but she is being extremely misleading because the actual calculation she was using was if they were ground. Teresa's urn would have needed to be 2.2 liters based on her weight. 135 pounds. She did not grind them up so we know she could not possibly even know or guess what percentage those bones ground up would fill.
[–]Redditidiot1 4 points 3 months ago
Agreed; I brought up the crematorium estimates below. Thanks for also bringing up that the 40% was just an estimate and not actually measured. :)
[–]MMonroe54 1 point 3 months ago
It is unclear -- and puzzling -- why she would not have weighed the bones, each container separately, as in those in the box, and then those found in the barrel, which were apparently in some Tupperware container, and those found at the quarry (not sure how they were brought to her). Why wouldn't she want some measurement of just how many there were? I'd bet no one even did a count of bones/bone fragments. So, all they knew really was there was "a bunch of bones"....whatever "a bunch" constitutes.
[–]MMonroe54 2 points 3 months ago
I copied and pasted, too, and this is what I have: "And, um, as I did my -- my quick calculations, um, if Ms. Halbach's weight was as it was stated on the missing person's poster, as 135 pounds, then in terms of volume, um, what would have been expected if we were able to identify every fragment as human and group them all together, um, the volume of -- of her remains after the burning incident -- incident, after cremation of sorts, if you will, would be a little larger than a two-liter bottle of soda. And I say that with all due respect."
This is from Day 14, under Cross by Dean Strang. So what you quote is from the day before, apparently under Direct examination. I'll look for it. Thanks.
[–]foghaze[S] 1 point 3 months ago
"And, um, as I did my -- my quick calculations, um, if Ms. Halbach's weight was as it was stated on the missing person's poster, as 135 pounds, then in terms of volume, um, what would have been expected if we were able to identify every fragment as human and group them all together, um, the volume of -- of her remains after the burning incident -- incident, after cremation of sorts, if you will, would be a little larger than a two-liter bottle of soda. And I say that with all due respect."
Right 2.2 liters is how large her urn should be AFTER they are ground. She is not factoring in the grinding process. If you go to any cremation website they have information on what size urn you would need. It's 1 cubic inch per pound. We know crematories do not give you bone fragments. You get the "ashes". So her urn would need to be 135 cubic inches. She weighed 135 pounds.
Cremation to an anthropologist does not mean Modern cremation where the grinding is done. To them cremation is just burning a body to that extent. The grinding process is not cremation.
In reality the fragments from a cremated human (done professionally in a controlled environment) would have filled most likely 4-5 liters. That would be a complete human skeleton. If what she had only filled 2/5ths of 4-5 liters less than 10% of TH's remains were found. She purposely made this whole analogy confusing and made it sound like more fragments were found than actual was. It's short of flat out lying. IMO.
[–]MMonroe54 1 point 3 months ago
I've seen ashes and urns (boxes) of cremated friends. None are larger than, say, about a shoebox if it were squared instead of rectangular. None that would fill a gallon milk jug, for instance, and 4 liters = 1.056 gallon. Two were ashes of men, each of whom weighed more than 135 lbs. I think the 2 liter number (about 1/2 gal) seems about right.
[–]foghaze[S] 1 point 3 months ago*
I've seen ashes and urns (boxes) of cremated friends. None are larger than, say, about a shoebox if it were squared instead of rectangular. None that would fill a gallon milk jug, for instance, and 4 liters = 1.056 gallon. Two were ashes of men, each of whom weighed more than 135 lbs. I think the 2 liter number (about 1/2 gal) seems about right.
You are correct and I'm not saying Ashes would fill 4 liters. I'm saying the actual fragments before being ground would. The fragments before being ground would fill about 4-5 liters.. The volume for fragments are not the same as ashes. Fragment volume is much greater. She is deliberately mixing these 2 together when she should not be. Her ASHES would be 2.2 liters yet Eisenberg says the actual FRAGMENTS would fill the bottle only 2/5ths not her ashes. She should be using the same unit of measure she is using to measure the ashes but she does not do this. It's misleading and completely messed up. Do you get it?
Evidence shared with media
submitted by Canuck64
July 14, 2016
Even long before the March 1st press conference, Steven Avery’s right to due process and presumption of innocence had been permanently removed.
Compare what Brendan was prompted to say to what was already widely known through the media.
Ken Kratz had both Steven and Brendan tried and convicted in the court of public opinion long before the evidence could be tested in a court of law. The trials themselves were just a formality.
I am sure this is just a sample of what was being discussed by all the media state wide, newspapers, radio, television.
WBAY News http://wbay.com/category/steven-avery-case-videos/
Nov 4
Teresa was on property taking pictures
Nov 5
RAV4 found at salvage yard.
Nov 9
Evidence human in nature found. 22 semi-automatic rifle, and 50 calibre muzzle loader.
Last seen wearing a button down shirt, blue jeans and a summer jacket. Light brown hair and brown eyes.
Nov 10
Blood, pieces of bone and teeth found on property. Bone and teeth found near residence.
Crime tape around tarp covering burn pit.
Attempt to dispose of a body by incendiary means.
Bone found of an adult female.
Inside trailer the key was found in Avery’s bedroom.
Blood found in vehicle and buildings.
Coverage of flags in gravel pit.
Nov 11
Avery’s DNA found on Teresa’s key.
Avery blood found in four places in SUV.
License plates hidden.
Cell phone and camera found in burn barrel near Avery house.
Handcuffs and leg irons,
cutting instruments, claw and rubber hammer, charred clothing found in burn barrels, ashes and much more.
Blood found in 7 locations on garage floor.
Blood found on wood trim and side door of Avery residence in close proximity to a bedroom which contained identifiers for Steven Avery.
Blood found in bathroom, on floor in front of washer and dryer.
Steve Avery has cut on right hand.
Nov 12
Interior of vehicle was not accessible to law enforcement .
Small cuts visible on Avery’s arms.
Nov 14
Cadaver dogs hit on three additional cars, one covered with a tarp, one with blood on a rag and a third with blood in the front and back seats.
Burned clothing, Partially burned shovel, barrel and steel belts coming from six tires.
A number of five gallon type buckets have been located near the Avery compound property which appear to have been utilized to distribute the burned remains.
Investigators believe Teresa was not just the victim of a homicide but also false imprisonment and sexual assault.
Divers search six area ponds.
Police said blood, bone fragments, teeth and other evidence from the search of homes, buildings and the 40-acre salvage yard determined Halbach was slain and dismembered by Steven Avery, who allegedly attempted to burn her body and other evidence. Kratz said he and Pagel called in Milwaukee Police Department officers who were involved in the Jeffrey Dahmer case, since those officers also had to work with body parts in their investigation. Dahmer, of Milwaukee, was convicted in 1992 of killing and dismembering 15 men.
Jan 19
Remains found in burn barrel positively identified a belonging to Teresa.
State lab tests were inconclusive.
Remains sent to FBI. FBI told sheriff remains are positively Teresa Halbach’s.
Candy thinks Steve is guilty.
February 4
Avery investigated for 2004 sexual assault.
December 6, 2005 preliminary hearing broadcast Live http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Preliminary-Examination-2005Dec06.pdf
The RAV4 was found in the southeast corner of the salvage yard camouflaged with a hood from another car and branches. It was missing its license plates and all its doors were locked.
Fassbender The license plates were found in a vehicle on the south side of the entry road leading to Avery's residence. They were folded up.
Teresa was there to take pictures of a plymouth Voyager. Steve admitted that she took pictures on October 31st.
Steve was arrested for felon in possession of a firearm.
Steve had a substantial scabbed over cut on his middle finger on his right hand.
Steve stated that Teresa took the picture and vin number, and he paid her outside by the vehicle $40 in cash. She gave him a copy of the Auto Trader, he returned home and she left. She was not seen alive again.
Steve said that he used the burn pit on October 30th.The burn barrel about a week before the 31st.
Human remains were found in a burn area behind the garage.
Charred bones, human bones, some tissue and teeth.
Kucharski
Many of the residences, outbuildings and office were searched.
Two rifles, some bedding and a vacuum were collected for Avery residence.
Ten empty .22 shell casings were found in the garage.
Pornographic material was found.
Ammunition was found in the bedroom.
A Toyota key was found in the bedroom.
Sturdivant
Bone matter was found concentrated in the center of the burn area behind the garage.
Bones matter was intertwined with the steel belt wires.
There was a hacksaw, shovel.
Another tire that had not been burned.
A burned and rusted van seat. Also found a zipper and grommets.
Burn area looked new, not used often.
Crime lab started sifting the material but did not have to dig down. The ground was hard so they only had to scrap the surface.
The material that was collected, bones, teeth, a zipper and some metal grommets were all placed in one double bagged black garbage bag which was tied up and placed in the evidence van.
Search was completed in two and a half hours.
No processing of the scene took place the next day, it resumed on Thursday.
Eisenberg
Dr. Eisenberg received a message that remains were dropped off in a box at her office while she was out of town.
When she returned she removed the nonhuman remains from the human remains as well as other items.
They were all bagged separately.
There were many fragments smaller than a nickel and some perhaps as long as 4 to 5 inches.
None represented an entire bone, but came from almost every segment of the human skeleton.
They had gone through considerable heat and burning.
She determined the bones to come from a female.
She sorted through the bone fragments without consulting or referring to any reference materials.
Strictly a visual examination. She did not feel she was required to confirm her visual examination.
Dr. Eisenberg determined the bones came from a female based on the shape of fragments she believes are from the brow ridge above the eye socket.
Also a part of a lower arm bone and radius head was very small meaning it has to be a female.
There have been studies on it but does not know the name of the article.
She completed no chemical analysis on the bones, only visual.
Defense counsel asked if she was told through there message that the bones were human, prosection objected, sustained.
Culhane
Collected blood from the back of the RAV4 and near the ignition.
The key found in Steve's room opened the RAV4 door and turned the ignition.
DNA found on the key and blood stains near the ignition belonged to Steve Avery.
The Blood in the cargo area belonged to Teresa.
Ms. Culhane was able to develop a partial DNA profile from the charred bones and tissue consistent with Teresa.
The FBI requires 13 "core" loci matches and they provide two extra loci. Because the DNA sample was so degraded they were able to only get 7 loci matches.
She states that one person out of a billion would be consistent with Teresa.
She swabbed 10 stains found in the RAV4 but only did DNA testing on four of them.
One of the swabs she collected was from the plastic strip where the carpet meets the plactic at the cargo door. She does not recall how big this stain was and it was not one she analysed. Judge ruled that it was not relevant for the hearing.
All the discarded presumptive test swabs were tossed in an open hazardous waste can on the 2 by 3 table.
Her scissors were on that table, and all her DNA swabs which are sealed in paper envelopes were on that table as well.
She than reopens all the envelopes at her desk to allow them to dry.
The next day the key found in Avery's trailer was brought to her to the garage at the same small table she used the previous day.
Multiple people use the small table in the garage so each person cleans it with bleach before doing it.
She swabbed only the black part of it before using it to turn the ignition.
She then also laid out the swab to dry on her temporary table in the garage.
That temporary work table in the garage is used by multiple people but they each wipe it down with bleach before using it.
She than puts it back in the paper container and retains custody of it.
Kratz
Introduces the last piece of evidence by stipulation (agreement between the prosecution and defense) the certificate copy of a death certificate filed that day December 6, 2005, that designates cause of death by homicide.
[–]ajpavvo 1 point 2 months ago
Teeth, why were the teeth not more important and the "tissue" as well? Why did the defense not demand dentist and if there is tissue but bones burnt to such small pieces where or how does any "tissue" survive and then not tested.
[–]Canuck64[S] 2 points 2 months ago
Dr. Simley testified that none of the crowns survived. All he could do was clue two pieces of roots together.
And the tissue was tested as item BZ. Culhane was only able to extract a partial profile using amplified testing, while the FBI conducted mitochondrial DNA testing which could not exclude Teresa.
Avian carpometacarpus (chicken wing) bone found in photo of Teresa Halbach's remains - non human
submitted by foghaze
August 4, 2016
http://i.imgur.com/GyaN4nZ.png
[–]DrCarlSpackler 55 points 2 months ago
The presence of a chicken bone taken from the burn area tends to preclude the theory of the intense fire claimed to cremate a body.
A fire that powerful, enough to denature a human, would destroy an unprotected, fragile chicken wing.
Errors, typos, coincidences, breaks of protocol in Avery reports and case
submitted by Theslayerofvampires
August 22, 2016
So I thought it might be helpful to compile a list of all of the "typos", coincidences and breaks of protocol in the case. I think once you look at them all together it becomes clear they were the result of trying to make Avery look guilty. It seems unlikely all these things were just coincidences or incompetence. Here are the ones I know about. I cited all that I could find on relevant subs and from transcripts and documents. Please add any I missed in comments.
TH Rav4 found days before TK and DV are scheduled to be deposed in Avery civil suit. 11/05/05: Steven arrested 11/10/05: Kocourek Deposition 11/15/05: Vogel Deposition
POG finds TH rav4 and is the ONLY searcher given a camera.
TH death certificate issued 11/10/2005 bones not identified as TH till 1/19/2006
Rav4 listed as seized on 11/3/2005
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/MTSO-Summary-Report-on-Homicide-Investigation.pdf
Magically changing evidence numbers. https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/4erlqd/sloppy_reporting_of_the_evidence_or_police_fuck/
Retired MTSO deputy Bushman lead the search that found the cell phone barrel. https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/4ktalm/retired_dep_bushman_was_group_leader_of_the_mtso/
Manitowoc coroner banned from site of TH's bones because of conflict of interest, no coroner called to the scene https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/4pdywi/coroner_debra_kakatsch_barred_from_the_crime/
Burn barrel number 4 taken into evidence then brought back to Averys, then taken back into evidence. https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/4ojvax/issues_with_burn_barrels_and_bones_found_in_pit/
New protocol invented and not validated by peer review for EDTA testing.
JB: All right. Your protocol, then, that was developed on February -- or issued on February 15th of 2007, for this case only, it's important that whoever do the test, follow the protocol as written, correct?
No forensic expert called to scene of the bones till days later, no pictures taken.
Culhane contaminated control samples with her own DNA when testing item FL (the bullet) which should invalidate the test but because she used up all the DNA in that test still accepted the contaminated test result.
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/jury-trial-index/ day 10 pg. 166 trial transcripts
No evidence of peer review of the test firing comparison of bullet.
[–]smash-_- 5 points 1 month ago
Typos you say?
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/4erlqd/sloppy_reporting_of_the_evidence_or_police_fuck/
[–]JBamers 9 points 1 month ago
TH's body is burned down to tiny bone fragments, her teeth are destroyed yet one piece of charred flesh is found. How is this even possible!
[–]MrDoradus 6 points 1 month ago
bones not identified as TH till 1/19/2006
What happened on this date? Afaik no one can really say when SC actually did the test that resulted in the partial match, all we know for sure is that she issued the report on it on Dec. 5th, 2005 (though it was likely done on the same day).
The profile previously developed from the apparent charred material (item BZ) is listed in the following- table (See Laboratory Report No. M05-2467 issued December 5, 2005 by this analyst)
But we can all agree on the fact that it certainly wasn't done before the death certificate was issued.
Burying the official report and the actual date of when the partial match was made under plenty of layers of BS can be viewed as a break in protocol in itself.
But all in all, it's easier to ask yourself which piece of evidence was actually collected by the book.
If MTSO didn't play part in collecting the evidence then a breach occurred when dealing with logistics, chain of custody or proper tagging, reporting and handling of evidence.
[–]dark-dare 1 point 1 month ago
I think the bones are the most fabricated evidence in the case.
Everyone, even the defense, refers to them as TH bones, remains etc. There is only ONE piece of bone that was tested, ONE. BZ and it gave a partial profile from SC's swab. The rest of the bones have NEVER been determined to be from anyone.
BZ could have been dry labbing or contamination, inadvertent or on purpose, by SC. Why was BZ not sent to the FBI, surely if there is flesh attached, the bone was not cremated, as were the rest of them, so it would stand to reason that it would be possible to get DNA from the bone itself. (Hope KZ tests this piece of bone) Does it have ANY relationship to the other bone fragments found, NO. So ONE piece of bone (BZ) has been partially identified, not enough to confirm identity. THAT'S IT. So why does everyone refer to the bone fragments as TH's.
[–]SBRH33 1 point 1 month ago
Totally agree.
I think I refer to them as TH's out of not sounding completely irrational. A form of respect I suppose.
But I very much agree that those bones are not Halbach. Where did item (BZ) get to anyway?
I've wondered if (BZ) was part of the remains CASO gave back to the Halbach's for burial.
[–]dark-dare 1 point 1 month ago
I hope not, I think BZ may be pivitol to KZ's experts.
[–]SBRH33 1 point 1 month ago
In CASO near the very end bones are given back to the family for burial.
If BZ is included in that what a clever way of keeping it out of the way for possible future DNA testing.
Exumation orders are extremely difficult to obtain.
Perhaps why the Halbachs hired the LA muscle to handle the shit storm about to open up on the shore of Lake Superior.
[–]dark-dare 1 point 1 month ago
Yes I saw where they gave some back in 2011, but they should have kept specific evidence until all appeals were exhausted.
[–]SBRH33 1 point 1 month ago
CASO definately kept some of the cremains. Probably of the most useless value. Science has evolved to the degree that something may be gleaned from the available cremains though.
[–]Theslayerofvampires[S] 1 point 1 month ago
Totally agree as well. If I could have anything definitively answered it would be the bones. They bug me so much.
[–]JJacks61 1 point 1 month ago
Culhane's deviation was NOT signed off by her supervisor. She FORGOT.
I hope Zellner has affidavits from both people saying they didn't know anything about it. No peer review on the bullet. No I was never asked to sign a deviation for a screwed up DNA test.
[–]SBRH33 1 point 1 month ago
Are you serious? WTF? How did I miss that?!
Damn that's twice for one single piece of evidence.... the piece that
puts Halbach in the garage
[–]SBRH33 1 point 1 month ago
I wish I didn't need signatures for my certifications! LMAO!
[–]Theslayerofvampires[S] 1 point 1 month ago
Is that testimony? Is it when she's being cross examined?
[–]JJacks61 1 point 1 month ago
Is that testimony? Is it when she's being cross examined?
Yes, it's in her cross exam testimony.
For information on the charred bones found at Radandt's quarry, go to:
http://georgezipperer.blogspot.com/2016/02/the-land-grab-theory-they-were-hoping.html
Hey Magiclougie - I hope I haven't overlooked something but I can't see any mention of Deputy Sider's report (Mantiwoc Report, page 13) that he discovered a burn barrel on Nov 7 in a cornfield in front of Steven's trailer. He states that he finds burnt metal material and what appeared to be the remains of the Motorola phone. If this is covered I apologize but I didn't see any mention of it and thought it might fit in somewhere. This isn't one of the four barrels collected on November 6.Sider doesn't give time (I'll check) when he finds this barrel. The night before, Reimer gets a tip from an informer to check Steven's incinerators (page 13). Hope this fits in.
ReplyDeleteExcellent work Jane! I only searched the CASO reports for the burn barrels. I'll add MTSO's report to the post.
ReplyDeleteHey I've just been looking at the evidence list at stevenaverycase.com. org/miscellaneous-records/ and on the Calmut County evidence list 7964 is listed as bone pieces barrel # 2. I cross referenced because on your blog it says 7964 is the label given to burnt bone from the deer camp (CASO pages 1073, 1076,1079). Is there an honest explanation for this that I've missed?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI haven't expressed that well, I was rushing but what I meant to say was on CASO page 180 content of barrel #2 is 8314. Now on the evidence list, 7964 is listed as burnt bone pieces barrel #2. On the evidence list, 8314 is now listed as content of barrel. We have 5 barrels listed as evidence:8314-8319 plus 7964.It doesn't stack up, if the contents of barrel two are split into two pieces of evidence, why would they be out of sequence. Plus we know there's a fifth barrel because Sider discovers it whilst the others are removed. If I'm being sloppy because I'm rushing, I apologize but I just know there is something wrong here.
ReplyDeleteSorry I keep dipping in and out but I've been trying to multi-tasking (doing lots of things badly). I just wanted to say you are absolutely right, at the beginning of the post you said:
ReplyDeleteThree 55 gallon barrels were collected from Radandt deer camp. One of these barrels, #2 contained burnt bone fragments... this barrel #2 was switched with one of Barb Janda's barrels and became 'Janda' s burn barrel #2' at trial.
That's right because Barb's barrel was 8314 barrel #2 (CASO page 180). Barrel #2 at trial was 7964 burnt bone pieces. These did not come from 8314, as 8314 is listed separately on the evidence list as 'content of barrel (not specified). Evidence list: stevenaverycase.org/miscellaneous-records. You nailed it!
Thank you, Jane, for confirming it. I spent a solid 10 hours or so, I hate to admit, trying to figure out the deal with the barrels and organizing what I found into a post that I hoped would explain it to others. There is definite obfuscation with the reports, so it takes some time to get to the bottom of things.
DeleteJane Cook wrote on Wednesday, 14 December, 2016:
On CASO page 180, the content of barrel #2 is 8314.
Now on the evidence list, 7964 is listed as burnt bone pieces from barrel #2 [and only one barrel, one of the three from the deer camp, contained bones].
On the evidence list, 8314 is now listed as content of barrel #2 [they took the bone fragments from the deer camp barrel and labelled them 8314].
We have 5 barrels listed as evidence: 8314-8319 plus 7964.
It doesn't stack up.
If the contents of barrel #2 are split into two pieces of evidence, why would they be out of sequence?
Plus, we know there's a fifth barrel because Sider discovers it whilst the others are removed [Avery's barrel from the front yard, containing the cell phone].
Jane Cook wrote on Wednesday, 14 December, 2016:
I just wanted to say you are absolutely right. At the beginning of the post you said:
"Three 55 gallon barrels were collected from Radandt deer camp. One of these barrels, #2 contained burnt bone fragments... this barrel #2 was switched with one of Barb Janda's barrels and became 'Janda' s burn barrel #2' at trial."
That's right because Barb's barrel was property tag #8314, barrel #2 (CASO page 180).
At trial, property tag #7964, the burnt bone pieces, came from Barrel #2.
These did not come from 8314, as 8314 is listed separately on the evidence list as 'content of barrel (not specified).
Evidence list: stevenaverycase.org/miscellaneous-records.
You nailed it!
I just wanted to add that your ten hours solid work was very well spent, because you have unearthed something compelling here, something that adds to the now overwhelming evidence that there was a deliberate and concerted effort to ensure Steven Avery did not get a fair trial.
ReplyDeleteThe next question for me is what was that burning barrel doing in a cornfield, strategically placed by some criminal mastermind �� to be close enough to Steven's trailer to be clumsily associated with Steven, but just far enough away to be discovered by some hapless cop? I might save that one for a rainy day but in the meantime, thanks for a truly brilliant post.
[–]InTheKnow2016
ReplyDeleteI was at the deer camp when the car was found about 300 yards away. The reason Josh and Travis were on the sign up sheet that day 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 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.
[–]AConanDoyle[S]
That is quite interesting, I knew they were close but not that close.
It seemed clear to me that Josh and Travis were there to be at the command tent and tell the story of the fire.
So there many people searching that morning? What about the previous days, was there search activity around the deer camp, yourself or others?
[–]InTheKnow2016
I didn't see anyone search the deer camp while I was there nov 4-6. They did walk thru the woods and gravel pits that sat prior to finding the car. It might have been searched by police between oct 31 and when the car was found and after I was gone for the weekend. Don't remember. Like everyone else, I just assumed Avery killed her as the news presented.
[–]Tfor10
I have always wondered about josh and the guy he signed in at the same time with travis groelle did a little research a few weeks ago and found he may be an amateur race car driver (travis) but that was it. always found it weird how they were the only 2 ppl with no ties to any sort of association that signed in that day. I posted something a few weeks ago but never got much back about travis.....
[–]AConanDoyle[S]
By coincidence he may live right next to the Devils river state trail just 7 minutes south on Highway Q
[–]AConanDoyle[S]
Earlier, when I had been in the command post area, I remembered someone mentioning that JOSHUA RADANDT had checked on his hunting trailers on Monday evening. He saw there was a large fire burning near STEVEN Averys property. The fire was described as being "larger than usual." I, Sgt Jost, started to piece all of this information together. I felt this area,if not already looked at, should be checked for any type of evidence. When Officer Mignon returned, I spoke with her about my feelings of the burn pile. She stated she also felt that something was unusual with that area.
They then found the magic single bone labeled BV laying on the grass....
[–]sleuthing_hobbyist
Interesting to note that this was 11/7 or 11/8 that this was noted, so this might be the first mention of a bonfire at Avery's. Right?
[–]AConanDoyle[S]
Exactly, this seems to be the seed for the bonfire stories, it is also followed up by Jost finding the only bone with mtdna, laying not in the pit but on the grass.
Where this bonfire was and who was in attendance is still very speculative.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/4brjvb/only_one_person_was_at_the_quarry_at_the_hunting/
We know that Brutus (a cadaver dog, not bloodhound) did not have any alerts directly within Avery's residence nor in other areas including as near the car crusher etc, aside from the RAV4 and Barb's burn barrel. The fact that Brutus did not bark or get any hits while in Avery's trailer/garage speaks volumes about the unlikeliness that Teresa was murdered in either of these areas as the state contended. Brutus did show interest in various areas of the quarry/gravel pit south of Avery's property but reportedly no factual hits. Brutus was trained specifically to track the deceased, unlike Loof who tracked living scents. Based on Brutus's handler on the subject of bloodhounds and scents: "Your scent is very specific. Each of us smells differently. It's almost as individual as a fingerprint would be."
ReplyDeleteLoof had been involved in searches for missing people across multiple counties. Loof was classified as "scent specific" and could pick up a scent off of anything that the individual had touched [i.e., any of the items taken from Teresa's vehicle and home would had given Loof a fully sufficient scent].
The mention on 11/07 of a "very intense" track leading from the deer camp toward Kuss Rd. was the first and last time this was ever mentioned in any CASO logs or other documents. Loof's hit near the deer camp was not mentioned again in any records. The trailer house where this track originated from was not mentioned by any other investigative report and there is no indication that the trailer was ever entered or searched (it no longer physically exists on the property, either). It was the following day, November 8, that a couple of presumed human bones were observed lying directly on top of an otherwise crusted over and undisturbed burn pit--these bones were never photographed in situ before being excavated.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/582vcs/the_very_intense_scent_from_jrs_trailer_to_kuss/
So What Do We Have Here??? (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeletesubmitted 2 days ago * by 7-pairs-of-panties
Hmmmm....So what do we really have here???? What are we really talking about???
2 ravs?
Phone records altered for trial and phone messages erased while victim should be missing.
Fax machines that have the wrong number and wrong time yet we are to believe the time stamp is right.
The victim's phone pings away from the suspects home while the suspects phone stays at his home on different locations on the property.
The car is called in on the 3rd and seized according to their reports, yet, nope, AC never saw anything, was just checking.
We have a key that jumps out of nowhere after 7 searches of a 9X10 room that has NONE of the victim's DNA on it.
We have the sheriff whom is related to the finder of the car that is able to find things in record time, whom has the sheriff's private line and just met in private w/ him prior to God leading the way.
We have officers able to travel to the property in star wars type speed.
We have officers looking in every car on the lot for clues for the missing girl. They look in EVERY CAR EXCEPT for the car of the missing girl, they are careful not to open that one!
We have dogs that find the victims scent at the neighbor's trailer camp but we are careful not to inspect that trailer even though the dogs never hit on SA's trailer, they will concentrate their efforts there.
We have a cujo type dog on site that hundreds of officers were so afraid of they couldn't go near the fire pit on the property that they found bones just laying at the top when walking by. BTW Cujo was still on site when the bones were found. Don't worry, they were careful not to take any photos or call the coroner, or forensic anything to check out the bones or do a grid. They were careful to scoop them up...Sorry about those chicken bones that got photographed somehow.
CONTINUED...
We have bones of a female also appearing burned found in the neighbors quarry (remember where the scent was). It's ok, we don't think these female burnt bones have anything to do w/ the other bones. Oh and we found some pink flesh material there and blood, and also burnt insulation, but keep looking at the salvage yard cause ya know CAUSE.
ReplyDeleteWe have a bullet that is found months later after many searches. The bullet should go through the victims head, but no blood DNA is on the bullet. The defense asks to be there for the testing of the bullet, but denied and the test is used up and contaminated but used anyways. It's true cause they said so.
We have bones in a bone pit that don't account for even 1/2 of what should be there. We are missing SO MANY TEETH! Where the hell are her teeth? We are to believe that the teeth did not survive the fire, but the scull where the bullets were shot did survive and that super amazing jeans rivet that survived cause we all know that jeans rivets from Kohls are WAY stronger than teeth??
We have our suspect taking several calls that night and visiting family and friends on the lot. Meanwhile he is also able to burn a body to cremation fragments in all of 2 hours. He is also magically able to clean his trailer of all blood, skin, DNA, and hair. How does he do this??? Bleach of course! It is amazing that bleach was able to clean up the hair cut that they gave her per Brenden. Even more amazing that they never tried to test anything out of the vacuum for the hair that they cut.
We have evidence from TH home that shows up at SA home; it's written down even. Certain things there should be 2 of in evidence and there just aren't.
We have electronics and cameras that are burned (kinda), bones are burned beyond recognition yet the electronics that would be much much easier to destroy they just lay there waiting to be identified.
We have burn barrels being taken to custody and contents cataloged, this same barrel goes on a truck back to the property and produces bones when the cops had the property under their control. Could this barrel be the one they took from the hunting trailers off Kuss Rd??? Is that why it needed to come back? A little switcheroo?
We have a cast of characters whom all seem to know that they are not going to find a missing girl. They seemed to know her fate long before they should have. On the 5th KK and DR and a few others were already saying what they expected to find on the property.
We have LE writing reports MONTHS after the fact. We have one police force in charge of the investigation, and another that should not be involved at all, but those are the ones that found EVERY piece of evidence.
I guess what we have here is a PERCEPTION. This case was built for the public eye (not the world stage). They wanted to create an image an awful horrific image. They were successful for the locals. The one problem they left just enough evidence and nothing more. When they didn't think it would be enough they went back and added more. (the bullet, the hoodlatch, and Brenden's false confession).
I haven't even mentioned everything. It's a long long list. Please add your own. Have a Merry Happy New Year TTM'ers!!
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/5l1co7/so_what_do_we_have_here/
[–]denmanstace wrote at https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/4f840i/and_do_you_know_what_else_was_south_of_the_metz/:
ReplyDeleteThe guy that wrote the book on Edward Wayne Edwards stated that one way E.W.E. would get rid of the bodies, would be to dig a shallow hollow under a fallen tree, put the body there with some gravel or something and then douse with diesel or some super combustible liquid and light a match. The explosion would drive the body up against the trees breaking every bone in the body. He would then be able to dispose/cut/dismember bodies easier rather than having to cut through bones...
The whoosh sound came up and I thought of E.W.E. again...
I personally don't believe in the E.W.E. theory...at the beginning it was intriguing then lost its appeal to me trying to rationalize how this elderly man could do all this stuff...but with the 'whoosh' sound and vile smell, who knows... this case is so full of twists and turns, its hard to come up with a logical answer.
The one thing that has come up for me from day one is that the only reason that the car, bullet, key etc was found on SA property was to frame SA...that is the only thing that makes sense to me in this whole case...who did it???...I have no idea at this point 4 months since watching it and Redditting ever since. No one could write this stuff...!
Excerpt from John Ferak's January 15, 2017 article at USA TODAY-Wisconsin:
ReplyDeleteAt Avery's trial, Avery's lawyers Dean Strang and Jerry Buting mistakenly believed the pelvic bones were found at the large mass of nearby quarries owned by Joshua Radandt, also southwest of Avery's land.
However, more precise police reports show the pelvic bones were recovered from Manitowoc County's land. Zellner has also recognized that several Calumet investigators were spending an inordinate amount of time over the course of several days scouring for evidence of Halbach's murder and dismemberment in and around these quarries, including Radandt's property.
Calumet Sheriff's Lt. Kelly Sippel's regular presence around these off-site quarries has drawn Zellner's attention. Reports of his activities, though vague and short, indicate he was aware of the recovery of the charred pelvic bones and the recovery of suspicious burnt material at a burn barrel kept by the Radandt deer camp property. On Nov. 10, 2005 — the day after Avery was taken into custody — Sippel threatened to arrest a Green Bay television camera man who was positioned south of Avery's property in the vicinity of the quarries. “I informed (the cameraman) the road that he was coming off of was posted as closed and that another breach like that would result in his arrest,” Sippel wrote in his report. “Searching continued throughout the day with several sites being located in a county quarry to the southwest. These sites were marked and GPS was taken …”
In November 2005, authorities from Calumet County and the Wisconsin Division of Criminal Investigation spotted several blood stains and additional charred human remains at the quarry properties encompassing the Avery Salvage Yard in Manitowoc County. However, these clues were downplayed by special prosecutor Ken Kratz at the 2007 murder trials of Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey. (Photo: Trial exhibit Steven Avery's murder trial)
Calumet Sgt. Bill Tyson and Ron Ebben of the Wisconsin Division of Criminal Investigation were involved in the recovery of bloody clues that remain a huge forensic mystery to this day.
Their observations raise the possibility that Halbach was harmed or dismembered at one of the quarries south of Avery’s. They collected fresh blood stains within the gravel and a stained rag of "possible blood or rust stains," their reports show. Significantly, the blood stains that were recovered from the quarry contained a full DNA profile for a male, not a match for Steven Avery, the Wisconsin State Crime Laboratory determined.
CONTINUED...
Law enforcement’s interest in a seldom-traveled road nearly a half-mile from Avery's has raised the possibility that Halbach’s RAV4 was found nearby, and that her body was initially buried, only to be dug up and dismembered at one of the quarries.
ReplyDeleteBolstering that scenario, cadaver and tracking dogs were far more intense along Kuss Road and the nearby quarries than at Avery’s trailer where Kratz suggested the brutal killing occurred. Kratz downplayed evidence that showed the tracking dogs were preoccupied with a number of sites that weren't near Avery's trailer and burn pile pit. Reports show that one of bloodhounds borrowed from the Kaukauna Police Department tracked Halbach's scent to a concrete stoop at the south entry door of a red house trailer that was part of the Radandt deer camp property. Dogs also tracked Halbach's scent to the cul-de-sac at the end of Kuss Road, reports show.
Manitowoc and Calumet deputies spent an entire day, Nov. 7, 2005, scouring an area near the end of Kuss Road that retired Manitowoc County Sheriff's deputy Mike Bushman suspected was a possible grave. The wooded area, near the Radandt quarry, drew heightened interest from one of the bloodhounds following the scent of Halbach's shoes and also from one of the police cadaver dogs. Authorities wrote reports stating that the site had no connection to Halbach's disappearance. The following afternoon, Sippel and Manitowoc County Sgt. Jason Jost were involved in recovering two charred human bones near Avery's burn pit.
http://www.postcrescent.com/story/news/investigations/2017/01/15/avery-case-lull-but-things-heat-up/96533558/
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 11/7/05
ReplyDeleteREPORTING OFFICER: Lt. Kelly Sippel
Circumstances: Monday morning orgainzed large group of firemen and LE personnel to search on and around the Avery property. Also brought in 60 state troopers to rewalk the salvage yard with the intent to locate any other evidence other than Teresa's RAV4 and to see if Teresa had been on the Avery property.
This would be when the bones were discovered in the quarry pile, but this pile was on county-owned land for dumping road debris, etc. The land used to be part of the quarry but was sold to the county, town of Gibson.
REPORTING OFFICER: Lt. Kelly Sippel
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 11/8/05
Circumstances: Tuesday morning a fireman and state trooper found the license plates in a station wagon. Taped off the area and returned to the command post. At noon, took the WI State Crime Scene Lab team back to area where the plates had been found and again returned to the command post. At 3:40 spoke to Jost, who indicated there was a large burn area behind Avery's garage. He felt the area hadn't gotten searched properly because of the large German Shephard in the immediate area.
This is when the first bone is discovered near Avery's fire pit.
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 11/12/05
REPORTING OFFICER: Lt. Kelly Sippel
"On the morning of 11/12/05, the state arson team returned to the AVERY property to finish collecting several items of evidence. The first item of evidence they were able to collect would have been that of the burned garbage in an area that we refer to as the deer camp located on the RADANDT property west/southwest of STEVEN AVERY's residence. The final two pieces would have been that of some bone and flesh located in the MICHELS MATERIALS QUARRY to the northeast of the AVERY property. At 0900 hours on 11/12/05, I pulled all officers into the command post. We then began to breakdown the area, and at 1 1:28 a.m. on llll2l05, Special Investigator TOM FASSBENDER turned the property back over to the AVERYS."
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 11/12/05
REPORTING OFFICER: Lt. Kelly Sippel
"State arson team returned to the AVERY property to finish collecting several items of evidence. The first item of evidence they were able to collect would have been that of the burned garbage in an area that we refer to as the deer camp located on the RADANDT property west/southwest of STEVEN AVERY's residence." (pg.249)
People involved: Lt. Kelly Sippel of Calumet County; Riemer; Ebben; Rodney Pevytoe, Wisconsin Division of Criminal Investigation
Circumstances: Nov. 12, three days after Avery's arrest, marked the last day authorities retained control of the 40-acre Halbach crime scene on Avery Road. However, reports reflect, many of these investigators weren't looking for evidence at Avery's, but were focused on gathering physical evidence at Radandt's quarry and at his deer camp site where Loof, the bloodhound, had tracked a scent to a secluded red trailer off Kuss Road several days earlier. "The first item of evidence they were able to collect would have been that of the burned garbage in an area that we refer to as the deer camp located on the Radandt property west/southwest of Steven Avery's residence," Sippel wrote. "The final two pieces would have been that of some bone and flesh located in the Michels Materials Quarry to the northeast of the Avery property." The Michels quarry was where the team of cadaver-scent dogs had fixated on a tall mound of gravel six days earlier. Riemer stated that he processed a container marked "deer camp burn barrel" along with several items of evidence labeled as burnt material and burnt bone from the deer camp area.
When: Feb. 27, March 1, 2007
DeletePeople involved: Leslie Eisenberg, forensic anthropologist,
Circumstances: During Avery's murder trial, Eisenberg confirmed that she examined a number of charred bones that were recovered by Wisconsin law enforcement from Radandt's quarry property — including some pelvic bones.
Additionally, charred human bones turned up in one of the four burn barrels, barrel #2, that the State claims was confiscated from the backyard of Avery's sister and next-door neighbor, Barb Janda.
"There were some cuts, appeared to be some cuts on those pelvic bone fragments?" asked Avery's defense lawyer Dean Strang.
"That's correct," Eisenberg testified.
[–]MMonroe54 4 points 19 hours ago
ReplyDeleteThen there's 3 or 6 likely human bones, burned. And therefore 10 or 5 non-human burned bones.
Why would someone burn a handful of animal bones there, where there's all these unburned animal bones? Did they get mixed up with a human body burning, did Eisenberg misidentify things?<<<
The only way it makes sense, imo, is if it was a regular burn site, where someone disposed of, say, deer bones, and perhaps occasionally tossed deer bones there but did not burn them. And then used that burn site to dispose of a human body the same way. I don't think it's too unusual that largish fragments were left behind. Panic, hurry, darkness, possible witnesses -- anything could account for it. They were actually not big, the largest 2 to 3 inches, I think, right? And could have been overlooked....and also never expected to be found because the point in moving the bones was not to conceal that burn site but so they would be FOUND somewhere else. It was sheer luck, especially considering this investigation, that the bones remaining there were found.
In shoveling ash and bones, some might be missed, especially in the dark or in a hurry. I'm not an advocate for any one theory, just throwing out possibilities of what might have happened, no matter who was doing the burning, cutting, and/or moving.
If the bones found at the quarry -- identified as pelvic bones -- were not human, it changes this case. Because one of the prevailing questions is, why bones in 3 different places? Quarry, barrel, burn pit? Unless bones had been moved into the burn pit, as the defense suggested, from the quarry, using the barrel as the transport. If quarry bones are not human, then we are left with burn pit and barrel, and that could be explained as the bones that did not burn fully on the first try were later shoveled into the barrel and relit. No transporting, in other words.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/5vujrt/making_sense_of_the_contents_of_the_quarry_pile/
[–]thed0ngs0ng
ReplyDeletehow about this theory- JR told police he observed a fire in SA's burning barrel as he drove to his deer camp on the 31st. TH's scent was later tracked by a bloodhound to the red trailer in this deer camp. If her body was cremated in the burning barrel at the deer camp, perhaps LE brought that barrel to the salvage yard, dumped the bone fragments in SA's burn-pit, and then put the barrel with the other Janda barrels instead of returning it to the deer camp.
[–]OpenMind4U[S]
I LOVE THIS!!!!! Simply love it! Thank you! Makes very good sense and very logical!!!!!!!!!!!
[–]dugdiggins
I like the theory that there were three, not four, Janda barrels. There were three deer camp barrels collected into evidence (CASO page 248). So the planters dumped the bones from deer camp burn barrel #2 into Avery's fire pit, but some of the bones got stuck in the muck at the bottom of the barrel. So the planters added that barrel to Janda's barrels. The reports on the barrels were obfuscated so that deer camp burn barrel #2 could be misidentified as Janda burn barrel #2. This would explain why there is confusion about how many total barrels were collected into evidence.
P.S. Steven also told O'Neill that Barb had 3 or 4 barrels.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/66wu40/there_was_three/
[–]Nexious 18 points 24 days ago
ReplyDeleteThe end of Kuss Road was also where several police dogs tracked Halbach's scent in the days prior to Avery's arrest.
The attempted explanation of this by Fassbender and Wiegert to Avery on 11/9 is completely insane, too.
FASSBENDER: You drove across the field. You went by the dead end. You went down the dirt road by the hunting shacks. You went in that back entrance and you parked that car there. You walked up. The bloodhound followed your scent all that way. Walked you right up through there, where the plates were thrown even.
WIEGERT: Took us to the body, took us to the plates.
Not only do they lie by claiming the bloodhound was randomly following AVERY'S scent (when it was actually a scent taken from "Teresa's shoe insole" that it tracked), but they go as far as to claim it led them to the body and plates. They are clearly misconstruing the bloodhound tracking with the cadaver dog and creatively filling in the blanks with made-up claims.
Their explained path that Avery must had taken based on the bloodhound scent tracking also means that instead of taking any of the very isolated paths directly through the thousands of cars, Avery instead trespassed and risked being seen by anyone who may be at the deer camp area or along that dirt road, and went a notable distance out of his way just to circle back around with the RAV4.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/62omcl/ferak_goes_back_to_manitowoc/
A Less Extreme Conspiracy (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeletesubmitted 8 hours ago by Mowter
A common tactic of guilters/LE is to argue that SA couldn't have been framed without a massive conspiracy involving extreme measures. If they can convince you that a frame-job would require Illuminati-level machinations, they've convinced you that there couldn't have been a framing and, by implication, SA is guilty. Here's a list of ways the framing may have been less extreme (and thus, more believable) than others have posited...
Motivation -- It's hard to believe LE would intentionally frame an innocent man. But it's also possible they honestly believed SA was guilty. It's less of a stretch to think LE was bending/breaking rules in what they felt was the pursuit of justice.
People Involved -- Framing SA would actually require very little in the way of affirmatively bad acts. We're talking about planting (a) the Rav4, (b) the blood, (c) the bullet, (d) the key, and (e) the burned remains. This doesn't require a massive number of people; only 2-3, really, and they don't even have to be LE. It could have been a single LE with the help of 1-2 outside folks. Everybody else involved only needs to take what's found at face value.
Did LE kill TH? -- At one point, the prosecutor argues that LE couldn't have framed SA without knowing TH was dead, and they couldn't have known that without killing her themselves. This is nonsense. There are lots of scenarios where LE would have known TH was dead without killing her themselves. They could have, for an example, found the crime scene, then moved the evidence to the yard to aid in convicting SA.
LE Wouldn't Cover for the Real Killer -- The argument goes that LE wouldn't frame SA because it would mean the actual killer was still free. There are lots of reasons why they wouldn't be worried about a killer being on the loose. Some examples: A) They honestly thought SA was the killer, B) They found TH and believed her death to be an accident or suicide, or C) They knew the killer was somebody like GZ, didn't want to convict him for something that may have been a horrible misunderstanding.
The takeaway here is twofold. First, in trying to piece together how SA could have been framed, it's not necessary to immediately go to extremes. Think of more reasonable explanations. Second, be suspicious of anybody states that a framing couldn't have occurred without the most extreme circumstances imaginable.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/67ghjc/a_less_extreme_conspiracy/
Inside Deer Camp of "Individual A" June 2016 (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeletesubmitted 8 months ago by solunaView
There's been a lot of interest about JR and the Deer Camp since last Friday. We have been interested in this location for some time now. Dating back to February or March.
I had interest because satellite images show that the trailers in the camp have been moved and some replaced. One trailer is gone completely.
My theory has always been that this is possibly the murder site. The land was sold almost one year to the day after TH was murdered. After the rally in Manitowoc in June we decided to pay a visit to the Deer Camp.
Here are some pics of that visit. This is one of the most bizarre and foreboding places I have ever visited. The negative energy in this place is enough to make your blood run cold.
I discussed this on another thread but didn't have the pics at hand. Went looking for them today. Others may be able to see something or experience something.
The last picture shows the spot where the red trailer used to sit. The direction through the clearing shows the elevation of the quarry and the fact that you can't see SA trailer from the Deer Camp.
http://imgur.com/a/GlUqU
http://imgur.com/a/PL57F
http://imgur.com/a/GQXqX
http://imgur.com/a/bJP9E
http://imgur.com/a/SD84K
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/507c4u/inside_deer_camp_of_individual_a_june_2016/
Factbender testifies that a dog alerted at the Kuss Road clandestine grave site on Nov. 7th. (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeletesubmitted 7 hours ago by schmuck_next_door
JD's report in CASO about excavation site doesn't tell you this, but a dog alerted on it. Factbender also testifies to this specific site. Also check out the time the time JD was notified that this site was not pertinent to the case. Oh, and this was on the 7th, about 16 hours before the bones in the pit are discovered.
CASO Page 137 JD's Report
On Monday,11/07/05 at 1035 hours, I (JD) was contacted by Inv. WIEGERT. He requested that an investigator go to the east end of Kuss Road.
I did respond to the area and spoke with retired Deputy Inspector MICHAEL BUSHMAN, MANITOWOC CO. SHERIFF'S DEPT. BUSHMAN was leading a team of searchers in the area. It should be noted that the end of Kuss Road is approximately one half mile away from the western edge of the AVERY property
I arrived at the east end of Kuss Rd. at approximately 1045 hours and spoke with former Deputy Inspector BUSHMAN. He indicated he had found a possible excavation site and did take us to the site.
The area was then taped off with crime scene tape and the area was frozen. No one was allowed in or out.
The possible excavation area was processed by WI STATE CRIME LAB personnel and at 1651 hours, I was notified the excavation area was not pertinent to this case. GPS coordinates for this area were N44 degrees 15.263 and W87 degrees 42.031.
Investigation continues.
Factbender testimony 08/10/2006
JB: Let me ask it this way. When the dogs would alert on something, that would cause you to devote some resources, you or Wiegert, to devote some police resources to then start searching, right?
TF: Certainly.
JB: And that would, potentially, include evidence collection officers if, upon search, they found something that looked like it was of evidentiary value, right?
TF: Yes.
JB: And you talked about, for instance, a suspected clandestine grave site, right?
TF: Yes.
JB: The dogs alerted on that?
TF: Yes.
JB: And you took a team over and you spent some time working on that?
TF: Yes.
JB: And it ended up being -- In fact, you were very seriously thinking that this was potentially a new grave site and that Teresa's body might even be in there, right?
TF: Yes.
JB: So you pulled a bunch of people over there to go look at it?
TF: To deal with it, yes.
JB: Okay. And then it ultimately determined -- was determined to be nothing of value, correct?
TF: Correct.
JB: So tell me, during that week, did you have to take your resources, your evidence collection team, to the burn pit behind Mr. Avery's garage, before November 8th? On the 5th, 6th, or the 7th, did you have to take an evidence collection team to the burn pit behind Mr. Avery's garage, because a dog had alerted?
TF: No.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/68ulp4/factbender_testifies_that_a_dog_alerted_at_the/
[–]Nexious 26 points 8 hours ago*
ReplyDeleteFrom Joshua Radandt's addidavit:
"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."
Sounds strikingly familiar to techniques used on multiple other parties including the Dassey family, to fit a particular narrative where the "truth" wasn't enough.
[–]thed0ngs0ng 14 points 8 hours ago
We already know the truth, we just need to hear it from you
[–]Zapfogldorf [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Very familiar. It's the "just keep talking until you say what we want you to say. Until then, everything you say is wrong" technique of investigation. "Confirm what we 'know' is true and we'll leave. Don't confirm and we'll keep telling you that you must have seen something else, repeat our questions and wear you down like a child does with his mother at the grocery store begging for a lollipop" method.
"There was a big fire?" "No." "There was a big fire?" "No." "There was a big fire?" "No." "There was a big fire?" "No." "There was a big fire?" "No."
"Are you sure there wasn't a big fire?"
They always want the truth alright; their truth.
[–]7-pairs-of-panties 20 points 9 hours ago
JR is a crucial witness! What he shares is mindblowing in my opinion. What he shares shows that this does in fact go to the top, it's not just a few rogue investigators planting under the radar. They knowingly and willingly did this. I've always believed that but what JR states proves it for me. How many more people are out there that know important information that they didn't think much of at the time but now it all makes sense. I'll bet there a lots.
[–]JJacks61 12 points 7 hours ago
Or were told what to say like Brendan was. And clearly JR. We just want the truth. NO, not like that, like this. Yea, that's the truth now that we told you.
[–]Casablank10 17 points 7 hours ago
JR being encouraged to remember a larger fire is consistent with ST increasing the size of Steven's bonfire every time he was interviewed.
TickTockManitowoc @TManitowoc
ReplyDeletePicture this scene: "Any sign of my missing Teresa?" "No sorry, Ms. Halbach..our sheriff blocked the search and rescue dogs from looking."
10:56 AM - 12 Jun 2017
Loof Track Three: Why didn't law enforcement allow Loof to search past the Kuss Road Cul De Sac? (imgur.com)
submitted an hour ago by magilla39
https://i.imgur.com/ICpNI4Ul.jpg
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/6h1meh/loof_track_three_why_didnt_law_enforcement_allow/
Barrels of Fun: Does Steven Avery new affidavit allow us to decode the Dance of the Burn Barrels? self.MakingaMurderer
ReplyDeleteSubmitted 12 hours ago * by freerudyguede
According to his new affidavit
.6. There were seven burn barrels on the property. Barb had four, Chuck had one, Allan and Delores had one, and I had one.
We can make that 6 burn barrels as we know from the crime scene photos and Bobby's testimony that Barb only had three barrels. So Barb 3, Chuck 1, Parents 1, and Steven Avery 1
On November 5 Joshua R. comes over to the salvage yard and identifies the barrel he saw burning - which is Steven Avery's barrel
The morning of November 6, Steven Avery's barrel is taken into evidence and as a precaution all three of Barb's barrels are collected as well.
The night of November 6/7, Teresa Halbach's burnt electronics brought to the yard and either the parent's or Chuck's barrel is moved to beside Steven Avery's trailer
Morning of November 7, the cell phone barrel "discovered". The Kuss Road excavation and Teresa Halbach's body located by scent tracking dog.
Ken Kratz advises sending Burn Barrel 4 back to use to plant Teresa Halbach's cremains.
Night of November 7/8. Teresa Halbach exhumed and cremated in deer camp. Burn Barrel 4 returned to salvage yard, but final barrel (either Chuck's or parent's) is used to transport cremains to firepit and then left at deer camp.
November 8. Teresa Halbach's cremains "discovered" in firepit. Burn Barrel 4 recovered and the deer camp burn barrel (ie Chuck or parent's) also taken in.
November 11. State arson team examine deer camp burn barrel, locate more bones and decide need to make sure deer camp burn site is clean
November 12. Deer camp burn site totally cleaned up by arson team, large and noticeably human bones labelled as "found in burn barrel 2".
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/6s4rkp/barrels_of_fun_does_steven_avery_new_affidavit/
Cell Phone Planted in Burn Barrel on November 7, 2005
ReplyDelete1:15 PM: Baldwin was a requested to guard the burn barrels. [CASO Report Page 135]
1:15 PM: Matuszak signs out and travels to the Sheriff’s Office to acquire the trailer containing burn barrel #4. [CASO_CRIME_SCENE_LOG v1.61.xlsx]
The request for Burn barrel #4 when the "cell phone" is discovered.
At 1:15 PM Baldwin stands by the burn barrel. At the same exact time Matuszak signs out to pick up the evidence trailer along with burn barrel #4 back at the SO.
Hawkins states in his report [CASO Report Page 135] that Ertl, Cates and Zhang are in the process of going through burn barrel #2 when they are called back and burn barrel #4 is placed onto the trailer.
JOHN ERTL, CHARLES CATES and GUANG ZHANG got through barrel marked #4 and were in the process of going through barrel #2 when they were called back to the scene. Barrel marked #4 was placed back on the trailer.
1:40 PM: Ertl, Cates and Zhang returned to Kuss Rd. [Notice of Motion and Motion for Post-Conviction Relief - Exhibit 82]
1:40 PM We returned to the scene and were briefed by Inv. Wiegert and then escorted to the apparent burial site, not far into the bush, south at the end of Kuss Road approximately 1/2 mile to the West of Steven Avery's residence.
2:40 PM: Ertl, Cates and Zhang sign in. [CASO_CRIME_SCENE_LOG v1.61.xlsx]
2:51 PM: Ertl, Cates and Zhang sign out and head over to Kuss Rd. [CASO_CRIME_SCENE_LOG v1.61.xlsx]
3:00 PM: Cates returns to the yard to finish processing the Honda and Renault for latent prints.[Notice of Motion and Motion for Post-Conviction Relief - Exhibit 82]
3:25 PM: Matuszak arrives at the salvage yard with burn barrel #4.[CASO_CRIME_SCENE_LOG v1.61.xlsx]
3:37 PM: Kratz signs into the salvage yard.[CASO_CRIME_SCENE_LOG v1.61.xlsx]
3:39 PM: Matuszak retrieves the burn barrel in front of Steven's. burn barrel #4 at the salvage yard. [CASO Report Page 143] [CASO Report Page 152]
3:41PM: Kratz signs out of the salvage yard.[CASO_CRIME_SCENE_LOG v1.61.xlsx]
4:20 PM: Matuszak signs out and heads back to the SO. [CASO_CRIME_SCENE_LOG v1.61.xlsx] [CASO Report Page 143]
Matuszak is ordered to drop off burn barrel #4 in the gravel pit before returning on the way back to the SO. Matuszak stops, the trailer doors are opened. Both barrels are removed. The cell phone is tossed in Steven's barrel. Someone snaps a pic Exhibit 156 - cell phone inside barrel. Steven's barrel is loaded back the trailer and off Matuszak goes.
The grass in the lower right hand corner isn't any way to dispute this. The entire quarry was bordered with grass.
Heimerl never testified about specifically Exhibit 156 - cell phone inside barrel. Kratz never asked about this pic. I wonder why...
On Monday, 11/07/05, at approximately 1545 hours, I (Deputy KENNETH R. MATUSZAK of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT) took into evidence a 50-gallon burning barrel. It was located on the northeast comer of STEVEN AVERY's property. The buming barrel was filled approximately one-quarter way with burned debris. The burning barrel was placed in an enclosed trailer. I then transported the burning barrel to the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT.
*There will be more on Matuszak's drive times later in the timeline.
CONTINUED...
Collecting Cremains in Burn Barrel #4
ReplyDeleteFrom the time that Matuszak leaves the gravel pit is when the cremains are collected and tossed in burn barrel #4.
5:45PM: Ertl and company finish at the burial site. [Notice of Motion and Motion for Post-Conviction Relief - Exhibit 82]
Note: Info is taken from the remaining info shown at 1:45PM west of Steven Avery's residence. (See diagram) The site was observed and upon written consent from the property owner, photographs were taken and the site was examined. White plastic sheeting protrunded from the ground on either side of an area -3' in diameter devoid of plants; apparent decomposed wood or peat-like material. Some moss lay nearby, uprooted; however, there was no sign that soil had been excavated and replaced and numerous small bits of the plastic sheeting appeared to have shed from the eposed material and lay on the surface. Once a warrant was obtained the site was excavated. The area devoid of plants appeared to be peat moss and the plastic sheet, the remnants of a peat moss bag (as per the label on the underside). Beneath the bag was the decomposing remains of a wooden pallet. The surrounding root mat extended under and up through the plastic sheet. The area was excavated further and no disturbance to the soil layering was evident - finished 5:45 PM.
6:15PM: Ertl confers with Wiegert and Fassbender. [Notice of Motion and Motion for Post-Conviction Relief - Exhibit 82]
6:15 PM Conferred with Inv. Wiegert and Tom Fassbender and then proceeded back to the SO in Chilton to finish processing the barrels. A fifth barrel, reportedly containing remnants of Motorola cellular phone had also been transported to the SO in Chilton.
7:00 PM: Radandt meets with Wiegert at the salvage yard. [CASO Report Page 145]
Radandt's Affidavit Revisited
A few days after November 5th, I remember seeing tower lights in the Manitowoc County sand and gravel pit What tower lights is he talking about? These perhaps?
JOSHUA stated he wished to talk to me about a phone call he had received. He stated that on 11/06/05 at approximately 1900 hours, he received a call at his residence.
The word residence stands out to me. Radandt clearly doesn't live at the Deer Camp. IMO, in his affidavit the night he is remembering the lights being on in the Manitowoc County Pit is the 7th.
Also, if you don't want to believe this is the night Radandt is talking about, November 7th is the last day he ever signed in or out on the log sheet. So there's that.
7:21 PM: Matuszak returns from the SO. [CASO_CRIME_SCENE_LOG v1.61.xlsx]
Back at Headquarters
7:30 PM: Ertl gains access to the service garage.[Notice of Motion and Motion for Post-Conviction Relief - Exhibit 82]
Ertl states in his report when he gets back to the SO they gain access to the garage, but not access to the evidence trailer.
7:30PM We gained access to the garage (but not the trailer supposedly containing the fifth barrel) and finished processing the contents of the second burn barrel.
He doesn't explicitly state that the evidence trailer is or isn't there; he simply states that they didn't gain access to it. This is his way of covering his team's ass. No I don't think that Ertl, Cates or Zhang had anything to do with physical planting of evidence.
7:30 PM We gained access to the garage (but not the trailer supposedly containing the fifth barrel) and finished processing the contents of the second burn barrel.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/6y3yyl/siders_falsely_testifies_at_trial_about_custody/
For Sleuthers - Updated Post with New Evidence Report as a Follow up to Prior Post: Master Evidence Spreadsheets - File Sharing Links Included - Includes Quarry Debris Sites, GPS locations and Human Bones from Recent Testing Motion (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeleteby seekingtruthforgood
The purpose of this updated post is to provide a screenshot of evidence ledgers and ID's which may be of interest to those who are sleuthing for this case: https://imgur.com/AzvEgDK
Specifically, my screen shot above details two ledgers: 6-86 and 5-209. Within the ledgers, you will notice evidence tags. Indicated by the tags are other related tags from which evidence was collected.
As an example:
Ledger 6-86 includes tags 7409, 7410 and 7411, which all came from tag 8658, per page 732 of the CASO report.
8658, we now now, is debris pile 3 from the quarry and contained human bones, per Dr. Eisenberg's report (included with Avery/Zellner's recent testing motion - link further below.)
Ledger 6-86 also includes tag 7429, which, per CASO page 733, came from 7963.
7963, per CASO page 248, came from the deer camp.
Interesting, is the very next tag number, 7964, also recorded under ledger 6-86, is described, per CASO page 407, as barrel 2.
7964, per Eisenberg's report, is a human bone with cut marks, sent to the FBI on November 7, 2006.
Now, assuming all of this evidence was tagged as it was processed, how did deer camp bones end up being processed with Dassey's burn barrel 2 bones, if Dassey's barrel was processed at a different time, which it was, per Ertl's report from November 7, 2005? We are really supposed to believe that the deer camp bones were being tagged at the exact same time as the Dassey burn barrel 2? They just ended up tagged together within the same series of evidence tags?
I don't have the answers to these unusual details, but am sharing these tags within two (2) specific ledgers because they all appear connected, and those sleuthing might be able to assist with sorting out some of the details related to these ledgers and the evidence tie in's to the exhibits from Avery/Zellners recent testing motion.
Below is my earlier post and I am including it because it contains links to related documents which might be helpful for researching.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/aanbqj/for_sleuthers_updated_post_with_new_evidence/
[–]RodentXmas
Delete7963, per CASO page 248, came from the deer camp. Interesting, is the very next tag number, 7964, also recorded under ledger 6-86, is described, per CASO page 407, as barrel 2.
So they processed or at least tagged Janda barrel #2 (#643) once (#7964) just after deer barrels (#7963 etc) and a second time (#8314) just prior to the SA burn pit (8318). When were the deer camp barrels first collected/processed? I know the second time Ertl had just been going through the barrels before being asked for his sifter for the SA burn pit on the 8th.
NB: They do shift these tags around a huge amount - like the tarp of 'debris' (actually critical fragments & rivets) from SA's burn pit on the 8th ended up as the much lower number #7923 despite not being searched until two days later).
8480 and 8481. Per the exhibit in Avery's new motion, those, when checked in, are described as, "Burn pile ash Northwest of red trailer Avery Property." That is quite odd because from that ash, law enforcement recovered burnt material from the deer camp, tag 7963 (page 248; also see pg. 402, of the CASO report, which shows tag #7963 is a 5-gal. bucket of burnt material, and, on pg. 403, the report shows this tag was recovered from tag #s 8480 & 8481)
Just to note again pg 403 doesn't show that, it just lists them together in sentence. Riemer had two buckets of ash from NW of Avery's trailer - nothing identified as human in them. And then he had five containers of burnt stuff from different places including the deer camp.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/aanbqj/for_sleuthers_updated_post_with_new_evidence/
They referenced "the red trailer" to allow transposing of evidence from the deer camp red trailer to SA's red trailer. Ambiguous record keeping allows flexibility in the story.
ReplyDeleteAny ideas on 'burn pile ash Northwest of red trailer Avery....' in document shown in MaM 2. (self.TickTockManitowoc)
by FailedExpert
Screenshot from MaM S02E10 https://i.imgur.com/S0k4PhU.jpg
The top two tags on the right, #8480 and #8481. Two piles of ash, or one pile collected into two containers.
The rest of the description is cut off but presumably referring to Steven Avery's red trailer? If they didn't put geo coordinates like they did for the others, are they trying to obscure something?
His burn pit is south of his garage I believe, SW of trailer? So northwest would be where? Wasn't the barrel they apparently planted electronics in, north of his trailer?
Eisenberg's worksheet says the bone fragments found in #8480 were not human (found in a later re-screen and tagged #7427).
There's no info about anything being found from #8481 (a version of the ledger in a spreadsheet seems to have an error attributing to this some bone fragments actually found in #8681).
The tags #8480 and #8481 are in Wiegert's list of 26 containers of 'fire debris' when he's at the crime lab taking back custody, but after Riemer transports them back to Calumet Hawkins lists them separately from the 23 buckets of 'debris'.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/9riygx/any_ideas_on_burn_pile_ash_northwest_of_red/
7963 was a bucket of burnt material from the deer camp.
Pg. 402, of the CASO report, which shows tag #7963 is a 5-gallon bucket of burnt material, and, on pg. 403, the report shows this tag was recovered from tag #s 8480 & 8481)
Upon finding the deer camp evidence was not only with the Avery evidence, AND LATER RENAMED, "Burn pile ash Northwest of red trailer Avery Property," the evidence collected from 8480 and 8481 feels highly suspect, especially given that it produced human bones.
A former red trailer, northwest of Avery property, is actually the wooded area by Kuss Rd, the deer camp, which also had a red trailer.
Per page 248, CASO, Rick Riemer indicated, "Also turned over to me was Property Tag #7958, burnt material with the words deer camp bum barrel printed on the container, which was found at the deer camp near the location.
Property Tag#7960, burnt bone from the deer camp area, was turned over to me at 1017 hrs.
Property Tag#7961, burnt material from Site E10 was turned over to me at 1019 hours.
Property Tag#7962, burnt material from Site E9 was turned over to me at 1023 hrs.
Property Tag#7963, burnt material from deer camp was turned over to me at 1027 hours."
Property Tag #7964 on the evidence list is tagged as burnt bone pieces from barrel #2.
Barrel #2, per Eisenberg, produced, "human bone (element ID), non-human non-biological; 1 shaft fragment with cut marks sent to FBI on 7 Nov 2006; pupal casings."
The barrel with the bones from Radandt's deer camp was identified as barrel #2 on page 248 of the CASO file; however, it was referred to as "Janda burn barrel #2" at Avery's trial.
The two ledgers seem to bring evidence together from the quarry and deer camp. The tag id's, if including evidence from Avery's pit, establishes they were processed together.
Curious why some charred pieces (CA), possibly collected/processed just after BZ, also had DNA (insufficient to type) (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeleteby FailedExpert
Sherry Culhane's NovDec 5 2005 report, no date given for when actually tested:
Item CA: three pieces of apparent charred material
The amount of DNA isolated from the charred material (item CA) was insufficient for DNA/STR typing methods
So she detected some DNA in a processed solution made from some or all of those pieces, then assessed how much DNA and thought it's not enough to amplify to type, or tried amplifying but didn't get enough of a signal or something?
The official guideline protocol for bone, if that's what she classed it as initially, is from page 75 here but I'm not sure at what point in there she'd have stopped?
What's the origin of CA?
It's known from trial testimony that the Wisconsin Crime Lab in Madison codes items in alphabetical order as they are submitted (sometimes with extra subset numbers of course). So I believe it would go BY, BZ, CA, CB. (originally they go A to Z, Hence Item C the Rav4 key was back on the 8th. Then AA, AB etc, then e.g. from AZ to BA).
In the above report there's
BY: numerous small pieces of apparent charred material
BZ: two pieces of apparent charred material
CA: three pieces of apparent charred material
It seems that BZ became the FBI's Q1, and therefore had been Calumet's #7926. That's the two pieces of charred material/remains, from one of which Culhane cut a piece, from which nuclear and mtDNA was reported (may or may not have been the same piece of it that Culhane cut). Culhane testified her nuclear DNA testing of BZ was done on Nov 11th.
It's implied that BZ was retrieved on Nov 10th from brown tarp #7923 in Calumet's storage - 'debris' reportedly discarded from SA's burn pit (as opposed to put into that box) on the 8th.
Per Fallon at pretrial (edit: When Buting inquires about a gap of missing Q numbers), FBI's Q2 was #7927. I believe that's on the Calumet ledger as 'unidentified material charred'. The FBI never reported anything back about it, or even mentioned it ever. Eisenberg also totally omits this tag # from her worksheet. It's totally absent from CASO (unless one of those bits that doesn't show up with the PDF Find facility).
DeleteEisenberg does include Tag #7928 in her report - as an 'empty box'! On the ledger it's 'unidentified material charred'. Unlike some other tags she doesn't mention transferring some things away. Strange.
Going back, #7925 is described by Eisenberg as 'Wood; 3 dental structures; bone frag'. Three pieces obviously matches the description of CA. But also additional bone fragmentation, that might be short for rather than fragment (Pevytoe used that term).
Tag #7924 she describes as human and non-human bone, including dental, and non-bio. For some reason she reports getting that Nov 11, whereas the rest of these items apparently retrieved from the tarp she only reports getting Nov 15.
Eisenberg's trial exhibit photo which is referred to as just a reminder photo for herself (even though used at trial, and used rotated by Culhane as well without telling the jury) of what she sent the FBI Nov 15th, is far more than two pieces, and more than five actually, more than six (accounting for her having cut a piece of tissue from one of the pieces comprising BZ). So presumably included #7927 which became Q2.
tl;dr: Is it a coincidence that separate pieces of charred material, bagged up separately but submitted one after the other, both had DNA? BZ was described as less burned than everything else, but presumably didn't have DNA on its actual charred surface to transfer onto other items? Was CA also less burned? Why does no one ever mention it again?
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/a1ghzc/curious_why_some_charred_pieces_ca_possibly/