UPDATE OCTOBER 14, 2019: Kathleen Zellner filed a 32,241-word, 135-page brief with Wisconsin Appeals Court District II, asking the court to grant Avery a new trial or evidentiary hearing in the Teresa Halbach murder case. Avery is appealing his 2007 conviction of 1st Degree Intentional Homicide in the murder of freelance photographer Halbach. From the brief: "The conviction of Steven Avery was primarily based on forensic evidence - further forensic testing, as agreed upon by the parties, has a reasonable likelihood of yielding exculpatory evidence and would create a reasonable probability of a different outcome."
UPDATE JULY 9, 2018: On July 6, 2018, Kathleen Zellner filed a "Motion to Supplement Previously-filed Motion for Post-conviction Relief" (link below).
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Wx_quH4MeWK292zy8H9a7E7yhJuBF6v2/view
In it Zellner states:
Mr. Avery is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on whether the withheld CD constitutes a Brady violation that entitles him to a new trial... Mr. Avery has presented this court with sufficient allegations of a Brady violation that meet the Kyles standard that the absence of the CD evidence deprived Mr. Avery of a fair trial, meaning a trial resulting in a verdict worthy of confidence... Confidence in Mr. Avery's verdict is undermined because of the suppression of material evidence contained on the CD, which could have been used to impeach Bobby's trial testimony as the State's primary witness and also to have established him as a third-party Denny suspect, because the CD would have supported a sexual assault motive for the murder of Ms. Halbach.Included as an exhibit in the July 6, 2018 motion is a June 25, 2018 affidavit from Blaine Dassey. He asserts that under pressure from "authorities" for the State of Wisconsin he lied at Avery's trial.
Blaine also states that he saw Bobby Dassey heading eastbound on highway 147 in a greenish or bluish vehicle on October 31, 2005 (Blaine was on his way home, heading westbound in a school bus on highway 147, around 3:30-3:40 PM, when he passed Bobby going in the opposite direction).
Blaine clarified on youtube.com that Bobby was driving a green Ford Ranger when he saw him heading eastbound on highway 147 around 3:30-3:40 PM on October 31, 2005 (a screenshot was pasted to facebook: see image above).
At the time of Teresa Halbach's disappearance on October 31, 2005, Scott Tadych drove a green Ford Ranger with a cap, similar to the one in the photo below (toward the end of Making A Murderer episode 9, just after Barb's meltdown outside the courthouse, you can see Scott walking to his truck, without the cap, which is parked by some SUVs).
Bobby Dassey did not own a Ford Ranger on October 31, 2005.
Bobby purchased a blue Ford Ranger in 2006 or later.
Also included as an exhibit in the July 6, 2018 motion is a new affidavit from Steven Avery, and in it he states that he believes both Bobby and Scott are involved in the murder of Teresa Halbach.
In November 2017, Zellner told Rolling Stone magazine:
I ask myself what would motivate Tadych and Bobby to be such obstructionists and I have reached the inevitable conclusion, as our court filings state, that they were involved in the crime and Barb, was and is involved, even unwittingly, in its coverup. … Tadych thinks he can intimidate us into looking away, but he has only succeeded in placing himself front and center in our investigation. Quite frankly, he is no match for our abilities, experience, resources or boundless commitment to freeing Steven Avery.
Kathleen Zellner's Press Conference on 8/26/16 [Full Transcript]
Zellner's Motion for Post-Conviction Scientific Testing, Filed on 8/26/16
Zellner's Motion to Hold Appeal in Abeyance and Suspend the Briefing Schedule, Filed on 8/26/16
Crucial witnesses coming forward now-as they always do when new scientific testing sought. Science not spin will rule.#MakingAMurderer— Kathleen Zellner (@ZellnerLaw) September 4, 2016
During Zellner's press conference on August 26, 2016, she said that only 30 percent of the bones were recovered and 29 of the teeth were never recovered:Wisc. App. Ct. grants our motion to stay appeal and return record to trial court to decide testing motion.#MakingAMurderer #Stepstofreedom— Kathleen Zellner (@ZellnerLaw) September 15, 2016
"The bones 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."Zellner wrote in her August 26, 2016 motion that bones found in the Radandt quarry, which included a pelvis, were suspected to be human:
"Most of Ms. Halbach’s bones and 29 of her teeth were not found in Mr. Avery’s burn pit. State expert Leslie Eisenberg testified that the volume of bones discovered in the burn pit was 'two-to three-fifths of what might be expected.' Dr. Eisenberg also admitted that the bones had been moved prior to their location in Mr. Avery’s burn pit. Dr. Eisenberg testified that she suspected that the bones found in the Radandt quarry, which included a pelvis, were human."
Sheboygan County Judge Angela Sutkiewicz
"I've noticed the whole debate on whether Zellner released all information in her first motion has gone silent, and some posters have even been gone for a while. Presumably Zellner knew which judges and players in the case had which ties and correctly assumed that the lower district judge would deny the motion, with some ridiculous arguments and factual errors, using their new science cap." - Mioracle, Reddit, November 23, 2017
In the opinion written by Judge Angela Sutkiewicz, she made claims that she had not been informed about the agreement with the state to perform the new scientific testing in stages; however, other issues were addressed in a July 14, 2017 letter to the Judge from Zellner Law.
FINDINGS
This July 14, 2017 letter appears to contradict that statement, when it states the following at the bottom of page 1 and the top of page 2:
The letter appears to further contradict that statement, when it states the following, on page 4.
Manitowoc County Case Number 2005CF000381 State of Wisconsin vs. Steven A. AVERY #122987:
https://wccabeta.wicourts.gov/caseDetail.html?caseNo=2005CF000381&countyNo=36&index=0&mode=details#defendant
UPDATE NOVEMBER 28, 2017: Sheboygan County Judge Angela Sutkiewicz denied Zellner's "Motion for Reconsideration," saying Zellner filed it prematurely and evidence wasn't sufficient for a hearing.
Sutkiewicz wrote:
In a statement sent to USA TODAY NETWORK-Wisconsin (Post-Crescent), Zellner said:
Zellner has filed a Notice of Appeal. Steven Avery filed his own Notice of Appeal back in 2015, but Zellner asked for a stay on that, which sent the case back to the trial court and into the jurisdiction of Sheboygan County Judge Sutkiewicz. After filing a request for post-conviction relief, which was denied by Judge Sutkiewicz, and a Motion to Reconsider, plus Supplements to that Motion, Zeller has now filed a Notice of Appeal, effectively moving the case out of the lower court (the county circuit court) and into the Appeals Court, meaning it is no longer in Judge Sutkiewicz's court or jurisdiction. Judge Sutkiewicz ruled on the Motions and the Supplements, anyway, though -- denying all of them. [Source]
MMonroe54 wrote at TickTockManitowoc:
Zellner filed the Motion to Reconsider, which was a plea for Judge Sutkiewicz to reconsider her earlier ruling on Zellner's plea for post conviction relief, which Judge Sutkiewicz denied.
Zellner then filed a Supplement to the Motion to Reconsider, and then a Second Supplement. But before Judge Sutkiewicz could or did rule on any of those, Zellner filed a Notice of Appeal on November 17, 2017, which went to the Appeals Court. That put an end to the case in Judge Sutkiewicz's court (as I understand it) and moved the case into the Appeals Court.
But Judge Sutkiewicz ruled on Zellner's Motions and Supplemental Motions, anyway, denying all of them, even though, according to Zellner, she (Judge Sutkiewicz) no longer had jurisdiction. So, I think this means all the Motions Zellner filed are for naught -- and in any case Judge Sutkiewicz denied them all --Sutkiewicz and her next filing will be a brief filed in the Appeals Court explaining why Steven Avery is appealing his conviction.
I think the Motions no longer have any standing, and, in any case, Judge Sutkiewicz denied all of them. Zellner is not appealing Judge Sutkiewicz's ruling on her Motions; instead, she has just moved on, to the Appeals Court. From now -- again as I understand it -- everything will be handled at the appeals level, and they are done with the lower or trial court (Judge Sutkiewicz's court).
In the lower or trial court, Zellner was trying to get an evidentiary hearing, which would examine new evidence, and, hopefully, result in a new trial. The Appeals Court could grant a new trial but they (again as I understand it) look at procedure instead of evidence (what the Appeals Court looks at, too, is if the judge erred in rulings during the trial, were mistakes made). As in, were Avery's rights violated during the trial, not was the evidence sufficient to convict him (the Appeals Court, as I understand it, is not about re-examining evidence, but more about procedure, and, if the law was applied correctly).
The only way the case would go back to Judge Sutkiewicz's court -- I think -- is if the Appeals Court orders a new trial. And then it might be moved to another county.
Tiger_Town_Dream wrote at TickTockManitowoc:
Zellner is appealing Judge Sutkiewicz's decision to deny Zellner's original June 2017 motion to the Wisconsin State Appellate Court. The Appeals Court will decide if Sutkiewicz correctly applied the law in her ruling.
An appeal has already been done on the original trial, so I don't think that Zellner can appeal anything related to that -- only the judge's denial of her June motion.
If the state appeals court rules in favor of Steven Avery and overturns Sutkiewicz's ruling and orders a new trial, the case will go back to the circuit (trial) court. What I don't know is if Sutkiewicz would still be the judge or another judge would preside.
All of this is at the state level. It isn't out of Wisconsin yet. Not even close. The appeal process has to be exhausted at the state level before it can even be taken to a federal court. The losing party at the state appellate level, either Avery or the state, can then appeal that decision to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which will likely occur.
I believe that the Wisconsin Supreme Court can either either agree to take the case and rule on it, or decide not to hear it, at which point the state appellate court decision stands. In either scenario, that's when the state appeals have been exhausted, and only then can the case be taken to federal court in the form of Habeas Corpus, which is where Brendan Dassey's case is.
UPDATE NOVEMBER 17, 2017: On November 16, 2017 Kathleen Zellner filed a "Second Supplement to Previously Filed Motion for Reconsideration."
In the "second supplement," filed on November 16th, Zellner listed her recent filings in Avery's case — most with no response from Sheboygan County Judge Angela Sutkiewicz, who is overseeing the case.
On November 17, 2017, Zellner filed a Notice of Appeal. Therefore, the next step is the Court of Appeals.
UPDATE NOVEMBER 1, 2017: Kathleen Zellner filed a "Supplement to Previously Filed Motion for Reconsideration" on October 31st.
UPDATE OCTOBER 23, 2017: Kathleen Zellner filed a "Motion for Reconsideration" with 20 new exhibits on October 23, 2017. She tweeted the following on October 24, 2017:
Kathleen Zellner tweeted to Avery supporters Friday that "help is on the way" in form of a motion to vacate the judge's order.
On October 3, 2017, Sheboygan County Circuit Court Judge Angela Sutkiewicz issued an order that says "the defendant has failed to establish any grounds that would trigger the right to a new trial in the interests of justice. As such, no further consideration will be given to this issue."
However, Zellner's motion states that the defense has more evidence to test, and prosecutors had agreed to let that happen.
Click here to read Zellner's motion.
Zellner states that experts planned to take swabs from Teresa Halbach's RAV-4 and conduct a complete examination of the vehicle for forensic evidence.
Zellner states that examination was supposed to happen before "weather worsened."
Zellner's team also planned to test license plates and a lug wrench.
Prosecutors also agreed that doctors would be able to complete a microscopic examination of pelvic bones.
"Defendant did not anticipate the court filing its order prior to the time Defendant could notify the court of the matters set forth herein," reads Zellner's motion.
Zellner says she showed prosecutors her motion and they agreed that it was factual. However, they would not join the motion.
The motion says the defense and prosecutors agreed to "streamline the litigation." The defense agreed to remove from its complaint allegations of ethical violations by trial prosecutor Ken Kratz, and remove references to brain fingerprinting.
Sheboygan County Judge Sutkiewicz wrote on December 1, 2017:
Avery claims that investigators planted evidence to wrongfully convict him of the murder. Avery has long argued that he was set up for filing a $36 million wrongful conviction lawsuit against Manitowoc County.
Avery had served 18 years in prison for a 1985 rape he did not commit. He was exonerated and released from prison in 2003. Avery was arrested and charged with Halbach's murder before a decision was made in the civil lawsuit.
In June, Zellner filed a 1,272-page motion for Avery's post conviction relief.
Judge Sutkiewicz, in her decision and order, responded to Zellner's claims regarding the DNA testing.
Claim #1:
A microscopic examination of the hood latch on Halbach's RAV 4 shows Avery's DNA did not get there by touching, meaning he didn't open the hood of the car.
Judge Sutkiewicz:
"This defendant's argument leaves out several significant facts. The author of the report concedes that there is no forensic test available that can conclusively determine whether DNA was left by sweat. As such, the report cannot conclusively state that the DNA on the hood latch could not have been left by the sweat of the defendant's hand.
Furthermore, while 11 of the test subjects did not leave detectable DNA on the hood latch, the fact remains that 4 of the test subjects did leave detectable DNA by touch. The report does not give any quantifiable statistics as to the amount of DNA left in his tests or comparable data to the test performed on the hood latch in question and entered into evidence at trial.
Contrary to the defendant's assertions, the test of the DNA on the hood latch does not rule out the defendant's hand as the source of the DNA."
Claim #2:
Avery's DNA found on Halbach's car key included too many cells to be transferred by simply holding the key, and could have been planted using something like Avery's toothbrush.
Judge Sutkiewicz:
"There is no question that the DNA found on the key was the defendant's. Even if the key found in the defendant's residence was the victim's subkey, and that the amount of debris found on the key is not consistent with the key being used on a regular basis, that does not establish that the key was planted."
Claim #3
Zellner says tests show a bullet fragment found in Avery's garage was not shot through Halbach's head. The claim states that it is red paint, not blood on the bullet, thus it was likely planted to wrongfully convict Avery.
Judge Sutkiewicz:
"The expert witness indicates that the tests used on the bullet are not inclusive to the point of discovering all particles present on the bullet surface. In order to completely rule anything out, the expert indicates that more detailed analysis would be necessary. Furthermore, the report indicates that the test performed cannot determine what the red substance on the bullet is. Again, the expert indicates that further testing would be needed to rule blood in or out as the source of the stain. The expert also states that he would want to supplement his report after further test results were available. The reports do not support the defendant's position."
Judge Sutkiewicz concludes:
"All three items of evidence were admitted at trial. Each was thoroughly contested by defense counsel. The reports submitted by the defendant are equivocal in their conclusions and do not establish an alternate interpretation of the evidence. Given the totality of evidence submitted at trial and the ambiguous conclusions as stated in the experts' reports, it cannot be said that a reasonable probability exists that a different result would be reached at a new trial based on these reports. As such, the defendant has not met his burden in order to obtain a new trial."
Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel praised the judge's decision and order.
"I am pleased with the judge's decision which brings us one step closer to providing justice to Teresa Halbach's family. DOJ will continue to vigorously defend Avery's conviction, which was handed down by a jury of his peers," Schimel says.
BRENDAN DASSEY CASE
A federal judge has overturned Brendan Dassey's conviction, but he remains behind bars. The Wisconsin Department of Justice has appealed the judge's decision up to the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago.
In September, seven of eight judges on the panel heard arguments from Dassey's attorney and an attorney representing the DOJ. The judges have not released a decision. A simple majority will rule.
There is the potential for the case to go before the U.S. Supreme Court.
[Source]
UPDATE OCTOBER 3, 2017: A circuit court judge has denied Steven Avery's request for a new trial in the murder of Teresa Halbach. Sheboygan County Judge Angela Sutkiewicz issued a decision and order saying, "the defendant has failed to establish any grounds that would trigger the right to a new trial in the interests of justice. As such, no further consideration will be given to this issue."
"The reports submitted by the defendant were equivocal in their conclusions and do not establish an alternate interpretation of the evidence," the judge wrote in her six-page ruling, according to the USA TODAY NETWORK-Wisconsin article. "Given the totality of evidence submitted at trial and the ambiguous conclusions stated in the experts' reports, it cannot be said that a reasonable probability exists that a different result would be reached at a new trial based on these reports."
Sutkiewicz made her ruling without even granting Zellner the chance to have an evidence hearing inside a Wisconsin courtroom.
Zellner told Patch that she had a message to her legions of Making A Murderer fans to keep the faith. Zellner, who is one of the country's most prolific wrongful conviction lawyers, pointed out that most exonerees are victorious at the appeals court levels, not at the state courts level, which is where Avery's case is currently. Still, she said, it's almost unheard of for a sitting judge to reject a post-conviction motion on a wrongful conviction claim without even conducting an evidentiary hearing to weigh the merits of the lawyers' arguments from both sides.
"This is not the end of the road," Zellner said. "This is the first time in one of our cases that (a judge) has not allowed us to have an evidence hearing ... We just want an opportunity to test all the evidence. We already have very powerful evidence and the most powerful, we have not had the opportunity to file it yet."
Avery's attorney, Kathleen Zellner, released this statement to Action 2 News: "We are filing an amended petition because we have additional test results and witness affidavits. The scientific testing is not completed. We remain optimistic that Mr. Avery's conviction will be vacated."
Patch spoke with Zellner by phone from Seattle. She said the ruling by the Sheboygan judge should not be viewed as a major setback for her and her client.
'Making a Murderer': How Steven Avery Could Still Get a New Trial
A judge denied his motion – but Avery's lawyer says there's more evidence that could lead to a new day in court
By Amelia McDonell-Parry, Rolling Stone
October 4, 2017
Claim #1:
A microscopic examination of the hood latch on Teresa Halbach's RAV4 shows Avery's DNA did not get there by touching, meaning he didn't open the hood of the car.
Judge Sutkiewicz:
Contrary to the defendant's assertions, the test of the DNA on the hood latch does not rule out the defendant's hand as the source of the DNA."
If there is no forensic test available to conclusively determine the DNA was left by sweat, how come the narrative presented by Ken Kratz was allowed in the original trial? It created unsupported prejudice against Avery. I guess we'll let it slide if the prosecution does it.
Claim #2:
Avery's DNA found on Halbach's car key included too many cells to be transferred by simply holding the key, and could have been planted using something like Avery's toothbrush.
Judge Sutkiewicz:
Claim #3
Zellner says tests show a bullet fragment found in Avery's garage was not shot through Teresa's head. The claim states that it is red paint, not blood on the bullet, thus it was likely planted to wrongfully convict Avery.
Judge Sutkiewicz:
UPDATE SEPTEMBER 3, 2017: Zellner told the Inquisitr that she intends to amend the petition for post-conviction relief, which she filed on June 7th. The following are excerpts from the article published on September 2nd:
The Latest ruling by Judge A. S. argues:
No communication was made to the court indicating that the original motion was incomplete and would be supplemented with further information. Only after the court fully considered the evidence submitted and issued its final ruling did the defense finally alert the court to the fact that it was working on further evidence to support its arguments.
This July 14, 2017 letter appears to contradict that statement, when it states the following at the bottom of page 1 and the top of page 2:
The parties [the state and the defense], in their communication, agreed that the testing would be done in stages and, depending upon the outcome of the testing, further testing could be done on additional items of evidence delineated in Mr. Avery’s motion for scientific testing. Certain items of evidence have not been release for examination and retesting. They are summarized as follows:
- “[N]ew DNA testing on evidence not previously tested (the prop, the battery cable, the interior hood release of the victim’s vehicle, the blinker light, the lug wrench, and the purple thong underwear).” (Motion for Scientific Testing, p. 14);
- “[N]ew and improved DNA testing of previously tested items (the license plates and swabs taken from the victim’s car)” (Id.);
- DNA testing on burnt material found at the Radiant deer hunting camp west of the Avery salvage yard to determine whether there are any items of evidentiary value at the deer camp. (Id., p. 22).
- A comparison of the fingerprints of Sergeant Andrew Coburn and Lieutenant James Lenk to unidentified prints on victim’s vehicle. (Id., p. 42).
- Examination of the victim’s vehicle. (Id. pp. 21-22);
- Swabs from stains on the floor of Mr. Avery’s garage, his bathroom, and his trailer. (Id., p. 31-32);
- Swabs from stains in Mr. Avery’s vehicle. (Id., pp. 37-38); and
- Unspent .22 LR ammunition recovered in Mr. Avery’s trailer. (Id., p. 41).
The letter appears to further contradict that statement, when it states the following, on page 4.
On July 5, 2017, an additional request was made to Mr. Fallon for the release of cranial fragments (Wisconsin State Crime Lab Items EK, EJ, KR and KQ) for further examination. Dr. Palenik believes there is sufficient reason to re-examine the cranial fragment defects identified as gunshot entrance wounds, at Mr. Avery’s trial, to confirm with scientific certainty, using the newest SEM microscope and other technology, if the victim was even shot and, if she was shot, whether it was by a .22 LR bullet. Dr Palenik made this request after examine the radiographs taken by Wisconsin State Crime Lab analyst Kenneth Olson and all other pertinent information related to the State’s claim that the cause of death was the result of a gunshot to the head by a .22 LR bullet.
Manitowoc County Case Number 2005CF000381 State of Wisconsin vs. Steven A. AVERY #122987:
https://wccabeta.wicourts.gov/caseDetail.html?caseNo=2005CF000381&countyNo=36&index=0&mode=details#defendant
UPDATE NOVEMBER 28, 2017: Sheboygan County Judge Angela Sutkiewicz denied Zellner's "Motion for Reconsideration," saying Zellner filed it prematurely and evidence wasn't sufficient for a hearing.
Sutkiewicz wrote:
What is missing in the wealth of arguments and documentation is any explanation as to why the defendant filed his motion on June 7, 2017, knowing that further scientific testing was required to complete his motion and that considerable investigation was still being conducted by the defense.While Zellner has over the last several months pointed to new transcripts of jailhouse recordings, new affidavits, new forensic examinations, and new relevant fights between Avery family members, many of her “new” theories play off of, make use of, or — in some cases — ignore information which has been contained on the record since the original investigation and trial. The judge dismissed her notion that the evidence is “new” in wholesale fashion and without parsing through Zellner’s filings to determine what truly is based on a “new” test and what is not. That failure of inquiry raises questions about the fairness of this particular order denying Avery a new trial. [Source]
In a statement sent to USA TODAY NETWORK-Wisconsin (Post-Crescent), Zellner said:
“We respectfully disagree with the Court’s opinion issued today. The Court makes numerous factual and legal errors; the most egregious one being that it no longer has jurisdiction of the Avery case; the appellate court has exclusive jurisdiction. We fully expect the case to be reversed by the higher court in Wisconsin. However, regardless of what happens in Wisconsin, we will pursue the case in federal court, all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Mr. Avery did not receive a fair trial because of numerous constitutional violations.”In summary, Sutkiewicz has denied Avery’s original request for a new trial, a subsequent motion to reconsider, and three supplements. Zellner filed a motion for post-conviction relief on June 7th. Judge Sutkiewicz denied it on October 3rd. Zellner subsequently filed a motion for reconsideration on October 23rd, which she supplemented with additional claims on November 1st, November 2nd, and November 17th..
MMonroe54 wrote at TickTockManitowoc:
Zellner filed the Motion to Reconsider, which was a plea for Judge Sutkiewicz to reconsider her earlier ruling on Zellner's plea for post conviction relief, which Judge Sutkiewicz denied.
Zellner then filed a Supplement to the Motion to Reconsider, and then a Second Supplement. But before Judge Sutkiewicz could or did rule on any of those, Zellner filed a Notice of Appeal on November 17, 2017, which went to the Appeals Court. That put an end to the case in Judge Sutkiewicz's court (as I understand it) and moved the case into the Appeals Court.
But Judge Sutkiewicz ruled on Zellner's Motions and Supplemental Motions, anyway, denying all of them, even though, according to Zellner, she (Judge Sutkiewicz) no longer had jurisdiction. So, I think this means all the Motions Zellner filed are for naught -- and in any case Judge Sutkiewicz denied them all --Sutkiewicz and her next filing will be a brief filed in the Appeals Court explaining why Steven Avery is appealing his conviction.
I think the Motions no longer have any standing, and, in any case, Judge Sutkiewicz denied all of them. Zellner is not appealing Judge Sutkiewicz's ruling on her Motions; instead, she has just moved on, to the Appeals Court. From now -- again as I understand it -- everything will be handled at the appeals level, and they are done with the lower or trial court (Judge Sutkiewicz's court).
In the lower or trial court, Zellner was trying to get an evidentiary hearing, which would examine new evidence, and, hopefully, result in a new trial. The Appeals Court could grant a new trial but they (again as I understand it) look at procedure instead of evidence (what the Appeals Court looks at, too, is if the judge erred in rulings during the trial, were mistakes made). As in, were Avery's rights violated during the trial, not was the evidence sufficient to convict him (the Appeals Court, as I understand it, is not about re-examining evidence, but more about procedure, and, if the law was applied correctly).
The only way the case would go back to Judge Sutkiewicz's court -- I think -- is if the Appeals Court orders a new trial. And then it might be moved to another county.
Tiger_Town_Dream wrote at TickTockManitowoc:
Zellner is appealing Judge Sutkiewicz's decision to deny Zellner's original June 2017 motion to the Wisconsin State Appellate Court. The Appeals Court will decide if Sutkiewicz correctly applied the law in her ruling.
An appeal has already been done on the original trial, so I don't think that Zellner can appeal anything related to that -- only the judge's denial of her June motion.
If the state appeals court rules in favor of Steven Avery and overturns Sutkiewicz's ruling and orders a new trial, the case will go back to the circuit (trial) court. What I don't know is if Sutkiewicz would still be the judge or another judge would preside.
All of this is at the state level. It isn't out of Wisconsin yet. Not even close. The appeal process has to be exhausted at the state level before it can even be taken to a federal court. The losing party at the state appellate level, either Avery or the state, can then appeal that decision to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which will likely occur.
I believe that the Wisconsin Supreme Court can either either agree to take the case and rule on it, or decide not to hear it, at which point the state appellate court decision stands. In either scenario, that's when the state appeals have been exhausted, and only then can the case be taken to federal court in the form of Habeas Corpus, which is where Brendan Dassey's case is.
"Avery's Post-conviction motion was filed under Wisconsin State Section 974.06 (see Avery's Motion for Post-Conviction Relief). Under Wisconsin State 808.075 (permitted court actions pending appeal), the court can issue decisions for cases not filed under Section 809.30 -- the court 'retains the power to act on all issues until the record has been transmitted to the court of appeals.' I do not believe that the record has been transmitted; thus, the trial court had jurisdiction to rule on the motion. I thought at first, Avery was saved by Section 809.30 -- which limits the court's authority to rule after a notice of appeal has been filed -- since this section does cover post-conviction appeals; however, this section SPECIFICALLY EXCEPTS section 974.06 motions. Thus, we are back to the default rule cited above that the trial court has jurisdiction to rule on matters before it until the the record has been transmitted. This is why, I think, the trial court ruled when it did." [Source]The judge stated:
No communication was made to the court indicating that the original motion was incomplete and would be supplemented with further information. Only after the court fully considered the evidence submitted and issued its final ruling did the defense finally alert the court to the fact that it was working on further evidence to support its arguments.
[ . . . ]
It is for the court, and not the parties, to determine if amendments to motions previously filed will be permitted.
[ . . . ]The defense cannot try to amend a motion that was filed without reservation only after it receives an adverse ruling.
[ . . . ]
[T]here is no reason asserted or good cause shown as to why the motion was submitted prior to the conclusion of all scientific testing.
UPDATE NOVEMBER 17, 2017: On November 16, 2017 Kathleen Zellner filed a "Second Supplement to Previously Filed Motion for Reconsideration."
In the "second supplement," filed on November 16th, Zellner listed her recent filings in Avery's case — most with no response from Sheboygan County Judge Angela Sutkiewicz, who is overseeing the case.
"This Judge seems like a piece of work. When I first read the ruling I was a little thrown, but I too lack the legal acumen to articulate why the Judge's ruling felt 'manifestly erroneous.' It wasn't until I read Zellner's Motion for Reconsideration that I realized how ineffectual this Judge probably is in her regular duties. Of course, there is still the more nefarious possibility that the Judge is corrupt or, at least, susceptible to influence by the State, in which case she might be fully aware she is improperly denying Avery an evidentiary hearing in violation of Wisconsin Statute 974.06." [Source]From Post-Crescent:
"Today is Mr. Avery's last attempt to elicit a response from this Court," Zellner wrote in Thursday's filing. "(Friday) Mr. Avery will file his notice of appeal from the Court's October 3, 2017, order."
Court records indicated Friday afternoon that a notice of appeal had been filed.
A call to Sutkiewicz's office seeking comment was not immediately returned Friday.
Zellner asked that Sutkiewicz vacate an Oct. 3 order that denied Avery a new trial and instead hold an evidentiary hearing.
Zellner also alleged that:
A report and CD containing investigative information regarding Dassey's family's computer wasn't turned over to Avery's defense attorneys and "must" contain evidence favorable to Avery. That report would have allowed the defense to establish sexual assault as the motive for victim Teresa Halbach's murder by linking another family member to the violent, sexual images on the family's computer.
Police should have investigated another potential suspect more thoroughly.In this amendment, an 'ultimatum' was given by Zellner, saying an appeal to the October 3rd order denying Avery a new trial would be filed if the judge didn't reply within 24 hours.
She also writes that defense attorney Dean Strang agrees that he was ineffective in representing Avery at trial because he failed to retain experts in blood spatter and ballistics.
On November 17, 2017, Zellner filed a Notice of Appeal. Therefore, the next step is the Court of Appeals.
UPDATE NOVEMBER 1, 2017: Kathleen Zellner filed a "Supplement to Previously Filed Motion for Reconsideration" on October 31st.
UPDATE OCTOBER 23, 2017: Kathleen Zellner filed a "Motion for Reconsideration" with 20 new exhibits on October 23, 2017. She tweeted the following on October 24, 2017:
to all the “well wishers” who hoped we were gone from SA’s case: 54 pg. motion filed today with 20 new exhibits #DreamOn #MakingAMurdererUPDATE OCTOBER 7, 2017: Steven Avery's attorney has filed a motion in response to a judge's decision to deny Avery a new trial.
Kathleen Zellner tweeted to Avery supporters Friday that "help is on the way" in form of a motion to vacate the judge's order.
On October 3, 2017, Sheboygan County Circuit Court Judge Angela Sutkiewicz issued an order that says "the defendant has failed to establish any grounds that would trigger the right to a new trial in the interests of justice. As such, no further consideration will be given to this issue."
However, Zellner's motion states that the defense has more evidence to test, and prosecutors had agreed to let that happen.
Click here to read Zellner's motion.
Zellner states that experts planned to take swabs from Teresa Halbach's RAV-4 and conduct a complete examination of the vehicle for forensic evidence.
Zellner states that examination was supposed to happen before "weather worsened."
Zellner's team also planned to test license plates and a lug wrench.
Prosecutors also agreed that doctors would be able to complete a microscopic examination of pelvic bones.
"Defendant did not anticipate the court filing its order prior to the time Defendant could notify the court of the matters set forth herein," reads Zellner's motion.
Zellner says she showed prosecutors her motion and they agreed that it was factual. However, they would not join the motion.
The motion says the defense and prosecutors agreed to "streamline the litigation." The defense agreed to remove from its complaint allegations of ethical violations by trial prosecutor Ken Kratz, and remove references to brain fingerprinting.
Sheboygan County Judge Sutkiewicz wrote on December 1, 2017:
None of the agreements were submitted to the court for its approval until after the final decision was made in the defendant’s original motion... Furthermore, it is for the court, and not the parties, to establish scheduling for matters pending before it. While cooperation between parties is to be encouraged, that cooperation and any agreements reached are not binding on the court. Agreements should have been submitted for approval of the court prior to the final decision on the original motion being reached. [Source]Avery and his nephew, Brendan Dassey, were each convicted of 1st Degree Intentional Homicide during separate jury trials in 2007. Prosecutors said the duo raped and murdered freelance photographer Halbach on the Avery property in Manitowoc County on Halloween of 2005. The case became one of the most high-profile murders in Wisconsin history after Netflix released the docu-series "Making A Murderer."
Avery claims that investigators planted evidence to wrongfully convict him of the murder. Avery has long argued that he was set up for filing a $36 million wrongful conviction lawsuit against Manitowoc County.
Avery had served 18 years in prison for a 1985 rape he did not commit. He was exonerated and released from prison in 2003. Avery was arrested and charged with Halbach's murder before a decision was made in the civil lawsuit.
In June, Zellner filed a 1,272-page motion for Avery's post conviction relief.
Judge Sutkiewicz, in her decision and order, responded to Zellner's claims regarding the DNA testing.
Claim #1:
A microscopic examination of the hood latch on Halbach's RAV 4 shows Avery's DNA did not get there by touching, meaning he didn't open the hood of the car.
Judge Sutkiewicz:
"This defendant's argument leaves out several significant facts. The author of the report concedes that there is no forensic test available that can conclusively determine whether DNA was left by sweat. As such, the report cannot conclusively state that the DNA on the hood latch could not have been left by the sweat of the defendant's hand.
Furthermore, while 11 of the test subjects did not leave detectable DNA on the hood latch, the fact remains that 4 of the test subjects did leave detectable DNA by touch. The report does not give any quantifiable statistics as to the amount of DNA left in his tests or comparable data to the test performed on the hood latch in question and entered into evidence at trial.
Contrary to the defendant's assertions, the test of the DNA on the hood latch does not rule out the defendant's hand as the source of the DNA."
Claim #2:
Avery's DNA found on Halbach's car key included too many cells to be transferred by simply holding the key, and could have been planted using something like Avery's toothbrush.
Judge Sutkiewicz:
"There is no question that the DNA found on the key was the defendant's. Even if the key found in the defendant's residence was the victim's subkey, and that the amount of debris found on the key is not consistent with the key being used on a regular basis, that does not establish that the key was planted."
Claim #3
Zellner says tests show a bullet fragment found in Avery's garage was not shot through Halbach's head. The claim states that it is red paint, not blood on the bullet, thus it was likely planted to wrongfully convict Avery.
Judge Sutkiewicz:
"The expert witness indicates that the tests used on the bullet are not inclusive to the point of discovering all particles present on the bullet surface. In order to completely rule anything out, the expert indicates that more detailed analysis would be necessary. Furthermore, the report indicates that the test performed cannot determine what the red substance on the bullet is. Again, the expert indicates that further testing would be needed to rule blood in or out as the source of the stain. The expert also states that he would want to supplement his report after further test results were available. The reports do not support the defendant's position."
Judge Sutkiewicz concludes:
"All three items of evidence were admitted at trial. Each was thoroughly contested by defense counsel. The reports submitted by the defendant are equivocal in their conclusions and do not establish an alternate interpretation of the evidence. Given the totality of evidence submitted at trial and the ambiguous conclusions as stated in the experts' reports, it cannot be said that a reasonable probability exists that a different result would be reached at a new trial based on these reports. As such, the defendant has not met his burden in order to obtain a new trial."
Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel praised the judge's decision and order.
"I am pleased with the judge's decision which brings us one step closer to providing justice to Teresa Halbach's family. DOJ will continue to vigorously defend Avery's conviction, which was handed down by a jury of his peers," Schimel says.
BRENDAN DASSEY CASE
A federal judge has overturned Brendan Dassey's conviction, but he remains behind bars. The Wisconsin Department of Justice has appealed the judge's decision up to the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago.
In September, seven of eight judges on the panel heard arguments from Dassey's attorney and an attorney representing the DOJ. The judges have not released a decision. A simple majority will rule.
There is the potential for the case to go before the U.S. Supreme Court.
[Source]
UPDATE OCTOBER 3, 2017: A circuit court judge has denied Steven Avery's request for a new trial in the murder of Teresa Halbach. Sheboygan County Judge Angela Sutkiewicz issued a decision and order saying, "the defendant has failed to establish any grounds that would trigger the right to a new trial in the interests of justice. As such, no further consideration will be given to this issue."
"The reports submitted by the defendant were equivocal in their conclusions and do not establish an alternate interpretation of the evidence," the judge wrote in her six-page ruling, according to the USA TODAY NETWORK-Wisconsin article. "Given the totality of evidence submitted at trial and the ambiguous conclusions stated in the experts' reports, it cannot be said that a reasonable probability exists that a different result would be reached at a new trial based on these reports."
Sutkiewicz made her ruling without even granting Zellner the chance to have an evidence hearing inside a Wisconsin courtroom.
Zellner told Patch that she had a message to her legions of Making A Murderer fans to keep the faith. Zellner, who is one of the country's most prolific wrongful conviction lawyers, pointed out that most exonerees are victorious at the appeals court levels, not at the state courts level, which is where Avery's case is currently. Still, she said, it's almost unheard of for a sitting judge to reject a post-conviction motion on a wrongful conviction claim without even conducting an evidentiary hearing to weigh the merits of the lawyers' arguments from both sides.
"This is not the end of the road," Zellner said. "This is the first time in one of our cases that (a judge) has not allowed us to have an evidence hearing ... We just want an opportunity to test all the evidence. We already have very powerful evidence and the most powerful, we have not had the opportunity to file it yet."
Avery's attorney, Kathleen Zellner, released this statement to Action 2 News: "We are filing an amended petition because we have additional test results and witness affidavits. The scientific testing is not completed. We remain optimistic that Mr. Avery's conviction will be vacated."
Patch spoke with Zellner by phone from Seattle. She said the ruling by the Sheboygan judge should not be viewed as a major setback for her and her client.
Zellner said she and the Wisconsin Attorney General's Office recently worked out an agreement to allow for additional physical evidence testing upon the RAV4 of murder victim Halbach, and the judge apparently did not know this at the time she decided to move forward and issue her ruling against Avery."
"It's not really a big deal," Zellner said of the decision. "We'll be submitting a motion to vacate the order because we have an agreement reached between both parties and the judge assumed that all the scientific evidence had been submitted. We'll have more scientific evidence as well as new witness affidavits that we'll be submitting before Thanksgiving."
"It's not really a big deal," Zellner said of the decision. "We'll be submitting a motion to vacate the order because we have an agreement reached between both parties and the judge assumed that all the scientific evidence had been submitted. We'll have more scientific evidence as well as new witness affidavits that we'll be submitting before Thanksgiving."
'Making a Murderer': How Steven Avery Could Still Get a New Trial
A judge denied his motion – but Avery's lawyer says there's more evidence that could lead to a new day in court
By Amelia McDonell-Parry, Rolling Stone
October 4, 2017
It isn't over yet for Steven Avery. Yesterday, a Sheboygan County, Wisconsin, Circuit Court Judge denied the Making a Murderer subject's request for a new trial, stating that the defense had not met the legal standard for overturning his conviction for the 2005 murder of 25-year-old Teresa Halbach.
"Given the totality of evidence submitted at trial and the ambiguous conclusions stated in the experts' reports, it cannot be said that a reasonable probability exists that a different result would be reached at a new trial based on these reports," Judge Angela Sutkiewicz wrote in her decision to deny the ruling, which was in response to a 1,272 page motion filed by Avery defense attorney Kathleen Zellner last June.
After the ruling was made public, Zellner sent out a press release saying she would be filing a motion to vacate Sutkiewicz's decision. According to Zellner, on September 18th – less than two weeks ago – the Wisconsin Department of Justice agreed "to conduct further testing and to allow Mr. Avery to amend his petition with new scientific test results and additional witness statements." Those results were still outstanding and the amendment was still pending when Sutkiewicz made her decision; now the motion cannot be amended unless Sutkiewicz or a higher court reverses her decision.
In an email to Rolling Stone, Zellner confirms that the judge was not aware of the agreement and that her decision came as a surprise to everyone involved.
"I am planning to discuss the situation with the prosecutor from the AG's office on Friday," Zellner writes. "They were also quite surprised by this ruling. Our hope is that we can enter into an agreed order to vacate the order with the AG, because we had agreed to test numerous additional items of evidence – including an examination of the RAV4 to determine if additional evidence could be gathered and tested.… In addition to the forensic tests, we informed the prosecutors in our face to face meeting on September 18, at their offices in Madison, Wisconsin, that we had three significant new witnesses on new Brady violations. Brady violations are the most frequent basis for convictions being vacated."
Zellner also says there are still "numerous items" listed on her original motion that have yet to be tested, suggesting that even without the new evidence, Judge Sutkiewicz's decision was based on an incomplete record. In her ruling, Sutkiewicz focused primarily on claims of evidence tampering, writing that test results related to the DNA found on Halbach's car key and car hood latch "inclusive." Zellner says of the judge's sparse six-page ruling contained "clear factual/legal errors" and "failed to even address certain issues." (Judge Sutkiewicz's office declined to comment.) Regardless, she says, "Our preference is to file an agreed motion with the AG to vacate this order."
Whether the AG's office will play ball remains to be seen – but yesterday, Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel said he was "pleased" with Sutkiewicz's decision. (The Wisconsin Department of Justice did not immediately respond to a request for comment.)MrDoradus wrote at Reddit:
"The bottom line is neither we nor Mr. Avery have any intention of giving up or not proceeding to fight for his exoneration – because he is absolutely innocent," Zellner tells Rolling Stone. "It is not uncommon for judges at the trial court level to prematurely dismiss post-conviction petitions and get reversed by a higher court. We will press on regardless of which path we have to take and we will ultimately succeed."
Claim #1:
A microscopic examination of the hood latch on Teresa Halbach's RAV4 shows Avery's DNA did not get there by touching, meaning he didn't open the hood of the car.
Judge Sutkiewicz:
"This defendant's argument leaves out several significant facts. The author of the report concedes that there is no forensic test available that can conclusively determine whether DNA was left by sweat. As such, the report cannot conclusively state that the DNA on the hood latch could not have been left by the sweat of the defendant's hand.Furthermore, while 11 of the test subjects did not leave detectable DNA on the hood latch, the fact remains that 4 of the test subjects did leave detectable DNA by touch. The report does not give any quantifiable statistics as to the amount of DNA left in his tests or comparable data to the test performed on the hood latch in question and entered into evidence at trial.
Contrary to the defendant's assertions, the test of the DNA on the hood latch does not rule out the defendant's hand as the source of the DNA."
If there is no forensic test available to conclusively determine the DNA was left by sweat, how come the narrative presented by Ken Kratz was allowed in the original trial? It created unsupported prejudice against Avery. I guess we'll let it slide if the prosecution does it.
Claim #2:
Avery's DNA found on Halbach's car key included too many cells to be transferred by simply holding the key, and could have been planted using something like Avery's toothbrush.
Judge Sutkiewicz:
"There is no question that the DNA found on the key was the defendant's. Even if the key found in the defendant's residence was the victim's subkey, and that the amount of debris found on the key is not consistent with the key being used on a regular basis, that does not establish that the key was planted."But the report does establish that the amount of DNA on the key is too high for it to be touch DNA. Lack of such data was enough of a reason for the judge to dismiss the first claim, yet it wasn't enough for her to consider the second one. We're at number two and there's flip-flopping between criteria already. And again, the prosecution claimed this was Teresa's primary key to support that Avery took it from her. The fact that it wasn't supports the planting theory, had the jury known this it would in fact have created a reasonable probability that a different result would be reached at a new trial based on this information.
Claim #3
Zellner says tests show a bullet fragment found in Avery's garage was not shot through Teresa's head. The claim states that it is red paint, not blood on the bullet, thus it was likely planted to wrongfully convict Avery.
Judge Sutkiewicz:
"The expert witness indicates that the tests used on the bullet are not inclusive to the point of discovering all particles present on the bullet surface. In order to completely rule anything out, the expert indicates that more detailed analysis would be necessary. Furthermore, the report indicates that the test performed cannot determine what the red substance on the bullet is. Again, the expert indicates that further testing would be needed to rule blood in or out as the source of the stain. The expert also states that he would want to supplement his report after further test results were available. The reports do not support the defendant's position."Is this a ruling from a judge or a game of ignoring the pink elephant in the room, wooden particles embedded into the bullet? That alone sufficiently supports the defendant's position if you decide to acknowledge it.
"All three items of evidence were admitted at trial. Each was thoroughly contested by defense counsel. The reports submitted by the defendant are equivocal in their conclusions and do not establish an alternate interpretation of the evidence. Given the totality of evidence submitted at trial and the ambiguous conclusions as stated in the experts' reports, it cannot be said that a reasonable probability exists that a different result would be reached at a new trial based on these reports. As such, the defendant has not met his burden in order to obtain a new trial."Even what Zellner already presented sufficiently creates a lot of additional doubt, that could have made the jury to come to a different conclusion. But it's apparent that there's a lot of bias involved in her decision making, most noticeable by her not having the same criteria in order to support the prosecution.
UPDATE SEPTEMBER 3, 2017: Zellner told the Inquisitr that she intends to amend the petition for post-conviction relief, which she filed on June 7th. The following are excerpts from the article published on September 2nd:
Zellner told the Inquisitr on September 2, 2017 that "her law office has informed the Wisconsin Attorney General of their intent to amend the 1,200-page petition for post-conviction relief" filed on June 7th.
Zeller says she has uncovered even more exculpatory evidence in her bid to free Steven Avery from prison since filing the June 7th petition.
Zellner says her latest findings – as well as "a number of other findings" (which "those who believe in Avery’s innocence have pointed to," including "Halbach’s cell phone records and surrounding tower data from October 31, 2005") – back up her claims that Halbach was not killed anywhere near Avery Auto Salvage, but clubbed to death (not shot) likely at her home in Hilbert, 30 miles away.
Zellner says "details about new direct evidence" has not been released, but will be included in the amended June 7th petition.
Zellner says "there will be more forensic testing, too, findings that will supplement the results and expert testimony" included in the June 7th petition.
Zellner says that since filing the June 7th petition, "new witnesses have come forward, leading to significant discoveries.”
These new witnesses, "who are stepping out of the shadows and telling Zellner's team what they know, were hesitant to tell the truth during the initial investigation."
Zellner’s not just after a new trial based on isolated violations. She plans to prove Avery’s innocence. “We are as fully invested in vacating Steven Avery’s conviction as we have ever been,” Zellner said.
“We strongly believe this [new] information, combined with the flawed forensic evidence used to convict Steven Avery, will free him, once again,” Zellner said.
END UPDATES
On June 7, 2017, Steven Avery's attorney, Kathleen Zellner, filed a motion for post-conviction relief at Manitowoc County Courthouse. Zellner's 1,250-page petition for a new trial includes sworn affidavits of 14 experts from law enforcement, the legal profession, and medical and scientific fields.
The 202-page motion is available on Kathleen Zellner's website:
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/55203379e4b08b1328203a7d/t/593879d729687f407255fdce/1496873472937/2017.06.07+-+Motion+for+Post-Conviction+Relief.pdf
http://www.kathleentzellner.com/
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/appealsdocuments/
2017 report from AT&T (merged with Cingular around 2005) of Teresa's cell records:
Exhibit 72: New Halbach Cell Records
The complete list of exhibits attached to the motion is available at the link below:
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/6g9xmn/list_of_exhibits_from_zellnami/
Strang and Buting's response to the motion (from this Ferak article):
By WBAY, Manitowoc
Posted: Wed 12:43 PM, Jun 07, 2017
Updated: Wed 6:29 PM, Jun 07, 2017
Steven Avery's attorney has filed a 1,272-page notice for post conviction relief in Manitowoc County, Action 2 News has learned.
Attorney Kathleen Zellner appeared in person to file the document Wednesday rather than providing an electronic filing.
Avery is serving a life sentence for the Halloween 2005 murder of freelance photographer Teresa Halbach. Avery is appealing his conviction with Zellner's help.
Zellner says if the court won't release him from prison based on these arguments, as an alternative he's entitled to a new trial in the interest of justice.
Her filing boils down to five arguments:
Ineffective defense counsel
Zellner claims Avery's trial attorneys, Dean Strang and Jerome Buting, failed at representing their client effectively by not putting expert witnesses on the stand to talk about DNA and blood spatter evidence.
Ethical violations by the prosecutor
She accuses special prosecutor Ken Kratz of ethical violations, fabricating evidence, and destroying Avery's reputation.
Brady violations
It argues a Brady violation, referring to a U.S. Supreme Court case that ruled prosecutors violated a defendant's due process by suppressing evidence that was favorable to the defendant who requested it
New evidence
The Wisconsin State Crime Lab in Madison has been analyzing forensic evidence used to convict Avery.
Eight pieces of evidence — including swabs of blood stains, blood flakes and a car key — are subject to testing. Most of it is from Halbach’s SUV found on Avery’s Salvage property in 2005. The testing is more advanced than what was available when Avery was convicted of murdering Halbach in 2007.
Zellner's motion breaks down the new scientific testing she had completed on evidence for the theory that Avery's DNA was planted.
Zellner says the bullet fragment found in Avery's garage was not shot through Halbach's head.
She says a microscopic examination of the hood latch on Halbach's RAV4 shows Avery's DNA did not get there by touching, meaning he didn't open the hood of the car.
And Avery's DNA found on her car key included too many cells to be transferred by simply holding the key, and could have been planted using something like Avery's toothbrush.
Allowable claim
Zellner also argues to the court that Avery's previous post-conviction motions do not procedurally bar him from bringing this claim.
In her motion, Zellner tries to pin Halbach's murder on an ex-boyfriend, claiming he had motive and opportunity and that he misled investigators about damage on Halbach's vehicle.
Kratz provided this statement to Action 2 News:
We also reached out to Buting and the state attorney general's office, which is representing the state in the appeal. We have not received responses.
Steven Avery's brother Chuck told us, "Justice will be served."
The Bullet Did Not Pass Through Bone and Never Had Blood on It; the Bullet Had Wood Imbedded in It and the Red Paint Deposited on It
Dr. Palenik will testify that "there is no evidence to indicate that the bullet (Item FL) passed through bone. In fact, the particulate evidence that is present strongly suggests an alternate hypothesis, which is that the trajectory of the fired bullet took it into a wooden object, possibly a manufactured wood product. Furthermore, the presence of red droplets deposited on the bullet suggests that the bullet had picked up additional contamination from its environment at some point after coming to rest (i.e., droplets of potential red paint or a red liquid)."
The State's theory that Ms. Halbach's cause of death was the result of being shot twice in the head with .22 caliber long rifle bullets is completely disproven by Dr. Palenik's testing. Because Dr. Palenik has determined that the damaged bullet (Item FL) never passed through bone (i.e., Ms. Halbach's skull), the State's evidence that Ms. Halbach's DNA was found on the damaged bullet (Item FL) is completely discredited.
Dr. Palenik examined the control samples submitted by Mr. Haag and determined that they did have bone particles embedded in them, even after they were washed in a solution in a similar manner to Item FL at the Wisconsin State Crime Lab (" WSCL"). Mr. Haag will offer the opinion that damaged bullet (Item FL) would have had bone particles embedded in it if it had been shot through bone such as a human skull.
Microtrace Examination of Damaged Bullet (Item FL) with 2016 Stereomicroscopy Digital Video Microscropy and Scanning Electron Microscopy and Energy Dispersive X-Ray Spectroscopy (SEMIEDS) Demonstrates that the Damaged Bullet (Item FL) was Never Shot Through Ms. Halbach's Skull
The purpose of Dr. Palenik's trace examination with a 2016 Stereomicroscopy Digital Video Microscropy and Scanning Electron Microscopy and Energy Dispersive X-Ray Spectroscopy (SEM/EDS) was to determine if bone could be detected on the surface of the damaged bullet (Item FL). ...
Dr. Palenik's Examination of the Damaged Bullet (Item FL)
On 23 May 2017, a damaged bullet (Item FL) was hand carried to Microtrace by Special Agent Jeff Wisch ("SA Wisch") of the Wisconsin Department of Justice. The bullet remained in the custody of SA Wisch during the analysis performed at Microtrace.
Dr. Palenik opened, photo-documented, and examined the damaged bullet (Item FL) using a combination of 2016 stereomicroscopy and digital video microscopy.
Dr. Palenik's examination revealed that the bullet surface was covered in debris exhibiting the following characteristics:
a. Wood fragments appear to be directly adhering to or embedded in the lead of the bullet. This later observation suggests that at least some of the wood was deposited when the energized bullet encountered a wooden object. Some of the fragments observed are individual particles of wood. One particle appears to be an agglomeration of woody fragments, possibly originating from a manufactured wood product such as chip or particle board. Isolation and analysis of these 142 particles would be required to identify the species or type of wood product.
b. A rounded red droplet (-. 073 mm 2) adjacent to a smaller red droplet (-0.005 mm 2) is present on one side of the bullet. The identity of this dried liquid is presently unknown. Based upon its color and the fact that the bullet was previously extracted for DNA, it seems unlikely that this is blood. The color, texture, and shape of the deposit suggests that the material may be paint. Regardless of its identity, the texture of the bullet in the area where the droplets are observed strongly suggests that the droplet was deposited after the bullet was fired and came to rest. This material could be identified if subjected to further analysis.
c. No particles consistent with bone were detected by an examination using 2016 stereomicroscopy or digital video microscopy.
d. A waxy substance covers a significant portion (-40%) of the leading surface of the bullet. According to Mr. Haag, this wax is used by firearms analysts to orient and hold bullets during their analysis.
e. Numerous fibers are observed adhering to the waxy substance. Most of these are colorless; however, red and black fiber fragments were also noted. Other white fibers not associated with the waxy surface were observed in association with the bullet. These fibers could be more specifically identified after isolation and further analysis.
Dr. Palenik notes that the criteria for classification of each material described above is based upon in situ observations and are not necessarily inclusive of all particle types that may be present.
The sample was examined without any further preparation in a JEOL 7100FT field emission scanning electron microscope with a 50 mm 2 Oxford SDD EDS detector. The base of the bullet was fixed upon a piece of conductive, double sided, carbon tape. An image of the bullet was obtained at 20 kV. The sample was examined by a combination of backscatter and secondary electron imaging at magnifications ranging from -50x to 2000x. Elemental maps were collected from various areas on the leading surface of the bullet that showed surfaces with exposed lead (i.e., away from the waxy deposit). The elemental maps were examined for areas with elevated levels of calcium and phosphorous. Each area analyzed was rotated toward the EDS detector to increase the number of x-rays detected. No areas with elevated levels of calcium and phosphorous were detected, indicating the absence of detectable bone. A few silicon-rich areas were noted, which may suggest the presence of silicate compounds (e.g., minerals).
Dr. Palenik's Opinions Re: The Damaged Bullet (Item FL)
Dr. Palenik opines that "there is no evidence to indicate that the bullet passed through bone. In fact, the particulate evidence that is present strongly suggests an alternate hypothesis, which is that the trajectory of the fired bullet took it into a wooden object, possibly a manufactured wood product. Furthermore, the presence of red droplets deposited on the bullet suggests that the bullet had picked up additional contamination from its enviro1m1ent at some point after coming to rest (i e., droplets of potential red paint or a red liquid)." (Affidavit of Dr. Palenik, P-C Group Exhibit 48,, 19).
Based upon these findings, it is Dr. Palenik's understanding that an investigator was sent by Kathleen Zellner & Associates, P. C., to the Avery garage to review the area for possible sources of the particulate types described above. It is Dr. Palenik's understanding that the following possible sources were identified:
a. Particle board in the garage with apparent bullet holes.
b. Red painted surfaces including a ladder in the garage and a red painted ceiling.
Each of the above listed materials observed on the bullet could be identified specifically. The potential sources for the particulate matter that were recently collected from the Avery garage could be directly compared to materials on the bullet. (Affidavit of Dr. Palenik, P-C Group Exhibit 48, ~ 20).
On June 2, 2017, Mr. James Kirby and Kurt Kingler, current post-conviction counsel's investigator and law clerk, collected wood and paint samples from the Avery garage. Mr. Kingler test fired .22 long rifles through the exterior garage wall and wood samples into the interior of the garage. Those samples have been submitted to Dr. Palenik for further tes ting to determine if the samples obtained on June 2, 2017, are, in fact, the source of the red particles and wood product observed by Dr. Palenik on the damaged bullet (Item FL). Dr. Palenik will supplement his affidavit after he completes testing of these items.
Mr. Johnson, the owner and previous resident of Mr. Avery's trailer, often fired his .22 caliber rifle into gopher holes near the doors of Mr. Avery's garage. Mr. Johnson would expect spent casings to be ejected into the garage and not picked up. Further, Mr. Johnson would expect damaged bullets or bullet fragments to end up in the garage. (Affidavit of Rollie Johnson, P-C Exhibit 7; Affidavit of Steven Avery, P-C Exhibit 4)
The Hood Latch Swab Was Never Used to Swab the Hood Latch: It Probably Came from a Relabeled Groin Swab Taken from Avery
Dr. Palenik examined the hood latch swab (Item ID) that allegedly was used to swab the hood latch of Ms. Halbach's vehicle and allegedly contained Mr. Avery's DNA. Dr. Palenik has concluded, by a series of experiments of the trace materials on the hood latch swab (Item ID), that it was never used to swab a hood latch.
Dr. Reich will testify that the DNA on the hood latch did not come from Mr. Avery touching the hood latch, and most probably came from a relabeled groin swab.
Two groin swabs were taken from Mr. Avery at Aurora Medical Center by a nurse on November 9, 2005. Mr. Avery was escorted by Inv. Wiegert to Aurora Medical Center at approximately 1:20 p.m. Agent Fassbender met Inv. Wiegert, who was escorting Mr. Avery for the examination. Mr. Avery was taken into an examination room. Present in the examination room were Faye Fritsch, RN and SANE Medical Director Laura Vogel-Schwartz, MD. (11/9/05 Execution of Search Warrant, P-C Exhibit 9, STATE 1635). Towards the end of the examination, Nurse Fritsch took two swabs of Mr. Avery's groin area in direct contravention of the search warrant, which specifically restricted that DNA samples were to be taken from Mr. Avery's saliva and blood. There was no reference to groin swabs in the search warrant. (11/9/05 Execution of Search Warrant, P-C Exhibit 9, STATE 1643).
Significantly, Nurse Fritsch's documentation of taking swabs from Mr. Avery excludes any mention of taking groin swabs. A well-qualified nurse following acceptable standards of charting would never fail to document taking the groin swabs unless she were instructed not to document taking the groin swabs by Agent Fassbender or Inv. Wiegert. (Forensic Evidence Checklist, attached and incorporated herein as P-C Exhibit 26, STATE 2875, 2877). Agent Fassbender and Inv. Wiegert "conferred and determined that the search warrant did not call for that type of exam. Inv. Wiegert immediately stopped Fritsch and the exam was concluded." Again, Nurse Fritsch would never have taken the groin swabs without being specifically instructed to do so by Agent Fassbender and Inv. Wiegert. Agent Fassbender and Inv. Wiegert's explanation that they did not realize that the search warrant did not call for taking groin swabs is not credible.
Furthermore, according to Agent Fassbender's report, Nurse Fritsch disposed of the groin swabs. (11/9/05 Execution of Search Warrant, P-C Exhibit 9, ST A TE 1635). Agent Fassbender's report is not credible because Nurse Fritsch never mentions, in her charting, disposing of the groin swabs. Agent Fassbender's report directly contradicts Mr. Avery's account of this examination as described in his affidavit. Contrary to Agent Fassbender's report, Inv. Wiegert told Nurse Fritsch that he would discard the swabs while Agent Fassbender escorted Mr. Avery into a separate room to get his fingerprints. As Mr. Avery followed Agent Fassbender and Nurse Fritsch out of the examination room, Mr. Avery heard Inv. Wiegert tell Nurse Fritsch to give him the groin swabs, and Mr. Avery observed Inv. Wiegert walk to the examination room receptacle as if to discard the groin swabs. Mr. Avery observed that Inv. Wiegert's did not drop the groin swabs into the receptacle. (11/9/05 Execution of Search Warrant, P-C Exhibit 9, STATE 1635; Affidavit of Steven Avery, P-C Exhibit 4).
Inv. Weigert, as an experienced investigator, would have known that taking groin swabs was not authorized by the search warrant, which permitted only the collection of saliva and blood samples. (11/9/05 Execution of Search Warrant, P-C Exhibit 9, STATE 1643). It is therefore reasonable to conclude, from this clear violation of Mr. Avery's Fourth Amendment rights, that Inv. Wiegert planned to use the illegally seized groin swabs from Mr. Avery to plant M r. Avery's DNA on other crime scene evidence.
Hood Latch Story Fabricated by Inv. Wiegert and Agent Fassbender in Brendan's Confession
It was not until four months after Ms. Halbach's RAV-4 was analyzed by the WSCL in Madison that investigators became interested in the hood latch. The hood latch was first introduced by Agent Fassbender and Inv. Wiegert in their March 1, 2006, interrogation of Brendan. Agent Fassbender asked Brendan, "Did he, did he, did he go and look at the engine, did he raise the hood at all or anything like that? To do something to that car?" (Pages from March 1, 2006, interrogation of Brendan Dassey ("3/1/06 Interrogation"), attached and incorporated herein as P-C Exhibit 27, STATE 4674). In a subsequent interview, Brendan denied seeing Mr. Avery open the hood. (Pages from May 13, 2006, interrogation of Brendan Dassey ("5/13/06 Interrogation"), attached and incorporated herein as P-C Exhibit 28, STATE 7300). In the May 13 interview, under pressure by Agent Fassbender and Inv. Wiegert, Brendan capitulated and changed his story to fit their narrative - that Mr. Avery opened the hood of Ms. Halbach's RAV-4 .
Reconstructed Correct Timeline (Pages 122-123)
Current post-conviction counsel, using new telephone records of Ms. Halbach, has reconstructed the correct timeline and route that Ms. Halbach took on October 31 , 2005. (Ms. Halbach 's New Cell Records, P-C Exhibit 72 11 ):
a. 8:17 a.m. AutoTrader calls Ms. Halbach. The duration of this call is one minute and seven seconds. (New Cell Records, P-C Exhibit 72). The State omitted this call from its timeline of Ms. Halbach's phone activity. (Trial Exhibit 362).
b. 9:46 a.m. AutoTrader called Ms. Halbach. The duration of this call was thirty three seconds.
c. 11 :10 p.m. AutoTrader called Ms. Halbach again at 11:10 a.m. for a duration of five seconds, (New Cell Records, P-C Exhibit 72, line 1342). The State omitted this call from its timeline of Ms. Halbach 's phone activity. (Trial Exhibit 362).
d. 11:44 a.m. Ms. Halbach placed a call to Barb Janda's landline. (New Cell Records, P-C Exhibit 72, line 1345).
e. 1:10 p.m. Ms. Halbach arrived at Mr. Schmitz's residence. The State incorrectly presented a false time line to the jury based upon the erroneous recollection of Mr. Schmitz that he received a call from Ms. Halbach at 1:10 p.m. (11/3/05 CCSD Interview of Steven Schmitz, P-C Exhibit 50, STATE 1210; TT:3/14:88). Ms. Halbach's phone records show that she called Mr. Schmitz at 12:51 p.m. (New Cell Records, P-C Exhibit 72, line 1348). Therefore, contrary to the State's timeline, Ms. Halbach arrived twenty minutes earlier at the Schmitz residence than the State represented to the jury. (TT:3/1 4:88).
f. 1:15 p.m. Ms. Halbach departed Mr. Schmitz's residence after completing his photographs. Mr. Schmitz testified that Ms. Halbach completed his appointment. For the convenience of the Court, current counsel has converted the times listed in Ms. Halbach's phone records. AT&T maintains its phone records using a 24-hour clock with Coordinated Universal Time ("UTC"), which, on October 31, 2005, was six hours ahead of Central Daylight Time, the local timezone for the State of Wisconsin. So, e.g., the 8:17 a.m CDT call is listed as 14:17:12 on Line 30 of this exhibit. 122 "around 1:30 [p.m.]" (TT:2/13:123). In light of Mr. Schmitz's mistaken timeline, it is reasonable to conclude that Ms. Halbach departed Mr. Schmitz's property approximately twenty minutes earlier than what Mr. Schmitz testified at trial.
g. Shortly after 2:00 p.m., Ms. Halbach arrived in the vicinity of the Zipperer residence. Despite searching for approximately ten minutes, Ms. Halbach was unable to locate their house and decided to proceed to her appointment at the Avery property. (Trial Exhibit 218). Ms. Halbach called the Zipperers' landline at 2: 12 p.m. (Trial Exhibits 361 and 362) to tell them that she was having difficulty finding their house, so she was proceeding to her next appointment but would return.
h. 2:24 p.m. Ms. Halbach received a call from Mr. Avery who was wondering when she would arrive. Ms. Halbach did not answer the call. (Affidavit of Steven Avery, P-C Exhibit 4. Mr. Avery used the *67 feature on his cell phone so that Ms. Halbach would not feel that she needed to return his call if she did not answer because the *67 feature would not register Mr. Avery's cell phone number on Ms. Halbach,s cellphone.
i. 2:27 p.m. Ms. Pliszka called Ms. Halbach. Ms. Pliszka's account of her conversation with Ms. Halbach is not credible. At trial, Ms. Pliszka testified that it was Ms. Halbach who called her at 2:27 p.m. on October 31, 2005. (TT:2/13:80). Ms. Halbach's phone records, as reflected in Mr. Kratz's summary exhibit, show that it was AutoTrader who called Ms. Halbach, not vice versa. (Trial Exhibits 361 and 362; TT:2/27:186-87).
Trial defense counsel failed to impeach Ms. Pliszka's testimony effectively that Ms. Halbach initiated the 2:27 p.m. call on October 31, 2005. Had trial defense counsel impeached Ms. Pliszka, they could have shown that her testimony was not credible about her alleged contact with Ms. Halbach, effectively undermining Ms. Pliszka's testimony that Ms. Halbach told her that she was on her way to the Avery property at the time of the call. (TT:2/13:80) (Interviews of Dawn Pliszka, attached and incorporated herein as PC Group Exhibit 102, STATE 5572).
j. Between 2:31 and 2:35 p.m. Ms. Halbach arrived at the Avery property. Ms. Halbach snapped one photograph of Barb,s van. Ms. Halbach began walking towards Mr. Avery' s trailer, but when she saw Mr. Avery come out of his trailer, she waved and turned around to go to her car to get his magazine. When Mr. Avery approached the car, Ms. Halbach was in the driver's seat with the door open and the engine running. Ms. Halbach handed an AutoTrader magazine to Mr. Avery and he paid her. Ms. Halbach turned left on Hwy. 147 as she exited the Avery property. (Affidavit of Steven Avery, P-C Exhibit 4).
k. 2:35 p.m. Mr. Avery called Ms. Halbach (Trial Exhibit 360) because he realized, after quickly flipping through the AutoTrader magazine, that AutoTrader also advertised front-loaders and Mr. Avery wanted to sell one of his front-loaders. Mr. Avery called Ms. Halbach at 2:35 p.m. to request that she return to the Avery property to photograph his front-loader. He terminated the call before it connected because he wanted to go and see Bobby but discovered that Bobby was not home. (Affidavit of Steven Avery, P-C Exhibit 4).
l. 2:41 p.m. The last voicemail received by Ms. Halbach registered to her phone. Ms. Halbach was on her way back to the Zipperer residence. (Trial Exhibit 361). Based on the fact that the Zipperers had the AutoTrader magazine and receipt (11/3/05 CCSD Report, attached and incorporated as P-C Exhibit 73, STATE 2497-98; TT:2/13:132; TriaJ Exhibit 26), it is clear that Ms. Halbach located the Zipperer residence, photographed their vehicle and departed from the Zipperer residence. On November 5, 2005, Inv. Wiegert and Det. Remiker had a conversation about Ms. Halbach's appointment schedule on October 31, 2005. In that conversation, they discussed their understanding that the Zipperer residence was Ms. Halbach's final stop on October 31. (11/5/05 Wiegert/Remiker recording, attached and incorporated herein as P-C Exhibit 71)
The following is a summary of what is in pages 50-60 of the motion regarding the blood, as posted by thebeacon32 at TickTockManitowoc.
Zellner initially wanted to do radiocarbon and DNA methylation testing to see if the blood came from the 1996 vial but her experts determined that there wasn't enough blood to do the tests. Also abandoned that line of testing after determining that the blood was planted using blood from the sink in 2005. (p50)
Side Notes:
Zellner's expert does several experiments and contends the following:
Zellner criticizes defense counsel for not hiring a competent blood spatter expert and for going with the planting theory of Lenk getting blood from the vial even though there wasn't really solid proof connecting him to it. And that they knew the hole was normal and that the improper seal was from when the file was accessed by the Innocence Project. They lost credibility and guaranteed his conviction.
The "NEW EVIDENCE" section focuses on the bullet, hood latch and RAV4 key, as well as "Brain Fingerprinting" of Avery.
Here are the contents of that section:
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/55203379e4b08b1328203a7d/t/593879d729687f407255fdce/1496873472937/2017.06.07+-+Motion+for+Post-Conviction+Relief.pdf
Other Comments About the Motion at Reddit:
Zellner has emails. P106, Ryan Hillegas' jealousy was the motive.
Tidbit from the available 15pgs - discussing Ryan Hillegas as a suspect - she says that Scott Bloedorn didn't want to talk with her investigator but then when they said something about the real killer SB blurted out "you mean Ryan Hillegas."
Her motion states Hillegas wanted to conceal and stir away attention from him by planting the evidence undetected. But he shows Colburn the car on the 3rd and then Hillegas plants it on the 4th?
This map from Zellner's office floor as pictured in Newsweek seems to line up exactly with Google Earth's route from TH's home to RH's address that he gave to LE - follow the blue line on the Newsweek map compared to the purple line on the Google Earth map. This is RH's family home in Hilbert. It's 5.3 miles and 8 minutes from TH's house. That's what the map is showing, the route between TH's and RH's homes. It's RH's family's home. Check CASO pg. 31. [magilla39]
http://imgur.com/yAXAKDR
http://imgur.com/hT9B7a7
http://imgur.com/rrDmcm1
From the post-conviction petition:
While Mr. Hillegas maintained an interest in Ms. Halbach, she was no longer romantically interested in him. (Email from Ms. Halbach, P-C Exhibit 53). Ms. Halbach became sexually involved with her housemate, Mr. Bloedorn, in the months preceding her disappearance. Reportedly, Mr. Bloedorn was also Mr. Hillegas' best friend. Mr. Hillegas committed perjury at trial when he described Ms. Halbach's relationship with Mr. Bloedorn as platonic and never romantic or sexual in nature. Current post-conviction counsel's investigator Mr. Steven Kirby attempted to interview Mr. Bloedorn about false statements he had made to the police in 2005. Mr. Bloedorn refused to sit for an interview with Mr. Steven Kirby, but when he was told that current post-conviction counsel planned to name a suspect in Ms. Halbach's murder, Mr. Bloedorn immediately blurted out, "You mean Ryan Hillegas." Another point of jealousy for Mr. Hillegas might have been the fact that Ms. Halbach, as part of her business, took nude photographs of men and women and this activity led her to become sexually involved with one of her clients, Mr. Czech. Mr. Czech was married to someone else at the time. Ms. Halbach kept the nude photographs that she had taken of Mr. Czech and his then-wife in the bedroom of her residence, a home that Mr. Hillegas frequented and moved into after Ms. Halbach's death.
Evidence shows Avery did not deposit his DNA on the victim's key by holding it in his hand rather it was deposited by applying DNA to the key ...such as a toothbrush
Groin swab used on the hood latch. That's pretty significant. Paragraph 170: 2016 Microscope Examination of Hood Latch Swab 359. Dr. Palenik has used a microscope developed in 2016 to analyze the hood latch swab. Dr. Palenik has offered the opinion that the swab was not used to swab the hood latch.
The motion alleges that the groin swab was switched out with the hood latch swab.
Page 73ish, KZ explains several breakdowns in protocol that explain how the groin swabs were even taken to begin with, were hidden, were then discarded but not recorded by the nurse. Then she shows how Wiegert and Fassbender's accounts don't match, then tops it off by showing where Weigert hid the fact that he was the one who submitted swabs into custody and put someone else's name in place of his own to hide the fact that he was in possession of hood latch swabs. She says he switched the swabs is what I'm sayin'. And shows how.
'According to current post-conviction counsel's expert, Dr. Reich, the most common way for forensic evidence to be planted is by re-labeling the forensic swabs'
Claims that the groin swab was was switched out with the hood latch swab. That the key was planted by Lenk and Colborn. And that the killer erased VM messages to delay the time that people realized she was missing. Also that the Zipperer's was her last appointment.
Rav-4 was not present at time of November 4 flyover. Investigators concealed knowledge that Rav-4 was driven on Mr. R's property. DOJ never authored interview with Joshua Radandt.
Joshua Radandt actually confirms the RAV4 was planted on the Avery lot, that the Wisconsin Dept of Justice investigators knew this [or at least they believed it at that time based on the dogs]? The police told him they knew how the car got into the spot it was found but they never told the defence. From affidavit of Radandt:
"At the time I was told by the Dept of Justice agents that they believed TH's vehicle was driven to the Kuss Road cul-de-sac by driving west through an empty field, then south down the gravel road past my hunting camp until reaching an intersection with a gravel road that ran northeast into the Avery property. They told me that they believed TH's vehicle turned northeast onto that gravel road and entered the Avery Property at its southwest corner. It is my understanding that this theory was based on the work of scent tracking dogs" (Affidavit of Joshua Radandt)
Joshua Radandt pressured to lie about the fire he saw. From the motion: "When investigators re-interviewed Mr. Radandt on November 10, 2005, they pressured him to describe the fire as large, behind Mr. Avery' s garage, and in an open burn pit. Mr. Radandt never told investigators that the fire was behind Mr. Avery's garage. Mr. Radandt sets forth in his affidavit that he remembers seeing the fire, contained to a burn barrel, and between several trailers on the Avery property. "Paul Metz, the man who heard a 'whoosh' and smelled something vile, also recants a lot of what we thought he said. He claims he heard no 'whoosh', and would have recognized the smell of a body burning because he was an ex-firefighter. He actually reported that he heard a 'buzz', like "electrical wires surging". In other words... it's very clear a lot of 'facts' we've heard through police reports are fabricated.
Did you see the footnote at the bottom of the page saying he, Joshua Radandt, had been unfairly called out as a suspect? Looks like he came forward.
"Mr. Radandt has been unfairly targeted as a possible suspect, because he owned land adjacent to the Avery property. Current post-conviction counsel has interviewed Mr. Radandt on two occasions and has been accompanied by him twice to view all of his property. No evidence exists that implicates Mr. Radandt in the murder of Ms. Halbach, and he has a solid alibi for the afternoon of October 31st, 2005."
"Investigators concealed their knowledge that Ms. Halbach's RAV-4 was driven onto Mr. R's property. (confirmed by scent dogs) (Brady violation).
Radandt gives his account of what DOJ agents told him. Footnote makes it clear that Radandt had an alibi for Oct 31 and is not considered a suspect.
LE knew from where the RAV4 was driven onto the property. Since that route pointed finger towards someone else driving it on there and not SA driving it there from his garage that information was kept quiet.
KZ claiming she was killed back at her apartment around 4:30 by Ryan. #strangerbesideme living in her house 14 days after her murder, hid things #checkaduhid, and used the false name to sign in.
Pg. 72-73: "Mr. James opines that the blood spatter on the inside of the rear cargo door was the result of Ms. Halbach being struck an object consistent with a hammer or a mallet while she was lying on her back on the ground behind the vehicle after the rear cargo door was opened."
TH was struck on the head after she opened the rear cargo door. She fell to the ground/floor and was repeatedly struck with a hammer or mallet. The blood spatter went up as she was struck and landed on the inside of the rear cargo door as a result since it was open and she was on the ground.
Just after MAM came out (Jan 2016)there was a person claiming to be involved in forensics and that was exactly his theory.
So those scratches on RH's hands tell a horrible story of how TH died. Such a sad day.
Seven very valid reasons to name Ryan Hillegas"
My prediction is they don't know who the killer is, but they know who knows. You know why? Because Sandy Greenman said something like that in a tweet!
All evidence points to planting. Killer not named.
Her motion implies that Andy Colborn knows who it was and that he accompanied the murderer to ASY on the 3rd. She also strongly suggests Ryan Hillegas's involvement.
She states in the motion that RH was with AC when they found the Rav. She says that it was RH in the background of the infamous phone call saying its here. In Summary: So, RH offered to look for the car with AC. They "found it" (RH knew where it was going to be but AC didnt) and then after that AC organised to have it moved to SA's ( Without complaint from RH). The rest is history.
AC was sure RH could be relied on to not say anything about moving the car? How do you develop that sort of intimate/dangerous relationship, unless you know one another already or there's a mutual benefit to ensure silence & compliance?
On 11/3, calls LE says he thinks he found the car. he and AC are on the lot at night, find the car. AC calls in the plates. He can't admit to this because he's on the property illegally w/o warrant. On 11/5, staged search party legally "finds" the car.
When you want to get rid a car, ASY is the place to take it....?
The short excerpt of the motion we saw possibly (at least that's my interpretation) indicates that the RAV4 was already driven to the property on the 3rd. So he found out via her appointment sheet he had access to. Or via his access to her phone records and/or apartment as a whole.
I don't know the answer, but SA's interview with the news was on Nov 4th. It's very possible that a lot of information was known by RH about TH's jobs earlier in the day, and maybe the fact that SA could be a suspect, and maybe the fact that LE wanted SA to be a suspect. It's possible that RH knew all of this before the car was planted.
My thoughts are that even thought she is implicating RH, we don't know yet that she is able to prove it. What she has accomplished in the little we know(15 pages, ugh) is that there was overwhelming evidence to overcome the Denny ruling when it came to him. At post-conviction, she just has to prove it is more likely someone else and that it definitely wasn't SA. It's the states job to file the charges or investigate. I don't think RH will talk....he is hoping his back is covered if he covers theirs. I sure wish he would roll over on them for one of their coveted plea deals!
"Ryan Kilgus." That's the name Ryan Hillegas used when signing in. 'Kil' gus. It takes a special sort of crazy [or subconscious admission of guilt] to replace 'hill' with 'kil' during a murder investigation. From the motion: Mr. Hillegas misrepresented his identity when he became the leader of the search. (Ryan "Kilgus")...
Why would Ryan take her RAV4 to ASY? If he is the killer, he probably would have known her AT appointments. Plus Avery was in the news alot around that time.
Bottom of page 155... "Current post-conviction council offers a free Brain Fingerprinting test, administered by Dr. Farwell, to the following individuals: Mr. Hillegas, Inv. Wiegert, Agent Fassbender, Sgt Colborn, and Lt. Lenk, on the issues raised in this petition."
From what I read the tests can tell through EEG and a bunch of technical science stuff whether a person knows key facts about a crime. SA's testing showed he did not have knowledge that TH was killed behind the Rav4 with the cargo door open, which we now know from the blood spatter expert. That is what I took away from it but if anyone can explain it better please do! My thoughts are all over the place tonight! :)
From page 196, bizarrely this seems to have been suggested by a prison inmate in 2008: Current post-conviction counsel found a letter dated May 4, 2008 and received by the State Public Defender Madison Office on June 20, 2008 from an inmate Bobby Don Salas ("Mr. Salas"), immate number 420573. Remarkably, Mr. Salas suggested that Mr. Avery get a blood spatter expert, DNA expert on the key to determine the source of the DNA, and "brain fingerprint" testing. This letter was forwarded to Ms. Hagopian and was ignored by her. (Letter from Mr. Salas, attached and incorporated herein as P-C Exhibit 105).
Having skim read it, it appears the suggestion is that the killer took her body in a car to Kuss Road cul-de-sac, where it was buried for some time between death and being burnt. It was burnt in a burn barrel on quarry property before being dumped in SA burn pit. My reading is that it is unknown where she was killed, but evidence (jeans and lube) found at Maribel Caves should have been properly tested.
So the blood was from SA's bathroom? Paragraphs 225 suggests that the killer entered SA trailer and collected the blood from his sink, planted it in the RAV-4 and then hid the RAV-4 in the Kuss Rd cul-de-sac!!!! Paragraphs 231-232 suggest that the killer planted the car on 4 November but not before accidentally damaging the front parking light on a metal post between Kuss Road cul-de-sac and the Avery property and collecting the broken light and placing it in the trunk. Paragraph 288 suggests that it is probable that TH remains were buried at Kuss Road excavation site for a period of time after her death and before her body was burned.
Looks like they might be claiming Steven bled in his bathroom sink on the night of 11/3 and the blood had been collected (by someone?).
Killer broke into SA property minutes after SA left. How far would a killer go to protect themselves. KZ doesn't believe LE collected the blood due to timings.
Strang and Buting knew the hole was normal and that the improper seal was from when the file was accessed by the Innocence Project. They lost credibility and guaranteed his conviction.
Page 8 doesn't straight up say it but seriously alludes to the fact that Ryan Hillegas was the one responsible. He was verbally and physically abusive during their relationship. It seems Ryan looks was still interested in her and she didnt want anything to do with him.
KZ alleges TH made it home and RH killed her there.
"The killer was familiar with the Radandt and Manitowoc County pits. He devised a plan to bring the RAV-4 from the murder scene to the Avery property."
Pg 103: On November 4, the killer decided to make another attempt to plant the vehicle on the opposite side of the Avery property, that is, in the southeast corner, close to the crusher. The killer, who drove the RAV-4 into the Radandt Pit in the late afternoon of November 4, was aided by an accomplice who drove another vehicle into the Radandt Pit to give the killer a ride out after the killer planted Ms. Halbach' s vehicle on the Avery property. The killer led law enforcement to Ms. Halbach's vehicle later in the evening on November 4. The killer represented to law enforcement that he would be willing to search the Avery property, something that the police could only do with a warrant based on probable cause which they did not have on November 4.
Brutus @cadaverdogbrutu Jun 12
Bloedorn lawyers up, Hillegas caught lying. They both attended the ASY together. Bloedorn knows more. Actions are loud.. #makingamurderer
Page 130 of the motion. It starts there about the white jeep.
I am all over the place with possibilities....This is certainly one of them. It could even be that her death was an accident and LE threatened family and RH to cooperate to set up SA....The most obvious suspect would be the ex so KZ is using his inconsistencies to draw him out to start pointing....
Brady violations and prosecution withheld evidence, Ken Kratz impaired, ineffectiveness of defense counsel.
Pieces of tail-light found on Randant property, 15 pages, https://www.scribd.com/document/350662763/Avery-1000-Page-Petition-2017
Andy Colborn's call to dispatch about Teresa's plates. Ryan Hillegas heard in background, saying "it's hers." You have to really listen in, but it's there. So crazy how we would speculate this and people would shake their heads and here we are. Whoa! I'm not this far yet, but I remember a lot of us analyzing this call. We thought it was PoG saying, "the car's here." It was RH saying "it's hers"?!?!
The key parts here:
That scene in the documentary where RH and MH were talking to reporters and acting really suspicious.. now I need to go watch it again!
You throw out the key and the bullet and have legit reasons about the car not being where it is said to be, then you don't even need all the interpretation favorable to SA. Now, add in just a percentage of the favorable interpretation, a portion of the prosecutorial charges, and a portion of the nonsensical prosecution theory and it all adds up to an overwhelming refutation of the state's original case.
Mr. Kratz's theory of Ms. Halbach's murder is one of the most preposterous tales ever spun in an American courtroom. If Mr. Kratz's theory were true, Mr. Avery is a true "idiot savant." Mr. Kratz's tale was as follows: Mr. Avery, the idiot, selects, as his victim, the only female with whom he had an appointment on the day of her murder. Mr. Avery, the idiot, selects his own bedroom for the commission of an incredibly bloody crime. Mr Avery, the idiot, handcuffs Ms. Halbach to his bed, sexually assaults her, slashes her throat, and stabs her stomach. He carries her lifeless bloody body to the garage, placing her in and taking her out of the back of her RAV4, puts her on a creeper, and rolls her to his burn pit where he tosses her body into a bonfire. However, despite leaving a mountain of incriminating evidence, Mr. Avery the savant, takes over and is able to level the mountain and remove all forensic traces of Ms. Halbach in his trailer and garage in a feat that is comparable to defying the laws of gravity and forensic science.
On November 4, 2005, news media crews filmed the interior of the house Ms. Halbach shared with Mr. Bloedorn. While interviewing Mr. Bloedorn in the kitchen, news media filmed what appeared to be the RAV-4 sub-key and blue lanyard, which was next to the kitchen sink. (November 4, 2005, WFRV Interview of Scott Bloedorn, stills attached and incorporated herein as P-C Group Exhibit 23). It is indisputable the key that was found in Mr. Avery's bedroom on November 8, 2005 was Ms. Halbach's sub-key with a blue lanyard attached. Trial defense counsel failed to demonstrate this simple undisputed fact to the jury by using Trial Exhibit 5 and the RAV-4 manual, which was critical to the success of proving the sub-key and blue lanyard were planted. (RAV-4 Manual, P-C Exhibit 1).
SOURCE (Page 80): http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Motion-for-Post-Conviction-Relief.pdf
On June 7, 2017, Steven Avery's attorney, Kathleen Zellner, filed a motion for post-conviction relief at Manitowoc County Courthouse. Zellner's 1,250-page petition for a new trial includes sworn affidavits of 14 experts from law enforcement, the legal profession, and medical and scientific fields.
The 202-page motion is available on Kathleen Zellner's website:
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/55203379e4b08b1328203a7d/t/593879d729687f407255fdce/1496873472937/2017.06.07+-+Motion+for+Post-Conviction+Relief.pdf
Misread: SA need not prove RH is killer- but RH is suspect cops never eliminated -SA's jury did not hear evidence on RH. #MakingAMurderer - Kathleen Zellner, Twitter, June 8, 2017Affidavits from Zellner's expert, which were attached to the motion, are also available on Zellner's website:
http://www.kathleentzellner.com/
For anyone reading the affidavits through them the first time, I would recommend starting with McCrary, as it pretty much sums up everything. Then, I would move onto the Bennett Gershman and then the Dr. Christopher Palenik. Gershman's is the best in my opinion, for the sole purpose that it shows exactly the kind of piece of shit Kratz is. Avery didn't stand a chance. Dr. Palenik then describes in incredible detail how they tested the bullet and provided a test that can be replicated by the state. He also went on into detail how they can later test the specific fragments found on the bullet to (hopefully) match the fragments to a wood shooting target and red paint from either the ladder or ceiling in the garage. Oh, and that it never went through any bones. - kylewhatever, redditExhibits that have been uploaded at stevenaverycase.org:
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/appealsdocuments/
2017 report from AT&T (merged with Cingular around 2005) of Teresa's cell records:
Exhibit 72: New Halbach Cell Records
The complete list of exhibits attached to the motion is available at the link below:
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/6g9xmn/list_of_exhibits_from_zellnami/
Strang and Buting's response to the motion (from this Ferak article):
“We have not read Kathleen Zellner’s June 7, 2017, filings for Steven Avery in their entirety, but have read the 202-page motion itself," the attorneys said. "We are glad that she has filed a motion with supporting documents. What really matters here, to us and we hope to everyone, is that we get closer to the truth in this case and to justice for everyone. We hope that Ms. Zellner, and Steven Avery’s entire current legal team, have taken an important step yesterday toward those two, related goals.”Wisconsin DOJ response to the motion:
The Wisconsin Department of Justice told USA TODAY NETWORK-Wisconsin that Avery's motion for a new trial is without merit. "We are confident that as with Mr. Avery's prior motions, this one also is without merit and will be rejected once it is considered by the court," said Rebecca Ballweg, senior communications specialist in the state Attorney General's office. "We continue to send our condolences to the Halbach family as they have to endure Avery's ridiculous attempts to re-litigate his guilty verdict and sentence."From the Post Crescent:
"Mr. Avery's post-conviction counsel have completed scientific testing and conducted an extensive re-investigation of his case, which demonstrates that planted evidence and false testimony were used to convict Mr. Avery of the first degree intentional homicide of Teresa Halbach," attorney Kathleen Zellner wrote in a 1,000-plus page document filed at the Manitowoc County Clerk of Courts office."Making A Murderer": Avery's attorney files 1272-page post-conviction notice
By WBAY, Manitowoc
Posted: Wed 12:43 PM, Jun 07, 2017
Updated: Wed 6:29 PM, Jun 07, 2017
Steven Avery's attorney has filed a 1,272-page notice for post conviction relief in Manitowoc County, Action 2 News has learned.
Attorney Kathleen Zellner appeared in person to file the document Wednesday rather than providing an electronic filing.
Avery is serving a life sentence for the Halloween 2005 murder of freelance photographer Teresa Halbach. Avery is appealing his conviction with Zellner's help.
Zellner says if the court won't release him from prison based on these arguments, as an alternative he's entitled to a new trial in the interest of justice.
Her filing boils down to five arguments:
Ineffective defense counsel
Zellner claims Avery's trial attorneys, Dean Strang and Jerome Buting, failed at representing their client effectively by not putting expert witnesses on the stand to talk about DNA and blood spatter evidence.
Ethical violations by the prosecutor
She accuses special prosecutor Ken Kratz of ethical violations, fabricating evidence, and destroying Avery's reputation.
Brady violations
It argues a Brady violation, referring to a U.S. Supreme Court case that ruled prosecutors violated a defendant's due process by suppressing evidence that was favorable to the defendant who requested it
New evidence
The Wisconsin State Crime Lab in Madison has been analyzing forensic evidence used to convict Avery.
Eight pieces of evidence — including swabs of blood stains, blood flakes and a car key — are subject to testing. Most of it is from Halbach’s SUV found on Avery’s Salvage property in 2005. The testing is more advanced than what was available when Avery was convicted of murdering Halbach in 2007.
Zellner's motion breaks down the new scientific testing she had completed on evidence for the theory that Avery's DNA was planted.
Zellner says the bullet fragment found in Avery's garage was not shot through Halbach's head.
She says a microscopic examination of the hood latch on Halbach's RAV4 shows Avery's DNA did not get there by touching, meaning he didn't open the hood of the car.
And Avery's DNA found on her car key included too many cells to be transferred by simply holding the key, and could have been planted using something like Avery's toothbrush.
From the motion:Included in the new evidence was testing called "brain fingerprinting," a technique to determine whether specific information is stored in a person's brain. A federal report suggests that testing has not been proven effective or useful, but according to the motion, through brain fingerprinting Zellner's expert determined Avery's brain didn't show that he knew specific details about the crime.
"New scientific source testing was performed on the exemplar sub-key to determine the source of the DNA. An experiment eliminated skin cells, rubbed from slippers identical to the ones photographed in Mr. Avery's bedroom on November 8, 2005, as the source of the DNA on the Toyota Key (Item C). The quantity of skin cells detected by Dr. Reich on the exemplar sub-key after it had been rubbed in worn slippers identical to Mr. Avery's was not comparable to the quantity detected by Ms. Culhane on the key. Mr. Avery's toothbrush was taken by law enforcement and current post-conviction counsel's DNA experts' experiments have shown that rubbing a toothbrush on a exemplar sub-key would produce a comparable quantity of DNA. Mr. Avery's toothbrush was taken by law enforcement from his bathroom but suspiciously was never logged into evidence. Mr. Avery, after reviewing a law enforcement photograph taken of his bathroom during one of the multiple searches, immediately noticed that his toothbrush was missing. Mr. Avery had not removed the toothbrush prior to leaving for Crivitz on November 5, 2005. The only plausible explanation for the missing toothbrush was that law enforcement removed the toothbrush but never logged it into evidence so that it could be rubbed on the sub-key of Ms. Halbach."
Steven shared his home with fiancé Jodi, yet there was only one toothbrush in the holder when photographed by crime scene technicians (since Jodi had been locked up in county jail since August, the framers would know to take the one that was damp)
Allowable claim
Zellner also argues to the court that Avery's previous post-conviction motions do not procedurally bar him from bringing this claim.
In her motion, Zellner tries to pin Halbach's murder on an ex-boyfriend, claiming he had motive and opportunity and that he misled investigators about damage on Halbach's vehicle.
Kratz provided this statement to Action 2 News:
"I need to read the entire filing before I respond to specific allegations. "However, Ms. Zellner must know that Brendan Dassey was convicted by a 12-person jury, based in part on his March 1, 2006 interview with law enforcement. For Ms. Zellner to allege that the prosecutor 'knew the confession was fabricated' is incredibly irresponsible, and frivolous. I understand she has launched 1200 pages of allegations to see if anything sticks--Ms. Zellner, in early 2016, promised test results that would 'prove' her client was wrongfully convicted---I suspect that, with science apparently now confirming Mr. Avery's guilt, she has chosen to make whatever incendiary allegations she can to make headlines, with little regard for the Halbach family or the truth."Strang declined to comment until he's seen the filing and read it over.
We also reached out to Buting and the state attorney general's office, which is representing the state in the appeal. We have not received responses.
Steven Avery's brother Chuck told us, "Justice will be served."
The Bullet Did Not Pass Through Bone and Never Had Blood on It; the Bullet Had Wood Imbedded in It and the Red Paint Deposited on It
Dr. Palenik will testify that "there is no evidence to indicate that the bullet (Item FL) passed through bone. In fact, the particulate evidence that is present strongly suggests an alternate hypothesis, which is that the trajectory of the fired bullet took it into a wooden object, possibly a manufactured wood product. Furthermore, the presence of red droplets deposited on the bullet suggests that the bullet had picked up additional contamination from its environment at some point after coming to rest (i.e., droplets of potential red paint or a red liquid)."
The State's theory that Ms. Halbach's cause of death was the result of being shot twice in the head with .22 caliber long rifle bullets is completely disproven by Dr. Palenik's testing. Because Dr. Palenik has determined that the damaged bullet (Item FL) never passed through bone (i.e., Ms. Halbach's skull), the State's evidence that Ms. Halbach's DNA was found on the damaged bullet (Item FL) is completely discredited.
Dr. Palenik examined the control samples submitted by Mr. Haag and determined that they did have bone particles embedded in them, even after they were washed in a solution in a similar manner to Item FL at the Wisconsin State Crime Lab (" WSCL"). Mr. Haag will offer the opinion that damaged bullet (Item FL) would have had bone particles embedded in it if it had been shot through bone such as a human skull.
Microtrace Examination of Damaged Bullet (Item FL) with 2016 Stereomicroscopy Digital Video Microscropy and Scanning Electron Microscopy and Energy Dispersive X-Ray Spectroscopy (SEMIEDS) Demonstrates that the Damaged Bullet (Item FL) was Never Shot Through Ms. Halbach's Skull
The purpose of Dr. Palenik's trace examination with a 2016 Stereomicroscopy Digital Video Microscropy and Scanning Electron Microscopy and Energy Dispersive X-Ray Spectroscopy (SEM/EDS) was to determine if bone could be detected on the surface of the damaged bullet (Item FL). ...
Dr. Palenik's Examination of the Damaged Bullet (Item FL)
On 23 May 2017, a damaged bullet (Item FL) was hand carried to Microtrace by Special Agent Jeff Wisch ("SA Wisch") of the Wisconsin Department of Justice. The bullet remained in the custody of SA Wisch during the analysis performed at Microtrace.
Dr. Palenik opened, photo-documented, and examined the damaged bullet (Item FL) using a combination of 2016 stereomicroscopy and digital video microscopy.
Dr. Palenik's examination revealed that the bullet surface was covered in debris exhibiting the following characteristics:
a. Wood fragments appear to be directly adhering to or embedded in the lead of the bullet. This later observation suggests that at least some of the wood was deposited when the energized bullet encountered a wooden object. Some of the fragments observed are individual particles of wood. One particle appears to be an agglomeration of woody fragments, possibly originating from a manufactured wood product such as chip or particle board. Isolation and analysis of these 142 particles would be required to identify the species or type of wood product.
b. A rounded red droplet (-. 073 mm 2) adjacent to a smaller red droplet (-0.005 mm 2) is present on one side of the bullet. The identity of this dried liquid is presently unknown. Based upon its color and the fact that the bullet was previously extracted for DNA, it seems unlikely that this is blood. The color, texture, and shape of the deposit suggests that the material may be paint. Regardless of its identity, the texture of the bullet in the area where the droplets are observed strongly suggests that the droplet was deposited after the bullet was fired and came to rest. This material could be identified if subjected to further analysis.
c. No particles consistent with bone were detected by an examination using 2016 stereomicroscopy or digital video microscopy.
d. A waxy substance covers a significant portion (-40%) of the leading surface of the bullet. According to Mr. Haag, this wax is used by firearms analysts to orient and hold bullets during their analysis.
e. Numerous fibers are observed adhering to the waxy substance. Most of these are colorless; however, red and black fiber fragments were also noted. Other white fibers not associated with the waxy surface were observed in association with the bullet. These fibers could be more specifically identified after isolation and further analysis.
Dr. Palenik notes that the criteria for classification of each material described above is based upon in situ observations and are not necessarily inclusive of all particle types that may be present.
The sample was examined without any further preparation in a JEOL 7100FT field emission scanning electron microscope with a 50 mm 2 Oxford SDD EDS detector. The base of the bullet was fixed upon a piece of conductive, double sided, carbon tape. An image of the bullet was obtained at 20 kV. The sample was examined by a combination of backscatter and secondary electron imaging at magnifications ranging from -50x to 2000x. Elemental maps were collected from various areas on the leading surface of the bullet that showed surfaces with exposed lead (i.e., away from the waxy deposit). The elemental maps were examined for areas with elevated levels of calcium and phosphorous. Each area analyzed was rotated toward the EDS detector to increase the number of x-rays detected. No areas with elevated levels of calcium and phosphorous were detected, indicating the absence of detectable bone. A few silicon-rich areas were noted, which may suggest the presence of silicate compounds (e.g., minerals).
Dr. Palenik's Opinions Re: The Damaged Bullet (Item FL)
Dr. Palenik opines that "there is no evidence to indicate that the bullet passed through bone. In fact, the particulate evidence that is present strongly suggests an alternate hypothesis, which is that the trajectory of the fired bullet took it into a wooden object, possibly a manufactured wood product. Furthermore, the presence of red droplets deposited on the bullet suggests that the bullet had picked up additional contamination from its enviro1m1ent at some point after coming to rest (i e., droplets of potential red paint or a red liquid)." (Affidavit of Dr. Palenik, P-C Group Exhibit 48,, 19).
Based upon these findings, it is Dr. Palenik's understanding that an investigator was sent by Kathleen Zellner & Associates, P. C., to the Avery garage to review the area for possible sources of the particulate types described above. It is Dr. Palenik's understanding that the following possible sources were identified:
a. Particle board in the garage with apparent bullet holes.
b. Red painted surfaces including a ladder in the garage and a red painted ceiling.
Each of the above listed materials observed on the bullet could be identified specifically. The potential sources for the particulate matter that were recently collected from the Avery garage could be directly compared to materials on the bullet. (Affidavit of Dr. Palenik, P-C Group Exhibit 48, ~ 20).
On June 2, 2017, Mr. James Kirby and Kurt Kingler, current post-conviction counsel's investigator and law clerk, collected wood and paint samples from the Avery garage. Mr. Kingler test fired .22 long rifles through the exterior garage wall and wood samples into the interior of the garage. Those samples have been submitted to Dr. Palenik for further tes ting to determine if the samples obtained on June 2, 2017, are, in fact, the source of the red particles and wood product observed by Dr. Palenik on the damaged bullet (Item FL). Dr. Palenik will supplement his affidavit after he completes testing of these items.
Mr. Johnson, the owner and previous resident of Mr. Avery's trailer, often fired his .22 caliber rifle into gopher holes near the doors of Mr. Avery's garage. Mr. Johnson would expect spent casings to be ejected into the garage and not picked up. Further, Mr. Johnson would expect damaged bullets or bullet fragments to end up in the garage. (Affidavit of Rollie Johnson, P-C Exhibit 7; Affidavit of Steven Avery, P-C Exhibit 4)
The Hood Latch Swab Was Never Used to Swab the Hood Latch: It Probably Came from a Relabeled Groin Swab Taken from Avery
Dr. Palenik examined the hood latch swab (Item ID) that allegedly was used to swab the hood latch of Ms. Halbach's vehicle and allegedly contained Mr. Avery's DNA. Dr. Palenik has concluded, by a series of experiments of the trace materials on the hood latch swab (Item ID), that it was never used to swab a hood latch.
Dr. Reich will testify that the DNA on the hood latch did not come from Mr. Avery touching the hood latch, and most probably came from a relabeled groin swab.
Two groin swabs were taken from Mr. Avery at Aurora Medical Center by a nurse on November 9, 2005. Mr. Avery was escorted by Inv. Wiegert to Aurora Medical Center at approximately 1:20 p.m. Agent Fassbender met Inv. Wiegert, who was escorting Mr. Avery for the examination. Mr. Avery was taken into an examination room. Present in the examination room were Faye Fritsch, RN and SANE Medical Director Laura Vogel-Schwartz, MD. (11/9/05 Execution of Search Warrant, P-C Exhibit 9, STATE 1635). Towards the end of the examination, Nurse Fritsch took two swabs of Mr. Avery's groin area in direct contravention of the search warrant, which specifically restricted that DNA samples were to be taken from Mr. Avery's saliva and blood. There was no reference to groin swabs in the search warrant. (11/9/05 Execution of Search Warrant, P-C Exhibit 9, STATE 1643).
Significantly, Nurse Fritsch's documentation of taking swabs from Mr. Avery excludes any mention of taking groin swabs. A well-qualified nurse following acceptable standards of charting would never fail to document taking the groin swabs unless she were instructed not to document taking the groin swabs by Agent Fassbender or Inv. Wiegert. (Forensic Evidence Checklist, attached and incorporated herein as P-C Exhibit 26, STATE 2875, 2877). Agent Fassbender and Inv. Wiegert "conferred and determined that the search warrant did not call for that type of exam. Inv. Wiegert immediately stopped Fritsch and the exam was concluded." Again, Nurse Fritsch would never have taken the groin swabs without being specifically instructed to do so by Agent Fassbender and Inv. Wiegert. Agent Fassbender and Inv. Wiegert's explanation that they did not realize that the search warrant did not call for taking groin swabs is not credible.
Furthermore, according to Agent Fassbender's report, Nurse Fritsch disposed of the groin swabs. (11/9/05 Execution of Search Warrant, P-C Exhibit 9, ST A TE 1635). Agent Fassbender's report is not credible because Nurse Fritsch never mentions, in her charting, disposing of the groin swabs. Agent Fassbender's report directly contradicts Mr. Avery's account of this examination as described in his affidavit. Contrary to Agent Fassbender's report, Inv. Wiegert told Nurse Fritsch that he would discard the swabs while Agent Fassbender escorted Mr. Avery into a separate room to get his fingerprints. As Mr. Avery followed Agent Fassbender and Nurse Fritsch out of the examination room, Mr. Avery heard Inv. Wiegert tell Nurse Fritsch to give him the groin swabs, and Mr. Avery observed Inv. Wiegert walk to the examination room receptacle as if to discard the groin swabs. Mr. Avery observed that Inv. Wiegert's did not drop the groin swabs into the receptacle. (11/9/05 Execution of Search Warrant, P-C Exhibit 9, STATE 1635; Affidavit of Steven Avery, P-C Exhibit 4).
Inv. Weigert, as an experienced investigator, would have known that taking groin swabs was not authorized by the search warrant, which permitted only the collection of saliva and blood samples. (11/9/05 Execution of Search Warrant, P-C Exhibit 9, STATE 1643). It is therefore reasonable to conclude, from this clear violation of Mr. Avery's Fourth Amendment rights, that Inv. Wiegert planned to use the illegally seized groin swabs from Mr. Avery to plant M r. Avery's DNA on other crime scene evidence.
Hood Latch Story Fabricated by Inv. Wiegert and Agent Fassbender in Brendan's Confession
It was not until four months after Ms. Halbach's RAV-4 was analyzed by the WSCL in Madison that investigators became interested in the hood latch. The hood latch was first introduced by Agent Fassbender and Inv. Wiegert in their March 1, 2006, interrogation of Brendan. Agent Fassbender asked Brendan, "Did he, did he, did he go and look at the engine, did he raise the hood at all or anything like that? To do something to that car?" (Pages from March 1, 2006, interrogation of Brendan Dassey ("3/1/06 Interrogation"), attached and incorporated herein as P-C Exhibit 27, STATE 4674). In a subsequent interview, Brendan denied seeing Mr. Avery open the hood. (Pages from May 13, 2006, interrogation of Brendan Dassey ("5/13/06 Interrogation"), attached and incorporated herein as P-C Exhibit 28, STATE 7300). In the May 13 interview, under pressure by Agent Fassbender and Inv. Wiegert, Brendan capitulated and changed his story to fit their narrative - that Mr. Avery opened the hood of Ms. Halbach's RAV-4 .
Reconstructed Correct Timeline (Pages 122-123)
Current post-conviction counsel, using new telephone records of Ms. Halbach, has reconstructed the correct timeline and route that Ms. Halbach took on October 31 , 2005. (Ms. Halbach 's New Cell Records, P-C Exhibit 72 11 ):
a. 8:17 a.m. AutoTrader calls Ms. Halbach. The duration of this call is one minute and seven seconds. (New Cell Records, P-C Exhibit 72). The State omitted this call from its timeline of Ms. Halbach's phone activity. (Trial Exhibit 362).
b. 9:46 a.m. AutoTrader called Ms. Halbach. The duration of this call was thirty three seconds.
c. 11 :10 p.m. AutoTrader called Ms. Halbach again at 11:10 a.m. for a duration of five seconds, (New Cell Records, P-C Exhibit 72, line 1342). The State omitted this call from its timeline of Ms. Halbach 's phone activity. (Trial Exhibit 362).
d. 11:44 a.m. Ms. Halbach placed a call to Barb Janda's landline. (New Cell Records, P-C Exhibit 72, line 1345).
e. 1:10 p.m. Ms. Halbach arrived at Mr. Schmitz's residence. The State incorrectly presented a false time line to the jury based upon the erroneous recollection of Mr. Schmitz that he received a call from Ms. Halbach at 1:10 p.m. (11/3/05 CCSD Interview of Steven Schmitz, P-C Exhibit 50, STATE 1210; TT:3/14:88). Ms. Halbach's phone records show that she called Mr. Schmitz at 12:51 p.m. (New Cell Records, P-C Exhibit 72, line 1348). Therefore, contrary to the State's timeline, Ms. Halbach arrived twenty minutes earlier at the Schmitz residence than the State represented to the jury. (TT:3/1 4:88).
f. 1:15 p.m. Ms. Halbach departed Mr. Schmitz's residence after completing his photographs. Mr. Schmitz testified that Ms. Halbach completed his appointment. For the convenience of the Court, current counsel has converted the times listed in Ms. Halbach's phone records. AT&T maintains its phone records using a 24-hour clock with Coordinated Universal Time ("UTC"), which, on October 31, 2005, was six hours ahead of Central Daylight Time, the local timezone for the State of Wisconsin. So, e.g., the 8:17 a.m CDT call is listed as 14:17:12 on Line 30 of this exhibit. 122 "around 1:30 [p.m.]" (TT:2/13:123). In light of Mr. Schmitz's mistaken timeline, it is reasonable to conclude that Ms. Halbach departed Mr. Schmitz's property approximately twenty minutes earlier than what Mr. Schmitz testified at trial.
g. Shortly after 2:00 p.m., Ms. Halbach arrived in the vicinity of the Zipperer residence. Despite searching for approximately ten minutes, Ms. Halbach was unable to locate their house and decided to proceed to her appointment at the Avery property. (Trial Exhibit 218). Ms. Halbach called the Zipperers' landline at 2: 12 p.m. (Trial Exhibits 361 and 362) to tell them that she was having difficulty finding their house, so she was proceeding to her next appointment but would return.
h. 2:24 p.m. Ms. Halbach received a call from Mr. Avery who was wondering when she would arrive. Ms. Halbach did not answer the call. (Affidavit of Steven Avery, P-C Exhibit 4. Mr. Avery used the *67 feature on his cell phone so that Ms. Halbach would not feel that she needed to return his call if she did not answer because the *67 feature would not register Mr. Avery's cell phone number on Ms. Halbach,s cellphone.
i. 2:27 p.m. Ms. Pliszka called Ms. Halbach. Ms. Pliszka's account of her conversation with Ms. Halbach is not credible. At trial, Ms. Pliszka testified that it was Ms. Halbach who called her at 2:27 p.m. on October 31, 2005. (TT:2/13:80). Ms. Halbach's phone records, as reflected in Mr. Kratz's summary exhibit, show that it was AutoTrader who called Ms. Halbach, not vice versa. (Trial Exhibits 361 and 362; TT:2/27:186-87).
Trial defense counsel failed to impeach Ms. Pliszka's testimony effectively that Ms. Halbach initiated the 2:27 p.m. call on October 31, 2005. Had trial defense counsel impeached Ms. Pliszka, they could have shown that her testimony was not credible about her alleged contact with Ms. Halbach, effectively undermining Ms. Pliszka's testimony that Ms. Halbach told her that she was on her way to the Avery property at the time of the call. (TT:2/13:80) (Interviews of Dawn Pliszka, attached and incorporated herein as PC Group Exhibit 102, STATE 5572).
j. Between 2:31 and 2:35 p.m. Ms. Halbach arrived at the Avery property. Ms. Halbach snapped one photograph of Barb,s van. Ms. Halbach began walking towards Mr. Avery' s trailer, but when she saw Mr. Avery come out of his trailer, she waved and turned around to go to her car to get his magazine. When Mr. Avery approached the car, Ms. Halbach was in the driver's seat with the door open and the engine running. Ms. Halbach handed an AutoTrader magazine to Mr. Avery and he paid her. Ms. Halbach turned left on Hwy. 147 as she exited the Avery property. (Affidavit of Steven Avery, P-C Exhibit 4).
k. 2:35 p.m. Mr. Avery called Ms. Halbach (Trial Exhibit 360) because he realized, after quickly flipping through the AutoTrader magazine, that AutoTrader also advertised front-loaders and Mr. Avery wanted to sell one of his front-loaders. Mr. Avery called Ms. Halbach at 2:35 p.m. to request that she return to the Avery property to photograph his front-loader. He terminated the call before it connected because he wanted to go and see Bobby but discovered that Bobby was not home. (Affidavit of Steven Avery, P-C Exhibit 4).
l. 2:41 p.m. The last voicemail received by Ms. Halbach registered to her phone. Ms. Halbach was on her way back to the Zipperer residence. (Trial Exhibit 361). Based on the fact that the Zipperers had the AutoTrader magazine and receipt (11/3/05 CCSD Report, attached and incorporated as P-C Exhibit 73, STATE 2497-98; TT:2/13:132; TriaJ Exhibit 26), it is clear that Ms. Halbach located the Zipperer residence, photographed their vehicle and departed from the Zipperer residence. On November 5, 2005, Inv. Wiegert and Det. Remiker had a conversation about Ms. Halbach's appointment schedule on October 31, 2005. In that conversation, they discussed their understanding that the Zipperer residence was Ms. Halbach's final stop on October 31. (11/5/05 Wiegert/Remiker recording, attached and incorporated herein as P-C Exhibit 71)
The following is a summary of what is in pages 50-60 of the motion regarding the blood, as posted by thebeacon32 at TickTockManitowoc.
Zellner initially wanted to do radiocarbon and DNA methylation testing to see if the blood came from the 1996 vial but her experts determined that there wasn't enough blood to do the tests. Also abandoned that line of testing after determining that the blood was planted using blood from the sink in 2005. (p50)
Side Notes:
- The cut was seen at least a week earlier by Roland Johnson (p52)
- Steven Avery told Andy Colborn that Teresa Halbach had come by around 2-2:30 but months later when Andy Colborn writes his report he pushes it to 3pm.
- Steven Avery breaks open the cut trying to unload a hitch and is dripping blood as he's walking, driving the Grand Am and walking into his trailer through the south door.
- He drips it in the sink and on floor and wraps it up in masking tape.
- He doesn't clean it up because Chuck Avery is waiting for him to go to Menards.
- He leaves the door to the trailer and the Grand Am unlocked.
- As they're leaving the property, he notices taillights close to his trailer and the orientation of the vehicle is such that it could only have come through the the field from Kuss Rd. Also says that the taillights are similar to Rav-4 and not a squad car. They drive back to check it out but the car is gone.
- They go to Menards and to the jail to drop money for Jodi. He gets home at 10/10:30 and goes straight to bed without going into the bathroom.
- Steven Avery gets up at 6am and goes to the bathroom and notices that most of the blood in and around the sink has been removed. (this is new to me!)
- Later that morning James Lenk and Dave Remiker interview him.
- That evening he smells cigarette smoke in his bedroom but he doesn't smoke. He believes this is the second time the trailer is unlawfully entered (do we know who smokes?).
- As he's getting ready to leave for Crivitz, he notices the front door of this trailer has been pried open. He had remembered locking the door after James Lenk and Dave Remiker left on Nov 4th.
- As his brother Chuck Avery leaves for Crivitz, he sees tail lights in the area where the RAV is eventually found. He tells Steven to go check on it but they're gone by the time he gets there.
Zellner's expert does several experiments and contends the following:
- the blood spatter found in the RAV was selectively planted and that there would have been blood in many more places if he was actively bleeding
- they did experiments with Steven with blood on his finger to show that it would have also been deposited on the outside door handle, key, key ring, steering wheel, gear shift lever, brake lever, battery cables, and hood prop instead of just the six places it was found.
- his experiments showed that it was actually just a small amount of blood and that one stain was most probably applied with an applicator (uh, let me guess which one that was)
- he contends that blood flakes on the carpet of the RAV were planted because experiments demonstrated that blood dripped on the carpeting would be absorbed in the carpet and would not form flakes on top of the carpet
- he contends that there is nothing unusual about the hole in the 1996 vial or the blood around the stopper
- he does experiments that show that the State's expert witness that the spatter was from Teresa being thrown into the car is 'demonstrably false' and was therefore a false narrative presented to the jury
- he contends she was struck on the head after she opened the rear cargo door, fell to the ground next to the rear bumper on the driver's side and was repeatedly struck with something like a mallet or hammer
Zellner criticizes defense counsel for not hiring a competent blood spatter expert and for going with the planting theory of Lenk getting blood from the vial even though there wasn't really solid proof connecting him to it. And that they knew the hole was normal and that the improper seal was from when the file was accessed by the Innocence Project. They lost credibility and guaranteed his conviction.
The "NEW EVIDENCE" section focuses on the bullet, hood latch and RAV4 key, as well as "Brain Fingerprinting" of Avery.
Here are the contents of that section:
- New Scientific Evidence Demonstrates that the Damaged Bullet (FL) in Mr. Avery's Garage was Not Shot Through Ms. Halbach 's Head Causing Her Death as the State Contended
- Microtrace Examination of Damaged Bullet Fragment (Item FL) with 2016 Stereo microscopy Digital Video
- Microscopy and Scanning Electron Microscope and Energy Dispersive X-Ray Spectroscopy (SEM/EDS)
- Demonstrates that the Damaged Bullet (Item FL) was Never Shot Through Ms. Halbach 's Skull
- Dr. Palenik's Examination of the Damaged Bullet (Item FL)
- Dr. Palenik's Opinions Re: The Damaged Bullet (Item FL)
- Brain Fingerprinting Demonstrates Mr. Avery's Actual Innocence
- How Brain Fingerprinting Works
- Probes Used By Dr. Farwell In Brain Fingerprint Test on Mr. Avery
- Dr. Farwell 's Brain Fingerprinting Test Results for Mr. Avery
- Results of Dr. Farwell 's Brain Fingerprinting Test On Mr. Avery
- 2016 Microscope Examination of Hood Latch Swab
- Source Testing of the Hood Latch Swab
- Source Testing of sub-key Demonstrated that the DNA of Mr. Avery on the sub-key was Planted
- Applicable Case Law Re: Planting and Fabrication of Evidence Violated Mr. Avery's Due Process Rights
- Applicable Case Law Re: New Evidence
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/55203379e4b08b1328203a7d/t/593879d729687f407255fdce/1496873472937/2017.06.07+-+Motion+for+Post-Conviction+Relief.pdf
Other Comments About the Motion at Reddit:
Zellner has emails. P106, Ryan Hillegas' jealousy was the motive.
Tidbit from the available 15pgs - discussing Ryan Hillegas as a suspect - she says that Scott Bloedorn didn't want to talk with her investigator but then when they said something about the real killer SB blurted out "you mean Ryan Hillegas."
Her motion states Hillegas wanted to conceal and stir away attention from him by planting the evidence undetected. But he shows Colburn the car on the 3rd and then Hillegas plants it on the 4th?
This map from Zellner's office floor as pictured in Newsweek seems to line up exactly with Google Earth's route from TH's home to RH's address that he gave to LE - follow the blue line on the Newsweek map compared to the purple line on the Google Earth map. This is RH's family home in Hilbert. It's 5.3 miles and 8 minutes from TH's house. That's what the map is showing, the route between TH's and RH's homes. It's RH's family's home. Check CASO pg. 31. [magilla39]
http://imgur.com/yAXAKDR
http://imgur.com/hT9B7a7
http://imgur.com/rrDmcm1
From the post-conviction petition:
While Mr. Hillegas maintained an interest in Ms. Halbach, she was no longer romantically interested in him. (Email from Ms. Halbach, P-C Exhibit 53). Ms. Halbach became sexually involved with her housemate, Mr. Bloedorn, in the months preceding her disappearance. Reportedly, Mr. Bloedorn was also Mr. Hillegas' best friend. Mr. Hillegas committed perjury at trial when he described Ms. Halbach's relationship with Mr. Bloedorn as platonic and never romantic or sexual in nature. Current post-conviction counsel's investigator Mr. Steven Kirby attempted to interview Mr. Bloedorn about false statements he had made to the police in 2005. Mr. Bloedorn refused to sit for an interview with Mr. Steven Kirby, but when he was told that current post-conviction counsel planned to name a suspect in Ms. Halbach's murder, Mr. Bloedorn immediately blurted out, "You mean Ryan Hillegas." Another point of jealousy for Mr. Hillegas might have been the fact that Ms. Halbach, as part of her business, took nude photographs of men and women and this activity led her to become sexually involved with one of her clients, Mr. Czech. Mr. Czech was married to someone else at the time. Ms. Halbach kept the nude photographs that she had taken of Mr. Czech and his then-wife in the bedroom of her residence, a home that Mr. Hillegas frequented and moved into after Ms. Halbach's death.
Evidence shows Avery did not deposit his DNA on the victim's key by holding it in his hand rather it was deposited by applying DNA to the key ...such as a toothbrush
Groin swab used on the hood latch. That's pretty significant. Paragraph 170: 2016 Microscope Examination of Hood Latch Swab 359. Dr. Palenik has used a microscope developed in 2016 to analyze the hood latch swab. Dr. Palenik has offered the opinion that the swab was not used to swab the hood latch.
The motion alleges that the groin swab was switched out with the hood latch swab.
Page 73ish, KZ explains several breakdowns in protocol that explain how the groin swabs were even taken to begin with, were hidden, were then discarded but not recorded by the nurse. Then she shows how Wiegert and Fassbender's accounts don't match, then tops it off by showing where Weigert hid the fact that he was the one who submitted swabs into custody and put someone else's name in place of his own to hide the fact that he was in possession of hood latch swabs. She says he switched the swabs is what I'm sayin'. And shows how.
'According to current post-conviction counsel's expert, Dr. Reich, the most common way for forensic evidence to be planted is by re-labeling the forensic swabs'
Claims that the groin swab was was switched out with the hood latch swab. That the key was planted by Lenk and Colborn. And that the killer erased VM messages to delay the time that people realized she was missing. Also that the Zipperer's was her last appointment.
Rav-4 was not present at time of November 4 flyover. Investigators concealed knowledge that Rav-4 was driven on Mr. R's property. DOJ never authored interview with Joshua Radandt.
Joshua Radandt actually confirms the RAV4 was planted on the Avery lot, that the Wisconsin Dept of Justice investigators knew this [or at least they believed it at that time based on the dogs]? The police told him they knew how the car got into the spot it was found but they never told the defence. From affidavit of Radandt:
"At the time I was told by the Dept of Justice agents that they believed TH's vehicle was driven to the Kuss Road cul-de-sac by driving west through an empty field, then south down the gravel road past my hunting camp until reaching an intersection with a gravel road that ran northeast into the Avery property. They told me that they believed TH's vehicle turned northeast onto that gravel road and entered the Avery Property at its southwest corner. It is my understanding that this theory was based on the work of scent tracking dogs" (Affidavit of Joshua Radandt)
Joshua Radandt pressured to lie about the fire he saw. From the motion: "When investigators re-interviewed Mr. Radandt on November 10, 2005, they pressured him to describe the fire as large, behind Mr. Avery' s garage, and in an open burn pit. Mr. Radandt never told investigators that the fire was behind Mr. Avery's garage. Mr. Radandt sets forth in his affidavit that he remembers seeing the fire, contained to a burn barrel, and between several trailers on the Avery property. "Paul Metz, the man who heard a 'whoosh' and smelled something vile, also recants a lot of what we thought he said. He claims he heard no 'whoosh', and would have recognized the smell of a body burning because he was an ex-firefighter. He actually reported that he heard a 'buzz', like "electrical wires surging". In other words... it's very clear a lot of 'facts' we've heard through police reports are fabricated.
Did you see the footnote at the bottom of the page saying he, Joshua Radandt, had been unfairly called out as a suspect? Looks like he came forward.
"Mr. Radandt has been unfairly targeted as a possible suspect, because he owned land adjacent to the Avery property. Current post-conviction counsel has interviewed Mr. Radandt on two occasions and has been accompanied by him twice to view all of his property. No evidence exists that implicates Mr. Radandt in the murder of Ms. Halbach, and he has a solid alibi for the afternoon of October 31st, 2005."
"Investigators concealed their knowledge that Ms. Halbach's RAV-4 was driven onto Mr. R's property. (confirmed by scent dogs) (Brady violation).
Radandt gives his account of what DOJ agents told him. Footnote makes it clear that Radandt had an alibi for Oct 31 and is not considered a suspect.
LE knew from where the RAV4 was driven onto the property. Since that route pointed finger towards someone else driving it on there and not SA driving it there from his garage that information was kept quiet.
KZ claiming she was killed back at her apartment around 4:30 by Ryan. #strangerbesideme living in her house 14 days after her murder, hid things #checkaduhid, and used the false name to sign in.
Pg. 72-73: "Mr. James opines that the blood spatter on the inside of the rear cargo door was the result of Ms. Halbach being struck an object consistent with a hammer or a mallet while she was lying on her back on the ground behind the vehicle after the rear cargo door was opened."
TH was struck on the head after she opened the rear cargo door. She fell to the ground/floor and was repeatedly struck with a hammer or mallet. The blood spatter went up as she was struck and landed on the inside of the rear cargo door as a result since it was open and she was on the ground.
Just after MAM came out (Jan 2016)there was a person claiming to be involved in forensics and that was exactly his theory.
So those scratches on RH's hands tell a horrible story of how TH died. Such a sad day.
Seven very valid reasons to name Ryan Hillegas"
- no alibi for time of murder
- spearheaded searches
- lied to law enforcement
- used fake name to sign in
- accessed Teresa's phone records after she disappeared
- involved in abusive relationship
- injuries on his hands
My prediction is they don't know who the killer is, but they know who knows. You know why? Because Sandy Greenman said something like that in a tweet!
All evidence points to planting. Killer not named.
Her motion implies that Andy Colborn knows who it was and that he accompanied the murderer to ASY on the 3rd. She also strongly suggests Ryan Hillegas's involvement.
She states in the motion that RH was with AC when they found the Rav. She says that it was RH in the background of the infamous phone call saying its here. In Summary: So, RH offered to look for the car with AC. They "found it" (RH knew where it was going to be but AC didnt) and then after that AC organised to have it moved to SA's ( Without complaint from RH). The rest is history.
AC was sure RH could be relied on to not say anything about moving the car? How do you develop that sort of intimate/dangerous relationship, unless you know one another already or there's a mutual benefit to ensure silence & compliance?
On 11/3, calls LE says he thinks he found the car. he and AC are on the lot at night, find the car. AC calls in the plates. He can't admit to this because he's on the property illegally w/o warrant. On 11/5, staged search party legally "finds" the car.
When you want to get rid a car, ASY is the place to take it....?
The short excerpt of the motion we saw possibly (at least that's my interpretation) indicates that the RAV4 was already driven to the property on the 3rd. So he found out via her appointment sheet he had access to. Or via his access to her phone records and/or apartment as a whole.
I don't know the answer, but SA's interview with the news was on Nov 4th. It's very possible that a lot of information was known by RH about TH's jobs earlier in the day, and maybe the fact that SA could be a suspect, and maybe the fact that LE wanted SA to be a suspect. It's possible that RH knew all of this before the car was planted.
My thoughts are that even thought she is implicating RH, we don't know yet that she is able to prove it. What she has accomplished in the little we know(15 pages, ugh) is that there was overwhelming evidence to overcome the Denny ruling when it came to him. At post-conviction, she just has to prove it is more likely someone else and that it definitely wasn't SA. It's the states job to file the charges or investigate. I don't think RH will talk....he is hoping his back is covered if he covers theirs. I sure wish he would roll over on them for one of their coveted plea deals!
"Ryan Kilgus." That's the name Ryan Hillegas used when signing in. 'Kil' gus. It takes a special sort of crazy [or subconscious admission of guilt] to replace 'hill' with 'kil' during a murder investigation. From the motion: Mr. Hillegas misrepresented his identity when he became the leader of the search. (Ryan "Kilgus")...
Why would Ryan take her RAV4 to ASY? If he is the killer, he probably would have known her AT appointments. Plus Avery was in the news alot around that time.
Ryan Hillegas still connected with 5 Halbachs on social media, including Mike Halbach. It's either getting real awkward or this is an extended family secret, sworn to the grave.
Also that the state destroyed voicemail messages left by TH which would have shown that ASY wasn't her last stop.
Brain fingerprinting, ineffectiveness of counsel, kratz impaired, prosecution withheld evidence.
Also that the state destroyed voicemail messages left by TH which would have shown that ASY wasn't her last stop.
Brain fingerprinting, ineffectiveness of counsel, kratz impaired, prosecution withheld evidence.
Also in her motion, page 175:
"Mr. Kratz' s inconsistent contentions at the trials of Mr. Avery and Brendan violate due process as well as a prosecutor's duty to promote the truth and serve justice. See Stumpf v. Houk, 653 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2011); Smith v. Groose, 205 F.3d 1045 (8th Cir. 000); State v. Gates, 826 So.d 1064 (Fla. App. 2002). A prosecutor may not advance at separate trials theories of guilt which cannot be reconciled factually. Mr. Kratz could not in good faith argue at Mr. Avery's trial that Mr. Avery was the only killer, and then argue at Brendan's trial that Mr. Avery along with Brendan killed Ms. Halbach. Mr. Kratz could not in good faith argue at Mr. Avery's trial that Ms. Halbach's death was caused by gunshot wounds and then argue at Brendan's trial that her death was caused by stab wounds to her stomach and throat and manual strangulation as well as gunshots. Mr. Kratz could not in good faith argue in Mr. Avery's trial that Ms. Halbach was killed in the garage and then argue in Brendan's trial that she was killed in Mr. Avery's trailer."
Moreover, there is an uncanny parallel between Mr. Kratz' solicitation of Mr. Avery as a private lawyer and Mr. Kratz' solicitation of vulnerable women when he was prosecutor. - pg 183
Bennett Gershman, J.D. ("Mr. Gershman"). Mr. Gershman is one of the nation's leading experts in prosecutorial misconduct. He has authored numerous articles and a book on prosecutorial misconduct. He is a former Manhattan prosecutor and current professor of law at Pace University. He has identified the ongoing ethical and Constitutional violations committed by prosecutor Kenneth Kratz before, during, and after Mr. Avery' s trial.
"Mr. Kratz' s inconsistent contentions at the trials of Mr. Avery and Brendan violate due process as well as a prosecutor's duty to promote the truth and serve justice. See Stumpf v. Houk, 653 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2011); Smith v. Groose, 205 F.3d 1045 (8th Cir. 000); State v. Gates, 826 So.d 1064 (Fla. App. 2002). A prosecutor may not advance at separate trials theories of guilt which cannot be reconciled factually. Mr. Kratz could not in good faith argue at Mr. Avery's trial that Mr. Avery was the only killer, and then argue at Brendan's trial that Mr. Avery along with Brendan killed Ms. Halbach. Mr. Kratz could not in good faith argue at Mr. Avery's trial that Ms. Halbach's death was caused by gunshot wounds and then argue at Brendan's trial that her death was caused by stab wounds to her stomach and throat and manual strangulation as well as gunshots. Mr. Kratz could not in good faith argue in Mr. Avery's trial that Ms. Halbach was killed in the garage and then argue in Brendan's trial that she was killed in Mr. Avery's trailer."
Moreover, there is an uncanny parallel between Mr. Kratz' solicitation of Mr. Avery as a private lawyer and Mr. Kratz' solicitation of vulnerable women when he was prosecutor. - pg 183
Bennett Gershman, J.D. ("Mr. Gershman"). Mr. Gershman is one of the nation's leading experts in prosecutorial misconduct. He has authored numerous articles and a book on prosecutorial misconduct. He is a former Manhattan prosecutor and current professor of law at Pace University. He has identified the ongoing ethical and Constitutional violations committed by prosecutor Kenneth Kratz before, during, and after Mr. Avery' s trial.
Bottom of page 155... "Current post-conviction council offers a free Brain Fingerprinting test, administered by Dr. Farwell, to the following individuals: Mr. Hillegas, Inv. Wiegert, Agent Fassbender, Sgt Colborn, and Lt. Lenk, on the issues raised in this petition."
From what I read the tests can tell through EEG and a bunch of technical science stuff whether a person knows key facts about a crime. SA's testing showed he did not have knowledge that TH was killed behind the Rav4 with the cargo door open, which we now know from the blood spatter expert. That is what I took away from it but if anyone can explain it better please do! My thoughts are all over the place tonight! :)
From page 196, bizarrely this seems to have been suggested by a prison inmate in 2008: Current post-conviction counsel found a letter dated May 4, 2008 and received by the State Public Defender Madison Office on June 20, 2008 from an inmate Bobby Don Salas ("Mr. Salas"), immate number 420573. Remarkably, Mr. Salas suggested that Mr. Avery get a blood spatter expert, DNA expert on the key to determine the source of the DNA, and "brain fingerprint" testing. This letter was forwarded to Ms. Hagopian and was ignored by her. (Letter from Mr. Salas, attached and incorporated herein as P-C Exhibit 105).
Having skim read it, it appears the suggestion is that the killer took her body in a car to Kuss Road cul-de-sac, where it was buried for some time between death and being burnt. It was burnt in a burn barrel on quarry property before being dumped in SA burn pit. My reading is that it is unknown where she was killed, but evidence (jeans and lube) found at Maribel Caves should have been properly tested.
So the blood was from SA's bathroom? Paragraphs 225 suggests that the killer entered SA trailer and collected the blood from his sink, planted it in the RAV-4 and then hid the RAV-4 in the Kuss Rd cul-de-sac!!!! Paragraphs 231-232 suggest that the killer planted the car on 4 November but not before accidentally damaging the front parking light on a metal post between Kuss Road cul-de-sac and the Avery property and collecting the broken light and placing it in the trunk. Paragraph 288 suggests that it is probable that TH remains were buried at Kuss Road excavation site for a period of time after her death and before her body was burned.
Looks like they might be claiming Steven bled in his bathroom sink on the night of 11/3 and the blood had been collected (by someone?).
Killer broke into SA property minutes after SA left. How far would a killer go to protect themselves. KZ doesn't believe LE collected the blood due to timings.
Strang and Buting knew the hole was normal and that the improper seal was from when the file was accessed by the Innocence Project. They lost credibility and guaranteed his conviction.
Page 8 doesn't straight up say it but seriously alludes to the fact that Ryan Hillegas was the one responsible. He was verbally and physically abusive during their relationship. It seems Ryan looks was still interested in her and she didnt want anything to do with him.
KZ alleges TH made it home and RH killed her there.
"The killer was familiar with the Radandt and Manitowoc County pits. He devised a plan to bring the RAV-4 from the murder scene to the Avery property."
Pg 103: On November 4, the killer decided to make another attempt to plant the vehicle on the opposite side of the Avery property, that is, in the southeast corner, close to the crusher. The killer, who drove the RAV-4 into the Radandt Pit in the late afternoon of November 4, was aided by an accomplice who drove another vehicle into the Radandt Pit to give the killer a ride out after the killer planted Ms. Halbach' s vehicle on the Avery property. The killer led law enforcement to Ms. Halbach's vehicle later in the evening on November 4. The killer represented to law enforcement that he would be willing to search the Avery property, something that the police could only do with a warrant based on probable cause which they did not have on November 4.
Brutus @cadaverdogbrutu Jun 12
Bloedorn lawyers up, Hillegas caught lying. They both attended the ASY together. Bloedorn knows more. Actions are loud.. #makingamurderer
Page 130 of the motion. It starts there about the white jeep.
I am all over the place with possibilities....This is certainly one of them. It could even be that her death was an accident and LE threatened family and RH to cooperate to set up SA....The most obvious suspect would be the ex so KZ is using his inconsistencies to draw him out to start pointing....
Brady violations and prosecution withheld evidence, Ken Kratz impaired, ineffectiveness of defense counsel.
Pieces of tail-light found on Randant property, 15 pages, https://www.scribd.com/document/350662763/Avery-1000-Page-Petition-2017
Andy Colborn's call to dispatch about Teresa's plates. Ryan Hillegas heard in background, saying "it's hers." You have to really listen in, but it's there. So crazy how we would speculate this and people would shake their heads and here we are. Whoa! I'm not this far yet, but I remember a lot of us analyzing this call. We thought it was PoG saying, "the car's here." It was RH saying "it's hers"?!?!
The key parts here:
- Evidence that the key was planted
- Evidence that the bullet didn't penetrate a human
- Evidence that the investigation altered a witness statement about what he heard and smelled regarding the fire
- New (or new to me) eyewitness testimony of seeing the Rav4 followed by a white jeep (who has a white jeep in all this)
That scene in the documentary where RH and MH were talking to reporters and acting really suspicious.. now I need to go watch it again!
You throw out the key and the bullet and have legit reasons about the car not being where it is said to be, then you don't even need all the interpretation favorable to SA. Now, add in just a percentage of the favorable interpretation, a portion of the prosecutorial charges, and a portion of the nonsensical prosecution theory and it all adds up to an overwhelming refutation of the state's original case.
Mr. Kratz's theory of Ms. Halbach's murder is one of the most preposterous tales ever spun in an American courtroom. If Mr. Kratz's theory were true, Mr. Avery is a true "idiot savant." Mr. Kratz's tale was as follows: Mr. Avery, the idiot, selects, as his victim, the only female with whom he had an appointment on the day of her murder. Mr. Avery, the idiot, selects his own bedroom for the commission of an incredibly bloody crime. Mr Avery, the idiot, handcuffs Ms. Halbach to his bed, sexually assaults her, slashes her throat, and stabs her stomach. He carries her lifeless bloody body to the garage, placing her in and taking her out of the back of her RAV4, puts her on a creeper, and rolls her to his burn pit where he tosses her body into a bonfire. However, despite leaving a mountain of incriminating evidence, Mr. Avery the savant, takes over and is able to level the mountain and remove all forensic traces of Ms. Halbach in his trailer and garage in a feat that is comparable to defying the laws of gravity and forensic science.
On November 4, 2005, news media crews filmed the interior of the house Ms. Halbach shared with Mr. Bloedorn. While interviewing Mr. Bloedorn in the kitchen, news media filmed what appeared to be the RAV-4 sub-key and blue lanyard, which was next to the kitchen sink. (November 4, 2005, WFRV Interview of Scott Bloedorn, stills attached and incorporated herein as P-C Group Exhibit 23). It is indisputable the key that was found in Mr. Avery's bedroom on November 8, 2005 was Ms. Halbach's sub-key with a blue lanyard attached. Trial defense counsel failed to demonstrate this simple undisputed fact to the jury by using Trial Exhibit 5 and the RAV-4 manual, which was critical to the success of proving the sub-key and blue lanyard were planted. (RAV-4 Manual, P-C Exhibit 1).
SOURCE (Page 80): http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Motion-for-Post-Conviction-Relief.pdf
Linda September 28, 2016 7:38 am
ReplyDeleteI would like to point out that Teresa would be going to this Halloween party with a new guy friend Bradley and MH is the one who made a point to tell this to RH and believe he knew this would Make RH furious. It made RH obsessed with it before he even got there. It was said that Bradley was confronted by RH with aggression and RH called him out and wanted to fight him. Actually his anger was really aimed toward Teresa as though Teresa was cheating on him. This of course wouldn’t be true, but not in his head in wouldn’t be. I think RH was so jealous and in a rage to the point of out of control that when he found the perfect moment he killed her and followed his plan of the cover up as scripted. I believe Rh called Teresa’s phone making horrible accusations and threats to her and she ignored them. He had ways of finding her schedule (Sun. visit) for Mon. and she switch the appts. around to avoid RH since it was clear he was outraged the night before at the party, he was harassing her and continued the insane phone calls until the very end on Oct. 31st. After he killed her he had to erase those messages because that would make him a #1 suspect if they were to find them. I believed he had help and remember that RH could only get the call logs, not the voicemails. That is where MH comes in because he could and did have them, which could have erased them for RH. This may be way out there for some, but this is where we place our thoughts.
Linda September 30, 2016 12:43 am
Daniel, Is there a way that I can delete my post on here ?
danielrluke September 30, 2016 1:45 pm
Which one do you want to delete? WHy do you want to delete it, if you don’t mind me asking?
http://overthrow.us/making-a-murderer/major-characters/ryan-hillegas/is-ryan-hillegas-the-killer
“On the Sunday before she disappeared, Hillegas ran into Teresa at a friend’s house. Halbach told him she planned to join her family at a bar in Appleton for a Halloween party. She was dressed as a cowgirl.
ReplyDeleteOn Tuesday, Hillegas called to ask Halbach about the party. Her voicemail box was full. “Which was weird for someone with a business,” he says. “She’s not the kind of person who would just take off and not call.”
By Thursday, he knew something was wrong. With the help of a friend, he went to Teresa’s house, fired up her computer and printed out a list of names and phone numbers of everyone she knew. The search was on.”
http://www.milwaukeemag.com/2006/05/01/blood-simple/
Buting: Ok…Let me ask you about the weekend of October 29th and 30th, the 29th being a Saturday. Did you see her or talk with her that day?
Hillegas: I don’t believe I talked with her on Saturday. Yeah, I don’t think so.
In episode 5 of Making a Murder, you see Ryan pretending to have difficulty remembering this. It’s not something anyone would forget or have trouble remembering if they were in a relationship with someone for five years. Once again, Ryan is not going to commit to anything he can at all avoid committing to, so we see qualifiers like, “I don’t believe”, or, “I don’t think so”.
Buting: OK, did you talk with her or see her on Sunday?
Hillegas: Yes
Ah, suddenly his memory is great! No qualifiers because he knows that Scott Bloedorn, at the very least, probably knew he’d been over. He can’t back out of this one…
Buting: And where was that
Hillegas: At her house
Buting: And how did that come about?
Hillegas: I had just stopped briefly…I think I was dropping something off for Scott and she was sitting there at her computer
“I think”, yet another qualifier. And more deliberate vagueness. The last time he says he sees his girlfriend of five years alive, he’s uncertain about why he went over, and doesn’t know what he was dropping off for Scott Bloedorn? Maybe it was a stack of missing posters?
Buting: So the last time you actually saw Teresa was Sunday?
Hillegas: Yes
Buting: Do you know about what time that was?
Hillegas: No. I don’t know
Of course not. Who would remember a detail as insignificant as the time of day you last saw your girlfriend of five years alive?
Buting: I mean we talking morning afternoon night?
Hillegas: I don’t know
This is the same guy who wants us to believe he magically guessed a username and password.
http://overthrow.us/making-a-murderer/major-characters/ryan-hillegas/the-very-strange-court-testimony-of-ryan-hillegas
I work with Ryan Hillegas... and he stalked his most recent ex (also a nurse)
ReplyDeletehttps://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/3xxn4s/i_work_with_ryan_hillegas_the_ex_heres_what_you/ - original post
screen grab before deletion of post
http://imgur.com/NrMmmWw
overthrow.us was the one to get the scrreen grab
http://overthrow.us/making-a-murderer/major-characters/ryan-hillegas/ryan-hillegas-purported-co-workers-reddit-post-recovered
Daniel Luke wrote on January 13, 2016...
ReplyDeleteA few days ago, I received a comment from one of my loyal readers:
This is the biggest pile of shit ever wrote. Ryan loved her. You don’t know these people, I do. Keep believing everything you see on the tv. Let me know when they get bigfoot, ok? I suppose she was part of her own murder cover up when she told me that avery creeped her out, looked at her weird. And poor little steevie was part of his own framing, seeing as he ever so sneakily got her specifically to come out that day. Hope you do research and realize how crazy all these conspiracy theories are. Sure hope your family never has to deal with such heartbreaking nonsense, just so some fucks can make a buck and a name for themselves.
As we are able to recognize someone’s face, or voice, or gait, with enough familiarity, we can also identify them by their writing style as well. Upon first reading the quoted text above, I was immediately reminded of what Ryan Hillegas’ wrote when he responded to my first and only instant message on Facebook:
“Have fun believing what you see on tv. I don’t even need to insult you, you do it well enough on own”.
The first quote, taken from a comment left on this blog, was written either by Ryan, or someone close to him who has adopted some of his patterns of speech. And this in turn raises several questions. If Ryan is reading this, more than likely other people in his social circle are too. If Ryan is the murderer, there is a better-than-average chance that many of those within that circle have harbored their own suspicions. Even if, in the minds of people he knows, their suspicions have sort of come and gone like a corps in a lake–rising languidly to the surface, partially, for a few days, and then descending into oblivion, to later rise, unexpectedly and horrifically once again, one could only imagine that this “corpse of the imagination”, if I may so term it, must be in the ascendant at the moment and all the more terrifying in its cumulative impact for being only partially realized like all of the greatest fears we have, dwelling in the deeper depths of the mind, and to which we have only indirect access.
If the above are the words are Ryan’s, (and we know definitively that one set are) what would motivate him to get on this blog to discredit me if he were innocent? And what better way to discredit me, if he’s going to bother at all, than by providing a rock-solid alibi, and to answer many of the other questions that I have for him? That’s the surest way to prove that I’m the idiot that he says that I am. Yet we have nothing like that at this point.
Someone on Reddit claiming to be a colleague of Ryan’s at Froedert Hospital in Milwaukee mentioned that he gave conflicting accounts to people about how he obtained Teresa Halbach’s login credentials. Apparently Ryan had been heard bragging about how he had duped a “grunt”, meaning an employee, working at Cingular Wireless in customer service, into giving him the desired information over the phone.
Ralph Waldo Emerson once wrote, “People do not seem to realize that their opinion of the world is also a confession of character”. What, therefore, should we infer about Ryan’s character if he is the kind of person who derisively describes a person in a difficult, low-paying job as a “grunt”? A person, moreover, that he has bragged about to others that he had no trouble tricking and manipulating?
If this anecdotal information is correct, we cannot but infer about Ryan that he enjoys tricking people. And if a person derives pleasure from tricking one person, we must reasonably wonder how much more pleasure might be derived from tricking one hundred people, or even a billion? What better affirmation of intellectual suzerainty over others?
http://overthrow.us/making-a-murderer/major-characters/ryan-hillegas/corpse-of-the-imagination
UPDATE TO THIS POST, JUNE 11TH, 8 PM EDT
ReplyDeleteScott Bloedorn, Teresa's roommate, with whom she had a few recent sexual encounters that she later regretted, told CASO investigators "he was aware that on Saturday night (October 29th) Teresa had been at a Halloween party in Green Bay," which was confirmed by Mike Halbach during his testimony.
Mike Halbach Cross Examination:
Q. Okay. The gathering at -- was at grandpa's house on Sunday, October 30?
A. That's correct.
Q. For his -- for his birthday?
A. Correct.
Q. And then, I think -- Were there, if you know, did she -- had she had plans to go to a Halloween party the Saturday night right before that?
A. I believe so. Earlier in the evening she was helping me with a wedding, shooting a wedding video. After that I think she would have went to a Halloween party. I believe that's correct.
Q. Okay. Saturday night, October 29?
A. Right. Yeah, it would have been later on in the night.
Apparently, neither Scott nor Ryan were invited to this party, which very well could be the Halloween party attended also by Teresa's friend Aubrey Wygralak, who told reporters on November 9, 2005 that Teresa was dressed as a cowgirl. Perhaps Scott and Ryan became aware of the party through Mike Halbach, who had been working at a wedding in Green Bay with Teresa earlier that evening, Saturday, October 29th.
Ryan must have heard Teresa was dressed as a cowgirl at the party and incorpoprated this fact into the story he told reporters in 2006:
"On the Sunday before she disappeared, Hillegas ran into Teresa at a friend’s house. Halbach told him she planned to join her family at a bar in Appleton for a Halloween party. She was dressed as a cowgirl. On Tuesday, Hillegas called to ask Halbach about the party. Her voicemail box was full. 'Which was weird for someone with a business,' he says. 'She’s not the kind of person who would just take off and not call.' By Thursday, he knew something was wrong. With the help of a friend, he went to Teresa’s house, fired up her computer and printed out a list of names and phone numbers of everyone she knew. The search was on."
During Ryan's testimony at Avery's trial, Buting asked him about seeing Teresa on Saturday or Sunday, and he said: "On Sunday we just talked, and she had mentioned that she had a cowgirl hat and she was going to dress up like a cowgirl. And that was pretty much the extent of it." However, the party she attended on Sunday evening was a family gathering for her grandfather's birthday: it was not a Halloween party.
CONTINUED...
Main Thread for Mike Halbach and Ryan Hillegas Discussion self.MakingaMurderer
ReplyDeletehttps://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/3y0wg9/main_thread_for_mike_halbach_and_ryan_hillegas/
submitted 1 year ago * by thesonnylee
First off, I know there are some commenters shaming people for suggesting other suspects, but this is a discussion forum for a crime documentary where everyone is allowed to discuss their opinions. Including both those interested in exploring other suspects and those who do not. We all discuss, ideally in an intelligent debate instead of just shutting each other down, and then the community chimes in and that's how discussion forums should ideally work. But this is the internet, so I know that can be difficult. I guess what I'm saying is I hope we all keep this in mind before we leave a comment, but again, I can't tell you what to do, and vice versa. More importantly, that's why there are different subreddits under "Making A Murderer". If you do not want to discuss Mike Halbach and Ryan Hillegas, then don't read this thread. Go start a "Why We Shouldn't Discuss Mike and Ryan" thread.
Disclaimer finished.
The topic of Mike Halbach and Ryan Hillegas has been discussed in several threads, so I decided to try and collect all in one place:
User RyanHDidIt paints a picture of how, well, Ryan H did it.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/3xybn2/case_solved/
This thread discusses Mike's odd behavior, specifically his quote about grieving.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/3xm7bl/mike_halbach_teresas_brother/
This thread discusses the odds of Ryan guessing Teresa's voicemail password correctly.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/3xyzd2/spoiler_what_are_the_odds/
User an0nymotapoeia suggests why Mike should be the top suspect.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/3xt8er/mike_halbach_should_be_the_main_suspect/
This now deleted post was from a co-worker of Ryan's. Someone screengrabbed and saved here.
http://ideape.blogspot.com/2015/12/blog-post.html
UPDATED WITH NEW THREADS:
An explanation for Mike and Ryan's behavior that maintains their innocence.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/3y165w/new_theory_to_explain_hillegass_and_mikes/
A theory that suggests Blaine Dassey, Mike Halbach, and Ryan Hillegas were previously friends and used to hang out at the Avery lot in the past.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/3xwe9x/unified_theory_bones_barb_janda_and_mike_halbach/?
Sure, there are several other suspects also worth looking into, but that's not what this thread is about. I want to discuss Mike Halbach and Ryan Hillegas.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/3xugni/who_killed_theresa_here_are_some_alternatives_to/
CONTINUED...
They are suspects, imho, for the following reasons:
ReplyDeleteCloseness to Teresa: investigators tend to look into people close to the victim, and here we have two suspects very close to the victim with some questionable behavior. The possible deleting of messages. As someone pointed out in one of the above threads, Ryan said he "made up a username that worked" to access Teresa's email, which of course does not make sense since only one username works, he'd have to know the username and be guessing on passwords. Also, don't most emails lock people out after a certain number of attempts? At any rate, it also seems Teresa was shot in the head, which makes me think, most likely, this was a close-range shot, unless the person is an expert shot, which could very well may be. But I'm reminded of The Jinx, where Durst murdered his friend who lived in LA because she trusted him and allowed him to get close enough to shoot her. Could that have happened with Teresa?
Access to Voicemails: the fact they admitted to accessing her voicemail and some voicemails being deleted after her disappearance is SO SHADY. I understand being desperate to find out any info you can about your missing sister and doing all that you can to login to her voicemails, but why delete anything? You know it's an ongoing investigation, why risk the suspicion raised by deleting something unless what's being deleted is even more suspicious?
The Harassing Phone Calls: as one of the above threads points out, Tom Pearce, Teresa's colleague, says in court that Teresa kept getting calls 3 weeks prior to her disappearance and she said she'd been receiving them for 2-3 weeks up to that point. He quoted her as saying in response to the calls, "It's them again," or "It's him again." As one the above threads pointed out, it seems like whoever's making these calls were probably leaving voicemails, and who do we know deleted voicemails from Teresa after her disappearance? Mike and/or Ryan.
The Search Party: everything about who they found the Rav4 feels shady to me. The quickness in which those women found the car in that giant lot, the camera being handed to them and no one else. Does anyone have a good sense of the timeline of the search party? When they began, where they went, and how long before they ended up at the lot?
Anecdotal History of Stalking Exes: As the above thread mentions, a co-worker on reddit has come out to say Ryan's had a history of stalking exes. Obviously, we can't verify this story, but I'm curious if more people will come out of the woodworks to confirm or deny.
Lastly, I have a question about who accessed what. In the documentary, did both Mike and Ryan admit to accessing the voicemails? I definitely remember Mike saying so, and I remember Ryan accessing her emails, but did Ryan access her voicemails too? Did Mike access her emails?
I shouldn't lump the two together, but it's hard not to due to their working together so closely in the search. Do you think one is more suspect than the other?
Let's discuss.
CONTINUED...
[–]dgrace51 6 points 1 year ago*
ReplyDeleteWhat the internet tells us about Ryan and Scott... ++++ Ryan wrestler. ex-boyfriend. dated her for 5 years through high school and early college. unemployed. stalking issue. mugged of $20.00 in food stamps. broke into her email, phone records,voicemail. had no alibi. would not provide time of day the day he saw her. put himself in the center of the attention. spoke for the family. controlled the search. rarely made eye contact. had the time. shows no emotion. after she was found he moved into her house to "keep an eye on things".
+++++
Scott had the time. had no alibi. controlled the search. rarely made eye contact. no emotion, but wow the family must be going through hell. charged with purchasing alcohol for a minor. (later)
+++++
Until her body was found, the only person that had the right to not be the least bit emotional was Steve Avery.
+++++ Everyone else should be crying and coming apart at the seams.
(Like the difference between the reactions in the "What We Saw" video and the Hindenbergh tragedy. One is horrifyingly real; one is horrifyingly fake.)
+++++
2:20 Scott Bloedorn. He's not about to break down; he's trying to break down.
http://wbay.com/2016/01/07/video-nov-4-2005-avery-appointment-was-halbachs-last-stop/
Scott and Ryan made themselves heroes invoking the community's sympathies with no emotion or urgency, while having all the means and time to cover their tracks.
CONTINUED...
Volunteers essential in search for Halbach
ReplyDeleteGreen Bay Press Gazette - Green Bay, Wis.
Subjects: Sex crimes; Police
Author: Srubas, Paul
Date: Nov 9, 2005
Start Page: B.1
Section: Local/State Document Text
MISHICOT -- It's nearly 1 p.m., and Ryan Hillegas is leaning on the fender of his car, killing time and waiting for his troops to come out of the woods. The search for the missing Teresa Halbach has been ongoing since daybreak, and Hillegas is hungry. He tears into a Krispy Kreme doughnut, the only food he's had time for all day. He takes a call on his cell phone, participates in a driveby interview with a television news crew in a sport utility vehicle and copies into a spiral notebook the phone numbers and other notes he's scrawled on his forearm while he was in the woods.
Hillegas, 25, in his faded green "hoodie" sweatshirt, dirty jeans and sneakers and with a stocking cap pulled low over his ears, is an unlikely looking general. And the rag-tag troops that begin to materialize out of the woods in search of further orders and a bit of lunch are an unlikely looking army. But, according to Calumet County Sheriff Jerry Pagel, they are an indispensable part of the search team that is looking for answers in the disappearance of Halbach, the 25-year-old photographer who has been missing since Oct. 31.
State troopers, police officers and sheriff's deputies working the case on Tuesday alone numbered more than 125, but the search area consists of hundreds of acres of mostly farmland and thick woods -- too much for police alone. It was Hillegas' crew that found Halbach's car Saturday on the 40-acre salvage yard belonging to the family of Steve Avery, who was convicted of a 1985 sexual assault and exonerated by DNA evidence 18 years later. It's that 40 acres where police are focusing their investigation, but a police helicopter and plane equipped with thermal imaging devices are circling a much wider area Tuesday afternoon, including the thick woods where Hillegas and the civilian force are searching.
Dozens of cars, most festooned with missing-person posters featuring Halbach's face, are parked up and down the sides of Old County Y, the staging area for the day's search. During the lunch break, searchers gather at the trunks of some of the cars, making sandwiches, or stand in clusters in the road talking and eating. Most are dirty and have cockleburs sticking to their clothing from their morning efforts. "Thank you, everybody, for what you're doing," a passing motorist tells them as she cruises carefully past them.
Hillegas works closely with the police. He meets with them daily. They tell him the areas to search, what would be helpful and what would be "getting in the way." And he stays in touch with them by cell phone.
Hillegas has no background in law enforcement. He studied nursing in school and is currently unemployed. Everything he knows about conducting search-and-rescue operations he's learned in the last few days -- advice from cops -- or has seen on TV. If his crew finds anything suspicious, they're under orders to flag it and notify Hillegas, who will notify police who will come check it out. "We're telling them to look for anything unnatural, if anything is out of place, if the ground is displaced, or articles of clothing," Hillegas said. Most of the volunteers are armed with cell phones.
Hillegas and his lieutenant, Scott Bloedorn, pour over aerial maps that they downloaded from the Internet. They mark off areas of interest in magic marker. "It's really amazing how well it's been organized," said Aubrey Wygralak of Pulaski, who participated in the search Monday. "It's all due to Ryan and Scott. Ryan is absolutely amazing. I don't know where this would be without him."
CONTINUED...
Most of the volunteers, like Hillegas and Bloedorn, are in their mid-20s and are also unschooled in search operations. They, too, are learning as they go. On Tuesday, search efforts look anything but amateur. The searchers march into the woods using a "line-of-sight" formation, in which each person stays within eye contact of searchers on either side of him or her, so they can descend into wooded gullies and thickets with some assurance that they are truly covering the area with the search.
ReplyDeleteThey're all motivated by the same thing: They know and love Halbach, worked with her, went to school with her or even just lived near her for a few years. Hillegas, who lives in Hilbert, dated Halbach in high school and has been fast friends with her ever since. Bloedorn has known Halbach since childhood and has been, up to her disappearance, her roommate in the farmhouse in St. John that they rent from Halbach's parents.
Up to 120 people have been helping in the search, taking off from work or school to participate. "For any of our effort, even if we don't know where we're going, it's honoring her," said A.J. Kluth, formerly of Green Bay and now a Chicago college student. Kluth was following the search efforts on the Internet and could no longer stand it; he canceled his classes, his wife, Sarah, canceled her work obligations, and they drove up from Chicago to participate in the search for Halbach. "She'd have done it for us," Kluth said.
[–]cajunhawk 2 points 1 year ago
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone know how long it had been since Ryan and Teresa's relationship had ended? That right there would have been extremely important information that would be relevant to the case...and to explain the meeting on the 30th at her home.
Recent ex shows up out to give something to the roommate, tries to pry info from her on her comings and goings...she possibly gives him false info. He checks up on her...sees she lied to him...motive.
[–]jrbr549 2 points 1 year ago
They found the car on the periphery of a salvage yard. Where the hell would it be? In the middle? It was a lucky find.
[–]UnreasonablyDoubtful 2 points 1 year ago
Great collection of information here!
[–]nashIrish 2 points 1 year ago
I think that a proper investigation could have helped here. Everyone involved seemed sketchy. The brother was so... uninvolved emotionally. He spoke of grieving before confirmation of death, which IS strange. If a family member went missing you would avoid that conclusion... they (the brother and ex- weird in itself) both tampered with evidence in the case of her voice mail. What was the reasoning for that? The police didn't even seem to care. Obviously this is a horrible case for everyone and the police are most at fault here, a fair investigation would have stopped this.
[–]layceepee 1 point 1 year ago
As one the above threads pointed out, it seems like whoever's making these calls were probably leaving voicemails, and who do we know deleted voicemails from Teresa after her disappearance? Mike and/or Ryan.
How do we know Mike and/or Ryan deleted voicemails? What I understood from the documentary is that it's likely voicemails were deleted, and Mike and /or Ryan had the opportunity to delete them. That seems a long way from knowing that they deleted them.
Do you know if anyone else had access to Teresa's voicemails? If you could prove that no one else did, that would move us a lot closer to knowing that Mike and/or Ryan deleted voicemails, but I don't think it's the case that we know there weren't others who could have had access.
What do you believe Ryan's motive for lying about how he got access to Teresa's voicemail would be? If he's acknowledging that he had access, how does he benefit from claiming he did it by guessing the log in/password combination rather than saying he knew the password? It seems to me saying he made up the user name and guessed the password is more likely an example of a lack of precision in language rather than a calculated deception.
[–]thesonnylee[S] 2 points 1 year ago
You're right, we don't know that they deleted the voicemails. Going off the information in front of me though, where two people were accessing the voicemails and then voicemails were found deleted, I'm gonna take a look at those two people. If information comes up about a third person accessing those voicemails, I would be wondering about that third person as well.
I do think his stumbling was a lack of precision in language, which feels even more suspect to me. If someone had been guessing a bunch of passwords to one username, successfully so, I think they have a good handle on how usernames and passwords work. But I don't think he did that. I think, and someone else mentioned this in another thread, he probably knew her username and password from having dated her for 4-5 years, and said the whole bungled username quote in court as an excuse, and he bungled it because he didn't actually do that.
[–]ryanHdidit 1 point 1 year ago
Now we're getting somewhere.
[–]cajunhawk 1 point 1 year ago
Proving he knew the password and username would prove he lied under oath.
[–]NotKiriux 1 point 1 year ago
Their official responses to having deleted the emails was something along the lines of, "I don't recall." Not exactly saying they did OR didn't.
CONTINUED...
[–]M_Tootles 1 point 1 year ago
ReplyDeleteJust want to point out that my explanation for Mike and Ryan's behavior is in light of the supposition of their innocence. It's true I prefer Charles Avery, Scott Tadych (and maybe Bobby Dassey) and The German Man, but I'm not saying Ryan (and maybe Mike) are definitively innocent.
[–]Bill_Shackelson 5 points 1 year ago
Ryan told a newspaper at the time he was at her house and she was dressed up as a cowgirl to go to a Halloween party with her family. He then said he called her on Tuesday to ask about the party.
Thing is, in court, and the story he stuck to mainly was that he was over there dropping stuff off for her roommate and she was sitting at her computer. No mention of Halloween costume or anything.
There is also mention in the newspaper at the time of a friend who said she was at a Halloween party together with Teresa who was dressed up as a cowgirl. I think Teresa was lying to Ryan and/or Ryan found out about the party.
In any case, it's odd to not remember what time of the day it was when you saw her dressed up in a cowgirl costume.
[–]MzOpinion8d 7 points 1 year ago
ReplyDeleteThe person I went out partying with the most was my cousin, and I also used to go out partying with my brother and his girlfriend. When it says TH said she was meeting up with her family at a bar, it may not mean her immediate family.
How did any of this end up with her being a lesbian, though?
[–]milowda 4 points 1 year ago
So, the evening of October 30th - morning of the 31st?
[–]Bill_Shackelson[S] 2 points 1 year ago
I am trying to figure that out... Do you think the newspaper made a typo? She went as a cowgirl to a Halloween party on a Friday 10/21/2005 with her friend Aubrey and then as a cowgirl again on Sunday 10/30/2005 with her family to another Halloween party? That's when Ryan said she saw her dressed up as a cowgirl, that Sunday.
I guess it's possible but I've never seen Halloween parties 10 days early. Was always on Halloween or a few days before or after (usually the weekend before or after the 31st).
[–]vasamorir 4 points 1 year ago
Some bars and places have early Halloween parties. Doesn't seem so strange. Also i'd expect her to dress the same twice rather than have 2 costumes.
[–]Bill_Shackelson[S] 2 points 1 year ago
But her ex-bf doesn't remember what time of the day it was when he saw her dressed up? That never even came up in court - what was she wearing when you saw her?
[–]Bill_Shackelson[S] 3 points 1 year ago
Well the ex-bf according to that older article said he showed up at the house of his "friend" who lived with Teresa on Sunday October 30th and saw her dressed up as a cowgirl...to go to a Halloween party LATER with her family.
Who dresses up in her costume in the morning or afternoon, even? And who goes to Halloween parties with their family at 25 years of age? Something's not right here.
[–]Bill_Shackelson[S] 2 points 1 year ago
I hear that. But remember the boyfriend didn't remember what time of day it was when he saw her? Yet he said she was dressed as a cowgirl when talking to a newspaper? Do people wear their Halloween costumes for breakfast and wear it all day? I guess that could be possible.
I guess what I am saying is that he wasn't invited, and if he said it was a party to see her family but her friend said she was at the party - well, he's gonna feel a little butt-hurt. And he didn't mention at all that she was dressed up to go to a Halloween party - EXCEPT I think the one mistaken slip to the newspaper, telling them that she was dressed up as a cowgirl and on her way to a Halloween party with her family. The story he stuck to consistently thereafter and in court was that she was at her computer and he had no recollection of what time of the day it might have been. Just doesn't sound right.
You remember when a girl you dated for 5 years is looking sexy in her cowgirl costume. Trust me.
[–]seankelly014 3 points 1 year ago
Hmm this Halloween party thing is new, it would definitely piss him off if she lied to him and then he meets here at a random party with another guy.
CONTINUED...
[–]gittlebass 4 points 1 year ago
ReplyDeleteAlso, there's conflicting dates about this halloween party. he said he called her to ask her about the party but her voicemail was full. But the halloween party was oct 21st according to this article.
From the blood simple article: On the Sunday before she disappeared, Hillegas ran into Teresa at a friend’s house. Halbach told him she planned to join her family at a bar in Appleton for a Halloween party. She was dressed as a cowgirl.
On Tuesday, Hillegas called to ask Halbach about the -party. Her voice-mail box was full. “Which was weird for someone with a business,” he says. “She’s not the kind of person who would just take off and not call.”
By Thursday, he knew something was wrong. With the help of a friend, he went to Teresa’s house, fired up her computer and printed out a list of names and phone numbers of everyone she knew. The search was on."
This doesn't make sense. Also, if someones missing, wouldn't you go to the apt, see their missing and then call the cops? not do the sleuthing yourself?
[–]milowda 3 points 1 year ago
Didn't let your imagination run away with you there huh?
I say typo (30th and after midnight of the 31st), and who says Ryan was still her bf? Sounds more like an ex being told not to tag along is all.
[–]Bill_Shackelson[S] 5 points 1 year ago
No no, Ryan wasn't her boyfriend. That's the thing. He was her EX. I am just saying. The burned weiner is a powerful force. And if it smells like a duck and quacks like a duck, the thing works for Aflac and is a mf'g duck! The duck in this case being Ryan who shows up to his "friend's" house where his ex-gf of 5 years lives, as well. And the other duck being Teresa who seems to be hiding something from him. Can't underestimate what Halloween means to dudes when they know the girl is dressed up all nice and fancy. THEIR imaginations start running wild - in the wrong direction.
[–]alanamb37 2 points 1 year ago
ReplyDeleteI have a google image of Ryan answering a question. What scares you the most? His answer "women because they're evil" quoted in 2002
[–]cajunhawk 2 points 1 year ago
Does anyone know how long it had been since Ryan and Teresa's relationship had ended? That right there would have been extremely important information that would be relevant to the case...and to explain the meeting on the 30th at her home.
Recent ex shows up out to give something to the roommate, tries to pry info from her on her comings and goings...she possibly gives him false info. He checks up on her...sees she lied to him...motive.
[–]jrbr549 2 points 1 year ago
They found the car on the periphery of a salvage yard. Where the hell would it be? In the middle? It was a lucky find.
[–]UnreasonablyDoubtful 2 points 1 year ago
Great collection of information here!
[–]nashIrish 2 points 1 year ago
I think that a proper investigation could have helped here. Everyone involved seemed sketchy. The brother was so... uninvolved emotionally. He spoke of grieving before confirmation of death, which IS strange. If a family member went missing you would avoid that conclusion... they (the brother and ex- weird in itself) both tampered with evidence in the case of her voice mail. What was the reasoning for that? The police didn't even seem to care. Obviously this is a horrible case for everyone and the police are most at fault here, a fair investigation would have stopped this.
[–]layceepee 1 point 1 year ago
As one the above threads pointed out, it seems like whoever's making these calls were probably leaving voicemails, and who do we know deleted voicemails from Teresa after her disappearance? Mike and/or Ryan.
How do we know Mike and/or Ryan deleted voicemails? What I understood from the documentary is that it's likely voicemails were deleted, and Mike and /or Ryan had the opportunity to delete them. That seems a long way from knowing that they deleted them.
Do you know if anyone else had access to Teresa's voicemails? If you could prove that no one else did, that would move us a lot closer to knowing that Mike and/or Ryan deleted voicemails, but I don't think it's the case that we know there weren't others who could have had access.
What do you believe Ryan's motive for lying about how he got access to Teresa's voicemail would be? If he's acknowledging that he had access, how does he benefit from claiming he did it by guessing the log in/password combination rather than saying he knew the password? It seems to me saying he made up the user name and guessed the password is more likely an example of a lack of precision in language rather than a calculated deception.
CONTINUED...
[–]thesonnylee[S] 2 points 1 year ago
ReplyDeleteYou're right, we don't know that they deleted the voicemails. Going off the information in front of me though, where two people were accessing the voicemails and then voicemails were found deleted, I'm gonna take a look at those two people. If information comes up about a third person accessing those voicemails, I would be wondering about that third person as well.
I do think his stumbling was a lack of precision in language, which feels even more suspect to me. If someone had been guessing a bunch of passwords to one username, successfully so, I think they have a good handle on how usernames and passwords work. But I don't think he did that. I think, and someone else mentioned this in another thread, he probably knew her username and password from having dated her for 4-5 years, and said the whole bungled username quote in court as an excuse, and he bungled it because he didn't actually do that.
[–]ryanHdidit 1 point 1 year ago
Now we're getting somewhere.
[–]cajunhawk 1 point 1 year ago
Proving he knew the password and username would prove he lied under oath.
[–]NotKiriux 1 point 1 year ago
Their official responses to having deleted the emails was something along the lines of, "I don't recall." Not exactly saying they did OR didn't.
[–]M_Tootles 1 point 1 year ago
Just want to point out that my explanation for Mike and Ryan's behavior is in light of the supposition of their innocence. It's true I prefer Charles Avery, Scott Tadych (and maybe Bobby Dassey) and The German Man, but I'm not saying Ryan (and maybe Mike) are definitively innocent.
[–]Bill_Shackelson 5 points 1 year ago
Ryan told a newspaper at the time he was at her house and she was dressed up as a cowgirl to go to a Halloween party with her family. He then said he called her on Tuesday to ask about the party.
Thing is, in court, and the story he stuck to mainly was that he was over there dropping stuff off for her roommate and she was sitting at her computer. No mention of Halloween costume or anything.
There is also mention in the newspaper at the time of a friend who said she was at a Halloween party together with Teresa who was dressed up as a cowgirl. I think Teresa was lying to Ryan and/or Ryan found out about the party.
In any case, it's odd to not remember what time of the day it was when you saw her dressed up in a cowgirl costume.
SEMPRE SBORRATISSIMO IN CULO: RICCARDO BARRAI! E DENTRO L'UNIVERSITY OF READING! DAVANTI A TUTTI!
ReplyDeletehttp://jenkins-ci.361315.n4.nabble.com/PRENDE-CAZZI-IN-CULO-RICCARDO-BARRAI-ALL-UNIVERSITY-OF-READING-RICCARDO-BARRAI-E-UN-PERVERSO-OMOSESS-td4896813.html
https://uk.linkedin.com/in/riccardo-barrai-46840512b
1
RICCARDO BARRAI E' ORMAI UN OMOSESSUALE DI TIPO DEPRAVATISSIMO! NATO A MILANO IL 26.11.1996! D'ALTRONDE..DA SEMPRE VENNE SODOMIZZATO DAL BASTARDO PEDOFILO PADRE PAOLO BARRAI! MERDACCIA CRIMINALISSIMA! DA RINCHIUDERE IN GALERA PER SEMPRE!! SI, E' GIUSTO RIMARCARLO. RICCARDO BARRAI E' ORMAI UN PERSO FEMMINONE! E' DIVENUTO UN OMOSESSUALE DI TIPO PERVERTITISSIMO. MA POTREBBE ANCHE ESSERE COMPRESO: FIN DALLA NASCITA VENNE SODOMIZZATO DAL PADRE PEDOFILO PAOLO BARRAI! UN BASTARDISSIMO CRIMINALE!
( DEPRAVED PEDOPHILE RICCARDO BARRAI BORN IN MILAN ON 26.11.1996 MAKES LOT OF HOMOSEXUAL ORGIES INSIDE UNIVERSITY OF READING. A LOT. WE HAVE EVIDENCES BOUT IT. BUT ... IN SOME WAY... HE COULD BE.. EVEN THOUGH JUST BY SOME VIEW POINTS OF VIEW, UNDERSTOOD. HE GOT SODOMIZED, SINCE BORN, BY HIS FATHER: WELL KNOWN PEDOPHILE, ALREADY 3 TIMES IN JAIL, PAOLO BARRAI, BORN IN MILAN ON 28.6.1965. EX CITIBANK. FIRED BADLY BY CITIBANK AND BEEN DONE CONDMENED TO JAIL BY CITIBANK )
A PROPOSITO DEL MALAVITOSISSIMO QUALE...
2
ReplyDeleteE' DAVVERO DA ARRESTARE SUBITO ( PRIMA CHE FACCIA AMMAZZARE ANCORA), IL TERRORISTA NAZISTA ED ASSASSINO, PAOLO BARRAI, NATO A MILANO IL 28.6.1965. NONCHE' MEGA RICICLA SOLDI MAFIOSI E POLITI-C-RIMINALI, OSSIA FRUTTO DI MEGA RUBERIE E MEGA MAZZETTE, RICEVUTE DA LEGA LADRONA E STRAGISTA SPAPPOLA MAGISTRATI, NONCHE', TANTO QUANTO, NAZIFASCISTA DITTATORE E PEDOFILO: SILVIO BERLUSCONI! DICEVO, E' DAVVERO DA ARRESTARE UNA QUARTA VOLTA, E SUBITO, IL TERRORISTA NAZISTA ED ASSASSINO, PAOLO BARRAI. NON PER NIENTE, GIA' STATO IN GALERA 3 VOLTE. OPINIONI TUTTE TERRIFICANTI SU DI LUI! MEGA TRUFFATORE E MEGA RICICLA CASH ASSASSINO VIA CRIMINALISSIMA BLOCKCHAIN INVEST, OLTRE CHE VIA NALISSIMA WORLD MAN OPPORTUNITIES LUGANO, CRIMINALISSIMA WMO SA PANAMA E CRIMINALISSIMA BSI ITALIA SRL DI VIA SOCRATE 26 MILANO! NOTO PEDOFIL-O-MOSESSUALE SODOMIZZA BAMBINI! CACCIATO DA CITIBANK A SBERLE, PER MEGA FRODI CHE LI FACEVA! SBAGLIA SEMPRE IN BORSA! AZZERA I RISPARMI DI CENTINAIA DI PERSONE! FALSO&LADRO&TRUFFATORE! DIFFAMA SUL WEB A FINI NAZIRAZZISTI! FONDATORE DEI NUOVI MEGASSASSINI TERRORISTI DI ESTREMISSIMA DESTRA: "NUOVI NAR"! FONDATORE DEL, PROSSIMAMENTE, DI FREQUENTE, OMICIDA: KU KLUK KLAN PADANO! CONDANNATO AL CARCERE A MILANO ED IN BRASILE ( 8 ANNI E PURE PER PEDERASTIA OMOSESSUALE, RIPETO, PURE PER PEDERASTIA OMOSESSUALE)! MULTATO DA CONSOB 70.000 €! DESTABILIZZA L'ITALIA PER FILO NAZISTI SERVIZI SEGRETI SVIZZERI ( ITALIA, DICEVAMO, DA 30 ANNI, GIUSTISSIMAMENTE, NAZIONE SCHIFATA IN TUTTO IL MONDO, IN QUANTO FASCIOMAFIOSA DITTATURA DI BERLUSCONIA.. NON PER NIENTE, TUTTE LE PIU' GRANDI INDUSTRIE, IN ITALIA DA SECOLI, DALLA TIRANNIASSASSINA DI BERLUSCONIA SON SCAPPATE, VEDI FIAT, PIRELLI, LUXOTTICA, MERLONI E MIGLIAIA E MIGLIAIA DI ALTRE... E CHE SIA CHIARO, PLS, CHE IDDIO BENEDICA I GRANDI PM CHE NON SOPPORTANTO IL CANCRO DEL MONDO INTERO, SILVIO BERLUSCONI, COME HENRY WOODCOCK, ILDA BOCASSINI E CHIUNQUE ALTRO DI QUESTA AMMIREVOLISSIMA CATEGORIA)! FA CRIMINI SU CRIMINI E NAZI-ST-ALKING, SU INTERNET, SU ORDINE DEI PUZZONI CRIMINALISSIM SILVIO BERLUSCONI, PAOLO BERLUSCONI ED UBALDO LIVOLSI DI FININVEST. IL VERME ASSASSINO PAOLO BARRI, E' ANCHE, DA SEMPRE, INNEGGIANTE ALLO SPAPPOLAMENTO DI MAGISTRATI SCOMODI "COME BERLUSCONI GRANDISSIMAMENTE FECE CON FALCONE E BORSELLINO"! PAROLE SUE, DETTE SPESSISSIMO! ORGANIZZANTE OMICIDIO DI DAVID ROSSI DI MONTE PASCHI!
Ho tantissimo da scrivere sul gia' 3 volte finito in galera, accertatissimo pedofilo omosessuale, ladro, truffatore, sempre falso, nazi-st-alker, mandante di omicidi ( spesso, ma non sempre, mascherati da finti incidenti, malori o "suicidate"... come quando fece ammazzare David Rossi di Monte Paschi, ma ne scrivero' in dettagli molto presto), mega ricicla soldi mafiosi e/o politico-criminali (piu' tanto di orrido altro), arrestato gia' 3 volte, Paolo Barrai, nato a Milano il 28.6.1965 e gia' residente a Milano in Via Ippodromo 105! Come presto meglio sottolineeremo, multato dalla Consob ben 70.000 euro!
http://www.consob.it/main/documenti/hide/afflittivi/pec/mercati/2013/d18579.htm
VI SONO TONNELLATE DI ALTRE COSE DA DIRE SU QUANTO SIA BASTARDO EFFERATO CRIMINALE E PEDOFILO PAOLO BARRAI. TROVATE UNA PARTE (CHE PRESTO AMPLIEREMO ALL'INFINITO E PIU')..... QUI:
https://es-la.facebook.com/public/Truffati-Da-Paolo-Barrai
Avery's lawyer: Ex-boyfriend killed Halbach
ReplyDeleteJohn Ferak , USA TODAY NETWORK-Wisconsin
June 13, 2017
Why the defense suspects Hillegas
Here are the key points in Zellner's motion relating to Hillegas as a suspect:
1. No alibi for time of murder
During Avery's trial, Hillegas testified that he last saw Halbach on Oct. 30, 2005, but claimed he did not remember what time he visited her property. "I have seen no evidence that he offered an alibi or any sort of statement regarding his activities from Oct. 31, 2005, to November 3, 2005. Nor have I seen any evidence that the authorities ever asked him to do so," said Gregg McCrary, a retired FBI agent.
2. Spearheaded searches for vehicle
During his initial conversations with law enforcement, Hillegas did not reveal he and Halbach previously dated for about five years. Instead, he gave the impression he was only a concerned friend. "Mr. Hillegas injected himself into the police investigation by taking an active role in the volunteer search," McCrary wrote. "He gave a female volunteer searcher (Pam Sturm) a camera and a direct phone number to the sheriff (Jerry Pagel)."
On Saturday morning, Nov. 5, 2005, Hillegas mobilized a volunteer effort sending dozens of people out into the surrounding area to locate his ex-girlfriend or her vehicle. It was only after most of the searchers left the property when former private investigator Pam Sturm showed up. Sturm conferred with Hillegas and Scott Bloedorn, a close friend of Hillegas, who lived with Halbach at the time of her disappearance. Sturm proceeded to drive to the Avery Salvage Yard. She walked straight to the back of the property and quickly found the missing RAV4 covered with tree branches. "It appears that he directed her to the area where the victim's vehicle was located," McCrary stated, referring to Hillegas.
3. Gave police erroneous information
The discovery of a broken blinker light on the driver's side of Halbach's vehicle became one of the most overlooked clues in the Halbach investigation. The broken blinker turned up inside the cargo area. Hillegas "also appears to have misled police when he told them that Ms. Halbach had damaged the front driver's side of her vehicle months before her disappearance, had filed an insurance claim for that damage and had taken the cash payout without repairing the vehicle," McCrary wrote. "However, it appears that particular damage was done more contemporaneously with the crime and a check with Ms. Halbach's insurance company revealed that she never filed an insurance claim for the front-end damage."
CONTINUED...
4. Used a fake name to search near Avery Salvage
ReplyDelete"On at least one occasion," McCrary stated, "Mr. Hillegas had misidentified himself as Mr. Kilgus to gain access to the Avery property. Regardless, the authorities allowed Mr. Hillegas multiple entries to the Avery property while it was under police control." During the weekend of Nov. 5-6, 2005, law enforcement officials recovered no major physical evidence to Steven Avery as the killer, despite a massive police presence meticulously canvassing the 40-acre property soon after the RAV4's recovery. "On Nov. 7, 2005, the day before the victim's burned bones and electronic devices were found in Mr. Avery's burn pit and burn barrel, Mr. Hillegas entered the property without signing in at the command post," McCrary stated. "There is no way to know exactly when he entered the property, or how long he had remained, but it might explain how, despite previous searches of that property, that the victim's bones were not discovered until Nov. 8, 2005. At the very least, this type of unauthorized entry to a restricted crime scene violates proper police practices and risks contaminating the scene."
5. Accessed Halbach's phone records after she disappeared
At Avery's trial, defense lawyers Dean Strang and Jerry Buting asked Hillegas about gaining access to Halbach's phone records. Hillegas testified he managed to correctly guess her username and password. "There is evidence that voice messages were deleted from Ms. Halbach's voice mailbox after her death and before law enforcement initiated their missing person investigation," McCrary stated. "Mr. Hillegas is one individual who knew Ms. Halbach's username and password and assisted law enforcement in accessing her Cingular Wireless account to obtain a list of her phone calls during the relevant time period."
6. Involved in abusive relationship with victim
Zellner's investigators determined Halbach had severed romantic ties with Hillegas, who still remained a constant presence in her life. "She sustained both verbal and physical abuse in her relationship with her ex-boyfriend," McCrary wrote. "At the time of her death, the ex-boyfriend was unemployed, lived close by and visited her home frequently."
7. Sustained injuries to his hands during time frame of murder
Dr. Larry Blum, a pathologist from Rockford, Ill., reviewed television news footage showing Hillegas with several scratches to his hands as he was organizing volunteer search efforts. "It is my opinion, to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty in the field of forensic pathology, that Mr. Hillegas' right hand ... appears discolored ... the abrasions I observed on the back of Mr. Hillegas' left hand are consistent with scratches inflicted by fingernails."
Zellner told USA TODAY NETWORK on Monday she is not obligated by the criminal justice system "to prove he murdered Teresa Halbach to get Steven Avery's conviction vacated."
"Rather, we are trying to show Hillegas had motive, opportunity and a connection to the crime that meets the Denny (third-party suspect) standard. The jury should have been presented with this evidence. It may have created a reasonable doubt about Steven's guilt."
http://www.postcrescent.com/story/news/local/steven-avery/2017/06/13/averys-lawyer-ex-boyfriend-killed-halbach/387912001/
Does KZ have more up her sleeve?
ReplyDeleteby supergrrl47 in TickTockManitowoc
[–]Mr_Precedent
Without a doubt, YES. She is better off not pointing fingers at specific LE until she can provide all 3 elements necessary to overcome the Denny rule. She's GOT them ALL on RH and only needs ONE alternate suspect (the most painfully obvious one) to show that CASO was negligent in its investigation. NOW, RH has incentive to spill the beans on EVERYONE ELSE who participated in the planting.
KZ's got the Court/County/State TRAPPED. If they deny exoneration AND a re-trial, she goes to the media and/or higher up (which is what they tried for years to avoid). If they choose re-trial instead of exoneration, KZ gets access to EVERYTHING they don't want her to have AND she will blow the lid off of Wisconsin. If they choose exoneration and then decide to NOT pursue other suspects, they've got the public and the media AND KZ's relentlessness to contend with. She/SA can't lose.
Anybody who doesn't think her strategy is EFFING BRILLIANT doesn't truly understand it.
[–]Mr_Precedent
It would be a conflict of interest for KZ to help RH, especially if she thinks he is involved in TH's death or the framing of SA - and I think she definitely does. She gave him the perfect opportunity to spill the beans when she referred to him as "Individual B" in her previous motion. As far as we know, he did not bite.
KZ can only do what is in the best interest of her client. RH will need to get his own lawyer if he is charged.
If he is REALLY stupid, RH (and Sweaty Ken Kratz) can try to sue KZ for libel. Then she can divulge EVERYTHING she knows and mop the highway with him. That would be too delicious for words!
She has them ALL between a rock and a hard place. So clever!
[–]Mr_Precedent
Most people watching the crappy tabloid shows and appearances that Sweaty Ken Kratz does don't read much besides the menu at IHOP, so they're surely not going to read the transcripts of the trial and accompanying evidence, motions, etc. SKK is counting on the ignorance and laziness of those who only watch TV to help spread his lies.
[–]Mr_Precedent
She wasn't given access to ALL of the evidence for her own testing, therefore she COULDN'T provide some stuff she would have LIKED to include.
[–]Mr_Precedent 5 points 22 hours ago
I think Wiegert is deeply involved in the framing and probably is the orchestrator of it until Sweaty Ken Kratz took over.
[–]Mr_Precedent 4 points 6 days ago
They didn't get the info it was SA from AT that night [Angela told then it was BJ on Avery Road, giving her phone number not SA's]. So WHY did they zero in on him immediately? Because Wiegert was part of the setup.
[–]Mr_Precedent
I think (just a hunch that may be wrong) that RH, MH and SB were involved in selling drugs confiscated by (Calumet drug investigator) Wiegert (possibly Kratz, too), and that TH died at home, in the presence of RH, MH and SB, of an overdose or injury that would have gotten them ALL in serious trouble if a Coroner learned she died at home and did an autopsy. I think they called Wiegert for help and he got the idea to call Lenk, frame SA, solve 2 big problems, and win some big awards and brownie points.
https://www.reddit.com/user/Mr_Precedent
The murder & the planting: two different crimes
ReplyDeleteBy TheDutchCoder (TickTockManitowoc)
June 11, 2017
With the Zellnami in full effect, we've all read that KZ is pretty much pushing RH forward as "the killer". We also know that KZ's main goals is to get SA the freedom he deserves, pretty much whatever the cost.
I think she has a fairly good idea of who the killer might be, but she's also smart: accusing LE of evidence planting would be really hard to prove, and will probably not help SA.
With that being said: I think it's more likely that we're technically looking at two different crimes: 1) The murder of TH by "the killer" 2) The framing of SA by LE (yes, it's not what KZ suggests, but I think this is what actually happened)
These two crimes (unfortunately) worked out in both "the killer"'s and LE's favour. "The killer" did his thing and got away with it. LE got "their guy" who was about to take all their money and reputation.
It is my opinion that "the killer" pretty much did what KZ outlines, but he didn't plant the evidence. It's far more likely that LE did this step (way more opportunity, and motive). "The killer" simply aided by handing them important things on a silver platter.
"The killer" only wanted to get away with his crime. The easiest way would be to make sure he wasn't seen or regarded as the killer and no clues led to him. So he made sure that the biggest piece of evidence (the RAV4) was to be found somewhere else.
Any place would be a good place, but a salvage yard is perfect. "The killer" made sure that's the place the car would be found.
With that done, he really needn't worry too much, especially considering who owned and ran the salvage yard.
Enter LE: suddenly SA is the prime suspect, they got the car, but they don't have much else to go on. Nothing really seems to indicate TH was killed there, but he must have done it, because they found the car!
It is my opinion the LE at this point chose to make it a "home run", by planting evidence to make sure SA would be found guilty. They just killed two birds with one stone: they "solved" the murder and they evaded the huge lawsuit.
Bottom line: I think there are two different crimes and unfortunately they blended perfectly into each other.
Do I think "the killer" planted the evidence: no. I think it's too far fetched, a simpler answer is obtained by asking "who had time and motive". "The killer" already diverted attention, that was (at the time) enough for now. Why risk getting caught planting evidence if they're already focussing on someone else?
I strongly believe it was LE who wanted to seal the deal, but KZ chooses not to go there, as it won't help SA and honestly: it might even help her case suggesting "the killer" planted the evidence, as LE has shown they only care about themselves.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/6glrxr/the_murder_the_planting_two_different_crimes/
[–]MMonroe54
ReplyDeleteMy "sometimes" theory is close but slightly different. I think the RAV was wherever TH was killed and "the killer" left afoot or in his own car. It had to be in some out of the way place, though, not unlike, a turn out or an infrequently traveled road or the Mirabel Caves or perhaps the cul se sac where a parked car would not be suspicious because a path led through the woods which people apparently often used. If so, I think LE found the car and the rest followed BECAUSE they really believed SA did it and wanted to make sure-- especially in view of the 1985 case -- that he didn't walk. But this too involves two different crimes: a killing and a framing. This is just one scenario that I occasionally entertain -- assuming SA did not do it -- as a "possibility". Much like KZ's theory about RH.
[–]TheDutchCoder
I see what you're saying, but without the car on his property, LE really had no reason to think SA was involved at all.
It's not impossible of course, but I think the car on his property was the nudge that both the killer as well as LE needed for this to escalate.
[–]Mr_Precedent
This is why I think RH and MW had something going on that made it necessary to frame SA to protect BOTH of them. Probably drugs. I think the 22 calls between RH and LE on the night the RAV was planted show it was a coordinated effort.
[–]TheDutchCoder
I didn't know RH had so many calls with LE on that day, is that in one of the Affidavits? (I haven't read all of them yet)
[–]Mr_Precedent
It's in his phone records from her very first motion, where she called him "Individual B."
[–]TheDutchCoder
Thanks!
There was an unnamed report entered into evidence for SA's October 31st photo shoot:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Trial-Exhibit-22-Lead-Form-5005Oct31.pdf
This report listed the ad type, amount due, and year/make/model of the vehicle to be photographed, in addition to the name, address, phone number(s), other contact info, etc. for the lead. It also had an area for TH to write down the VIN number, check the form of payment, and write down a credit card number and expiration date.
I believe AT faxed one of these unnamed reports for each lead on a lead sheet.
And, like you said, TH would have brought the detailed reports for each lead with her to the photo shoots (she would get the VIN numbers and complete the payment info before overnighting the package of materials to AT), and maybe she left the summary lead sheet at home since the detailed reports had the same, but more, information. However, SA called in after the summary lead sheet was printed, so he wasn't on the October 31st sheet:
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Trial-Exhibit-20-Lead-Form-2005Oct31.pdf
Instead, AT completed a "photo shoot/reshoot" form (hand printed by DP), in addition to the computer-generated detailed report (the unnamed report with account info, payment info, ad info, directions/special instructions, space for photographer to write down VIN#):
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Trial-Exhibits-17-360-and-362-Auto-Trader-Appt-and-Phone-Records.pdf
I did notice there were leads that didn't pay TH, which she noted as "got photo, no payment" or "done, no pay" on the summary lead sheet.
AS testified:
All of our customers are given the option to prepay, or pay with the photographer when he or she gets there. They would normally pay when the photographer got to this property.
AS said if they didn't prepay, they would normally pay when the photographer got to his/her property, but the leads couldn't be forced to pay the photographers when they got there. If they changed their minds last minute, there was nothing TH could do about that. She would take the photos and send them into the office anyway. From there, I presume the sales staff would follow up with the photo shoots that didn't pay, making their pitch to convert leads into sales (they already had the photos stored in their system and the customer information, possibly the VIN# of the vehicle, so going forward with the ad would only require the ad copy and payment).
KATHLEEN ZELLNER TO FILE AMENDED PETITION IN STEVEN AVERY CASE: NEW WITNESSES STEPPING FORWARD, NEW SUPPLEMENTAL FORENSIC RESULTS, AND NEW EVIDENCE WILL BE INCLUDED
ReplyDeleteBY INQUISITR
SEPTEMBER 2, 2017
The noted post-conviction lawyer for Making a Murderer subject Steven Avery says she has uncovered even more exculpatory evidence in her bid to free him from prison.
Avery is serving life without parole in a Wisconsin prison for the 2005 murder of Teresa Halbach.
Zellner told the Inquisitr that new witnesses have come forward, leading to ”significant discoveries” since she filed a 1,200-page petition for post-conviction relief on June 7.
She did not name the individuals but said they were hesitant to tell the truth during the initial investigation.
Details about new direct evidence have also not been released, but will be included in an amended motion.
And while considerable attention was cast on Zellner’s accusations of misconduct by the state under Brady v. Maryland, the lawyer is now swinging for the fences. She’s not just after a new trial based on isolated violations. She plans to prove Avery’s innocence.
“We are as fully invested in vacating Steven Avery’s conviction as we have ever been,” Zellner said.
“However, the big difference now is the new witnesses who are stepping out of the shadows and telling us what they know.”
There will be more forensic testing, too, she said, findings that will supplement the results and expert testimony she included in the June brief.
“We have informed the Wisconsin Attorney General of our intent to amend the petition with this new information,” Zellner said.
“It is our strong belief that our experts have demonstrated so many critical flaws in the forensic evidence used to convict Steven Avery a decade ago.”
CONTINUED...
Zellner has received considerable blowback, mostly on social media, since announcing her intention to free Avery. She announced new forensic testing last year, but it took nearly a year to prepare and file the motion, leading some to believe the case was at a standstill.
ReplyDeleteThen there is the $10,000 challenge she issued to anyone who can prove Avery is guilty. The challenge is real, she says, despite accusations that she threw out the gauntlet as a publicity stunt. Although Redditors attempted to pick the challenge apart, nobody has officially attempted to cash in by following Zellner’s guidelines.
Those with the qualifications to challenge her findings have also been silent.
“Other than ad hominem attacks that show a sense of desperation, there has not been a single identifiable, credible expert who has stepped forward to rebut any of our forensic claims.”
And the claims are bold ones. Her June petition appears to come from the Gerry Spence school. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. The 88-year-old Spence has never lost a criminal case as a prosecutor or defense attorney. In his fashion, Zellner’s brief has become as high-profile as the Avery case itself. In it, she points to Ryan Hillegas, Halbach’s on-again, off-again boyfriend as the likely killer. She dramatically links him to bumbling Manitowoc County Sheriff’s deputies who she says were duped so badly they planted evidence to cover their tracks. Zellner says there were more viable suspects than Steven Avery, but the state withheld key evidence that pointed towards them.
Hillegas was never considered a suspect. He and Scott Bloedorn, Halbach’s roommate with whom she had a sexual relationship, were questioned, but not asked for alibis.
Zellner claims Halbach was not killed anywhere near the Avery Auto Salvage, but clubbed to death–not shot–likely at her home in Hilbert, Wisconsin, about 30 miles away.
Zellner says her latest findings back that up, while those who believe in Avery’s innocence have pointed to a number other findings, including Halbach’s cell phone records and surrounding tower data from October 31, 2005.
Avery maintains that Halbach left his property around 2:30 p.m. that day. He watched her drive away, he says. The state had a different version of events though, and the jury bought it. Ex-Calumet County District Attorney Ken Kratz said some of Avery’s story checked out, but that he was lying about where Halbach went after she took pictures of the van he had for sale. Kratz claims she did not leave the property, but that Avery lured her into his trailer, where she was raped and stabbed before being shot dead in his garage. Halbach’s cremains were found in at least two locations on the Avery property. The state says Avery and nephew Brendan Dassey burned the body in a Halloween bonfire. Zellner challenges that claim.
“We strongly believe this [new] information combined with the flawed forensic evidence used to convict Steven Avery will free him, once again,” Zellner said.
Brendan Dassey is eligible for early release 2048. Dassey’s conviction was thrown out last year, but the ruling has since been vacated pending the outcome of an en banc hearing in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals scheduled for September 26.
http://www.inquisitr.com/4472735/kathleen-zellner-new-evidence-uncovered-in-steven-avery-case/
[–]HuNuWutWen 8 points 2 months ago
ReplyDeleteThe State will need to produce verified, certified chain of custody documentation for these specific items...
...if the State cannot produce the aforementioned documents ?...
...or if those documents are not 100% AIRTIGHT...
...the items quite simply must be excluded, deemed inadmissible...
...THE LAW is VERY CLEAR, this is not debatable...they can't just pull things out of their ass, call it evidence...
...and also, a failure of Duty such as this creates other equally serious breaches of conduct...
...but, let's pretend for a moment that these fucking liars are able to forge some CoC papers for the Court...
...that is when the SHIT HITS THE FAN...
...because somebody switched the "swabs"...and...
...we now KNOW, to a high degree of scientific certainty, that these same swabs NEVER CAME IN CONTACT with a hood latch...
... the Chain of Custody documents will illustrate exactly who did it, and when...
...so , name the Tech who collected the samples...
...name everyone who had any contact with/access to/custody of those samples from that point onward, to present day...
...we will see who DID what, when...
...or at least, who is gonna go down for it...
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/6kqxu2/and_yet_another_kz_tweet_experiment_hood_latch/
[–]HuNuWutWen 9 points 2 months ago
ReplyDeleteThe implications of this "swapping of swabs" must not be downplayed, or understated...
...this is SERIOUS BUSINESS...falsifying evidence...entering false evidence... evidence tampering... perjury... subornation of perjury... prosecutorial misconduct...in addition to all of the other flagrant violations of Avery and Dassey's rights...
...this is getting really ugly, for The State...
...I don't think the higher-ups will attempt to deny SCIENCE ...
...their own people are overseeing this current testing...they are seeing these same test results and expert rebuttal opinions...
... now, this is Wisconsin, so ya just never know what bullshit they might try to come up with...
...but, science doesn't choose a side... there is no winner/loser in science... science is not a game to be played...
...unless you are dealing with Sherry "Double Blind" Culhane...who is this fucking idiot ?... she's expendable, that's who...
...let's just see how old Sherry stacks up, against REAL Scientific Methods, and Analysts...
... Ms. Zellner and her team are kickin' ass and takin' names...
...somebody is gonna FRY for this ... and I don't recall any instance from the past where it's the Big Fish...it's always the little people who take the fall...
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/6kqxu2/and_yet_another_kz_tweet_experiment_hood_latch/
[–]HuNuWutWen 23 points 2 months ago
ReplyDeleteSo, one question being asked is...
..."how could a not-swapped latch swab swab a latch yet show no evidence of having swabbed that latch ?. "....hmmm...
...something to ponder, as we gather 'round the B-B-Q...
...is it possible to remove "contact transfer" DNA from a metal surface without also removing residual matter from that same surface ?...oil, grime, road dust, oxidization...
... the method of collection is to basically rub, or swab an absorbent cotton "Q-tip" on that hard metal surface ...
...even without access, YET, to re-test the actual hood latch in question, one can logically conclude it is highly likely that the sample swabs would include the residual surface matter from the hood latch along with other trace matter ...
...although it is remotely possible to discover "groin" DNA on the hood latch, it is at the same time highly UNLIKELY that those sample swabs would not also include other residual trace matter...
...yet, in this case, the swabs are devoid of those other traces...
...this is the point where we DEMAND a reasonable explanation...
...we don't proceed until we satisfactorily explain the facts of this particular issue...
................................................................................................
...or, we could go with the "guilter" explanation...
... he straddled the hood ornament, no pants, twerked the hood open...
...Look Ma, NO HANDS !!! ...
... now, imagine him disconnecting the battery cable ...lol
................................................................................................
...KZ is systematically dismantling the frame-job...I LOVE IT...
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/6kqxu2/and_yet_another_kz_tweet_experiment_hood_latch/
Zellner had declared her intention to amend her original petition with the press, but apparently never filed the proper paperwork with the Wisconsin courts to delay a decision. Now that a ruling has been rendered on the matter, it could be much harder for her to have future Avery petitions heard. The judge did leave the door open for Avery to file a new Habeas Corpus appeal over his claims of ineffective counsel, but the bar is notoriously high for relief to be granted that way.
ReplyDeletehttp://uproxx.com/tv/judge-denies-making-a-murderer-steven-avery-request-new-trial-zellner/3/
From the article at Patch:
Zellner said she and the Wisconsin Attorney General's Office recently worked out an agreement to allow for additional physical evidence testing upon the RAV4 of murder victim Halbach, and the judge apparently did not know this at the time she decided to move forward and issue her ruling against Avery."
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/743elo/its_not_really_a_big_deal/
[–]wewannawii
Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel praised the judge's decision and order.
"I am pleased with the judge's decision which brings us one step closer to providing justice to Teresa Halbach's family. DOJ will continue to vigorously defend Avery's conviction, which was handed down by a jury of his peers," Schimel says.
http://www.wbay.com/content/news/Judge-denies-Steven-Averys-request-for-a-new-trial-449279693.html
[–]Figdish35
But but but - this is the guy that Zellner had the agreement with.....Yikes.
http://www.inquisitr.com/4472735/kathleen-zellner-new-evidence-uncovered-in-steven-avery-case/
Zellner told the Inquisitr on September 2, 2017 that "her law office has informed the Wisconsin Attorney General of their intent to amend the 1,200-page petition for post-conviction relief" filed on June 7th.
Zeller says she has uncovered even more exculpatory evidence in her bid to free Steven Avery from prison since filing the June 7th petition.
Zellner says her latest findings – as well as "a number of other findings" (which "those who believe in Avery's innocence have pointed to, including Halbach’s cell phone records and surrounding tower data from October 31, 2005") – back up her claims that Halbach was not killed anywhere near Avery Auto Salvage, but clubbed to death (not shot) likely at her home in Hilbert, 30 miles away.
Zellner says "details about new direct evidence" has not been released, but will be included in the amended June 7th petition.
Zellner says "there will be more forensic testing, too, findings that will supplement the results and expert testimony" included in the June 7th petition.
Zellner says that since filing the June 7th petition, "new witnesses have come forward, leading to significant discoveries.”
These new witnesses, "who are stepping out of the shadows and telling Zellner's team what they know, were hesitant to tell the truth during the initial investigation."
Zellner’s not just after a new trial based on isolated violations. She plans to prove Avery’s innocence. “We are as fully invested in vacating Steven Avery’s conviction as we have ever been,” Zellner said.
“We strongly believe this [new] information, combined with the flawed forensic evidence used to convict Steven Avery, will free him, once again,” Zellner said.
[–]lrbinfrisco
ReplyDeletePersonally, I feel that no Wisconsin court will rule that Avery deserves a new trial. I thought that the judge would draw this out and let the state reply to strengthen her position, but she didn't. That she denied the petition though is no surprise. This will like be appealed all the way to the Supreme court before a ruling is upheld. Avery's best chance is in Federal court where his appeal options are much more restricted. I believe that he was not given a fair trial and there exists no evidence to prove that he is guilty even by a preponderance of the evidence. But Zellner needs to prove that Avery is innocent beyond any reasonable doubt and quite a few unreasonable doubts, and that's just in Federal court. In Wisconsin court, she could produce a living, breathing TH and video of the planting of all the evidence and it still would be enough for a Wisconsin court to overturn. I think that all that is going on now is positioning for future appeals. I don't think that KZ realizes just how thoroughly corrupt the Wisconsin judicial system is. And as for the MTSD, it could be argued that the Mafia has done a better job of protecting Constitutional rights of citizens than they have.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/742lp9/judge_denies_steven_averys_request_for_a_new_trial/?sort=new
[–]Nexious[S]
ReplyDeleteThe judge's order straight-up clashes with the aforementioned 974.06:
A motion for postconviction relief may be denied without a hearing if the defendant fails to allege sufficient facts to raise a question of fact or presents only conclusory allegations, or the record conclusively demonstrates that he or she is not entitled to relief. If multiple grounds for relief are claimed, particularized rulings as to each are to be made in denying the motion without an evidentiary hearing.
PARTICULARIZED RULINGS as to EACH are TO BE MADE in DENYING the motion without an evidentiary hearing.
She made no such ruling on probably over 80% of the claims Zellner made in her brief, including any of the Brady, Denny etc. Very questionable order in my opinion.
[–]dark-dare
This is the same Judge that ruled against one of BDs appeals. She thought BD guilty, so I would say she is biased from the get go! In most of KZ cases she doesn't get results until she is in federal court. No ruling on additional testing???
[–]Nexious[S]
In 2015 she also heard Avery's pro se appeal and struck down all 11 claims quite intensely.
http://fox11digital.com//news/PDFs/Decision-on-Avery-request-for-new-trial.pdf
[–]Thesnakesate
She's covering for the State, plain and simple.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/742lp9/judge_denies_steven_averys_request_for_a_new_trial/?sort=new
[–]StoneEyes319 3 points an hour ago
ReplyDeleteI know there's been a lot of criticism of KZ, fair or not, am I the only one that feels like the Judge's timing on this is a little suspect? Seems everything in both SA's and BD's case have taken longer than expected whereas this decision came quickly and as a shock to not only SA's counsel and if there was an agreement, the AAG too....I'm no lawyer but this certainly seems unusual. Maybe I just don't trust anyone involved in this anymore but I can't shake the thought that this may have been a very snakelike tactic used by the State to throw cold water on all the progress made. Think about it, AAG makes some kind of side deal telling KZ she can do additional testing, then praises the Judge's decision? Seems AAG may have been playing a game all along by giving KZ the confidence that she'd be able to file an amended petition, while knowing the Judge would rule before KZ was able to do so. If so, she should accept some of the blame BUT I still think the majority of the focus/blame should be on the AAG in this situation. Just seems like a really dirty move...
[–]lawyerjoe83 5 points 4 hours ago
Because as a lawyer, you don't get to just say "hey, I'm doing some further testing" and have the court guess at when you're done. Moreover, some of her other statements to the court made it sound like testing was done. It seems to me that there's been a tremendous disconnect between the parties and the court in this matter. Someone should have asked for a status conference regarding scheduling or filed a motion to stay decision or SOMETHING. Moreover, as I'm sure we'll hear the state point out, many of the rulings were procedural in nature and will not change with additional testing, so they won't be affected.
[–]annies999 3 points 4 hours ago
Someone should have asked for a status conference regarding scheduling or filed a motion to stay decision or SOMETHING.
She states on page 1 of the brief 'Mr. Avery requests an evidentiary hearing and that he be produced for that hearing.' Is that not the same thing (I'm not a lawyer)?
[–]lawyerjoe83 6 points 4 hours ago
That's the relief he's requesting. He's requesting a hearing on the petition and then after the hearing a ruling in his favor. The court decided the petition didn't deserve a hearing before ruling (that issue would of course be appealed). But it doesn't have anything to do with scheduling or a timeframe for decision.
[–]sassycoinoz [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
I agree with the OP. Of course KZ doesn't trust the AG. Why the hell would she? She knows this case is political and until it's out of WI it's going nowhere. I think these meetings she has with the prosecution and AG go a little like this "look TF you know what I know. I have XYZ proof. We can string this out as long as you like but I'll eventually win". Then they shake hands and smile for the camera. Why on earth would the prosecution agree to additional testing when they know what it will uncover? The state are not or ever going to play fair with this case. They have too much to lose. These closed door meetings have nothing to do with agreements or trust. We're way past that. They know she knows. She knows they know she knows. She is exposing their corruption bit by bit and letting them slowly hang themselves. There is no way she walked out of that Sept 18th meeting with nothing but trust and a handshake. No way.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/74ho1v/opinion_not_a_big_deal/
Ruckus • 21 hours ago
ReplyDeleteAre you kidding me?!? That woman is using the judicial system to play games and make a name for herself. Mr. Avery is right where he belongs.
convivial: cannibal: • 17 hours ago
She already has established a name for herself by saving 19 innocent people who were wrongfully convicted. You are a fool if you have made up your mind in regards to this case on either side. There are too many holes left unfilled and both sides are scrambling to make up for the arbitrary motions and rulings that were put into effect prior. Some day you or a loved one may be right where others think you belong too. There will be no guarantee except by other persons whom sit in your judgement. I sure hope you have a lot of faith in your fellow man or you just may sing a different tune. This is about three lives here. One is sadly gone and though you may think it is a decry of justice it likely matters little to her as she is deceased. You would honor her memory better by being 100% sure once all evidence is tested and gone over by other experts who do not stand to gain from a guilty verdict as is the case herein. You do nothing to honor the victim unless you exhaust all possible evidence correctly and efficiently. Which has not been the case so far by a long shot. Be it that they are guilty or not in the end justice is only served when this is seen through correctly. So stifle and quit drooling while you call out for blood. It is unbecoming of a decent human being. You too maybe.
http://www.wbay.com/content/news/Avery-attorney-files-motion-for-judge-to-vacate-order-denying-new-trial-449808313.html
[–]annies999 9 points 4 hours ago
ReplyDeleteWith her last tweet on this I was leaning towards the agreement being a court issue rather than the state. Good to see that it is. I hope that the court recognize that justice needs to be served - with the full testing results and amended brief - and not jettisoned by process.
[–]Aliensputitthere 5 points 4 hours ago
What happens if the judge doesn't agree?
[–]Yonder101 5 points 3 hours ago
She can always file a motion including new evidence, but the problem lies in some of the laws regarding Post Conviction Relief. Once a judge rules on a PCR issue, the petitioner is not allowed to file another PCR motion regarding that issue without cause.
What she's essentially doing here is trying to get the judge to vacate her order on the motion so that she is able to amend the motion. If the judge doesn't agree, KZ can appeal. And again, she'd be asking the appellate court to vacate the rule, just to be able to amend the motion.
If she cannot amend the current motion, she can file a new motion with her new evidence and witnesses. However, this new motion would be precluded from including any of the items previously ruled on. So everything in the KZ's first motion is gone.
[–]7-pairs-of-panties 5 points 4 hours ago
So what is the deal here? They are willing to let her test, but she can't amend 'the record w/o their permission and the amended record is quite important for her to move forward w/ ANY court correct? I'm confused...
[–]Yonder101 7 points 3 hours ago
The state will allow her testing, but doesn't want her to have one huge motion with everything from the original motion, plus her new witnesses, plus anything she discovers from the new testing.
The state wants her original motion gone, because it has already been ruled one. This would force KZ to have start from square 1, and make it so that KZ cannot re-argue anything included in her original motion. It gives the state the best of both worlds, makes them seem like they have nothing to hide because they are allowing testing, but also takes away any of the compelling arguments KZ had in her first motion.
[–]Yonder101 9 points 2 hours ago
The best thing that could happen for SA is that Judge S vacates her ruling. Next best is that order is vacated on appeal. If KZ cannot get the order vacated either by the judge or on appeal, she is really handcuffed and would need some new evidence, and it would have to be huge, and there would need to be a reason why it wasn't included in previous request for post conviction relief. The laws that govern PCR requests are stacked almost impossibly high against the convicted.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/758th3/kz_the_state_is_not_reneging_on_agreement_the/
Steven Avery's Defense Attorney Says New Evidence May Set Him Free (EXCLUSIVE)
ReplyDeleteNov 15, 2017 8:00 am
InTouch
She promised to free Steven Avery. “[My] goal is to exonerate [my] client” by consulting the “best scientists in the world,” defense attorney Kathleen Zellner vowed in early 2016, after taking Avery’s high-profile case. “It does not matter how long it takes, what it costs or what obstacles we have to overcome,” she later added. “Our efforts to win Mr. Avery’s freedom will never stop.” But despite spending more than $230,000 on tests and promising to prove the guilty verdict was unjust in the case that became a national obsession thanks to Netflix’s Making a Murderer, some experts now say that Zellner won’t succeed. “Avery is going to die in prison,” NYC defense attorney Bruce Baron tells In Touch.
But Zellner’s not backing down. On Oct. 23, she filed a 54-page motion asking the court to reconsider its decision to deny her client a new trial for the grisly Halloween 2005 murder of Teresa Halbach, 25. (On Nov. 1, Zellner filed an additional 50 pages.) Still, Baron thinks it’s too little, too late because the points should have been made during Avery’s post-conviction motion. And former Wisconsin prosecutor Ken Kratz — the man who put Avery, 55, behind bars — feels similarly. “His case is never, ever getting overturned,” he says, calling Zellner’s motion “weak” and full of “far-fetched allegations.”
But Zellner tells In Touch exclusively that her critics are wrong and some of their comments are “laughable.” Wisconsin criminal defense attorney Raymond M. Dall’Osto agrees that Zellner has a shot. “I think the arguments that have been made have validity. They’re not frivolous,” he tells In Touch, pointing out that typically it’s not just one piece of evidence that overturns a conviction. “Will they prevail? That’s going to be determined in the judicial process.” In Touch has obtained the motion, and here, Zellner defends some of her key arguments:
CONTINUED...
1) Avery’s nephew, Bryan Dassey, told officials that his younger brother, Bobby, told him he saw Teresa leaving Avery’s property. This contradicts Bobby’s testimony at trial that he last saw Teresa walking toward Avery’s trailer on the day she went missing.
ReplyDeleteIn court papers, Zellner argues that Bobby’s testimony was inaccurate. She tells +In Touch+, “We have three witnesses who have stated that Teresa left the property. The state’s theory that Teresa never left is fatally flawed and demonstrably false.”
2) Photos of Teresa were found on the Dasseys’ home computer along with images of females being raped and tortured.
“At first glance, it looks like it has merit, but [it’s] nonsense,” says Kratz, author of Avery: The Case Against Steven Avery and What Making a Murderer Gets Wrong. He says that at least six people had access to the computer, including Avery. “Our forensic computer expert has established the exact timeline of when the Dassey computer was accessed and only Bobby Dassey was home at the relevant times,” Zellner claps back.
3) Zellner claims that shortly before her disappearance, Teresa took notes about an upcoming appointment in her day planner — which was later found in the possession of her ex-boyfriend Ryan Hillegas. Zellner believes this indicates Ryan had access to Teresa’s car after she went missing.
“Back in 2005, Teresa carried [an electronic device] that had her appointments on it. That very [device] was found in Avery’s burn barrel,” says Kratz, who recalls that Teresa’s day planner was sitting on her kitchen counter when she went missing. But Zellner says Kratz has his facts mixed up: “The day planner was in [Teresa’s vehicle when] she left home on Oct. 31 because she spoke to two of our witnesses and told them she was going to pull over and make notes. Her handwritten notes of these conversations are on the day planner.”
4) Forensic testing found no particles consistent with bone on a bullet fragment found in Avery’s garage, which Zellner claims was incorrectly believed to have entered and exited Teresa’s skull.
“I never said the bullet went through the skull,” argues Kratz. Zellner calls Kratz’s response laughable: “He told the jury that Ms. Halbach was shot twice in the head and [the] bullet fragment had Ms. Halbach’s DNA on it. In order for Ms. Halbach to be shot in the head and deposit her DNA on [the] bullet fragment, [it] had to exit her skull.” She called the prosecution’s theory “a work of fiction that has been wholly dismantled by a world-renowned trace evidence laboratory.”
Kathleen Zellner attends the premiere of Dream/Killer during the 2015 Tribeca Film Festival at Chelsea Bow Tie Cinemas on April 19, 2015 in NYC. (Photo Credit: Getty Images)
5) Forensic testing found Avery would have had to try to open the hood latch of Teresa’s SUV around 90 times to leave the amount of DNA the Wisconsin State crime lab says it found on the latch.
“Did her experiment replicate the conditions at the time? I doubt it,” says Kratz, adding that Avery was sweaty when he touched the hood latch on Teresa’s SUV because he had spent 30 minutes camouflaging the vehicle under branches. But Zellner says Kratz has no idea what he’s talking about. “The assertion that Mr. Avery was sweating is pure speculation. It’s reasonable to assume that an obese prosecutor dressed in a suit and tie would be sweating with such mild exertion,” she fires back, in a clear dig at the portly attorney. “We did replicate the exact conditions described by the prosecutor, and no one came close to leaving as much DNA as existed on the hood latch swab.”
Avery’s fate is up in the air, but the fight (and the debate) over his innocence is far from over. “Giving up on his case would be accepting that someone else got away with murder,” says Zellner. “We are going to keep ringing the doorbell at this so-called Court of Justice until someone answers it.” She adds, “The deeper we dig into the Avery conviction, the more evidence we uncover of his innocence.”
http://www.intouchweekly.com/posts/steven-avery-new-evidence-146760
Does this screenshot solve the issues of KZ and the access to the RAV4.[There appears to be some debate about this] (i.redd.it)
ReplyDeletesubmitted by revvedup001
https://i.redditmedia.com/ZNXeH-25wlihjlSKPogrANwAzf83qv5VVgxFlEEJB4Q.png?w=792&s=2d173382bd701751821772afc62ecd6c
[–]screamcleaning
So am I following correctly? KZ and the state came to a retesting agreement for the items listed in this post, then the judge ruled that not enough evidence was presented to warrant a retrial or even an evidentiary hearing, and now the state is going back on the agreement pending KZ's appeal on the judge's (premature) ruling. Do I have it correct? I specifically remember an interview KZ gave in which she said that this process would go step by step. The state would hand over a little bit at time, evidence would be retested, then they would meet again and talk over results, and then come to agreement on more evidence to be tested. Those are my words not hers but I can probably find the article I read and link it. It definitely seems as if state was somewhat working with KZ till that ruling happened. When she asked for the scientific retesting the judge never ruled on it, instead KZ and the state reached an agreement. I had assumed the whole step by step thing was what they had agreed too. At this point she has only received items that SA was entitled to due to previous rulings. Basically this whole year feels like a put-on job by the state to make it seem as if she was getting to retest tons of evidence and they had nothing to hide. I think the judge's ruling was absolutely prearranged.
I don't think the state going back on the agreement is a proven fact yet. In one of her recent filings she listed the agreement that she and the AG came to and although the AG did not sign his name to the document, it was stated in a certain way that he acknowledged that was what took place in their meeting. So I believe the agreement to be true. The problem is, and I do believe this was KZ's mistake, the judge ruled before KZ officially told the court of the agreement that was reached. I do not know if KZ was required to notify the court of the agreement but if she had, I think that would have postponed the judge's ruling. At this point the judge has ruled so I don't think the state as any legal obligation to turn over any more evidence. Even if they wanted to turn over the Rav I'm not sure that there is a legal avenue for them to do so.
[–]immanuelxy
I’m not sure either how this works. But it looks like the State hasn’t backed on the agreement, it’s just that the Judge’s ruling messed things up. But once she rules on the Motion for Reconsideration, we should be back on track.
[–]screamcleaning
Yes, I think so. If the motion eventually goes in KZ's favor and then the AG does go back on the September agreement that would make the state look incredibly bad. Way worse than they have looked so far, which is pretty hard to top.
[–]immanuelxy
And this KZ tweet seems to confirm it.
The State is not reneging on agreement [...] the question is will the court let us proceed to test & amend. #makingamurderer
7:43 AM - 9 Oct 2017
CONTINUED...
[–]screamcleaning
ReplyDeleteIf she wants the Rav4 she should ask for it? Ridiculous. It was asked for in her motion for scientific testing in 2016 and eventually agreed to by the AG in September 2017. There is clear documentation to back this up. Anyone saying this is making excuses and spouting BS.
[–]revvedup001[S]
Letter to the judge, it's in with all the appeal docs.
[–]immanuelxy
They agreed to the testing on September 18, 2017. Is it dated after that?
The letter is dated July 14, 2017. So before the agreement.
[–]revvedup001[S]
testing on September 18, 2017.
This appears to be the verbal agreement mentioned in the motion for reconsideration p.5
The screenshot is before and appears to be the only documented mention of the rav4. So it's impossible to actually prove that KZ is making stuff up as claimed if the state verbally reneged on a verbal agreement.
[–]immanuelxy
It’s from Motion for Relief, filed 10/3/2017, pages 1 through 5. The RAV4 is mentioned.
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/55203379e4b08b1328203a7d/t/59d7e76cbebafb24a3513d9b/1507321714899/2017.10.06+-+Motion+to+vacate+order+of+10.3.17.pdf
Steven Avery Guilters Send Sheboygan Judge Flowers In Murder Case
ReplyDeleteAngela Sutkiewicz received flowers this week at courthouse.
By John Ferak, Patch Staff | Dec 1, 2017 5:03 pm ET
People who believe that Steven Avery is guilty of murdering Teresa Halbach are huge admirers of Manitowoc County Sheriff's Detective Andy Colborn, Manitowoc County Sheriff Rob Hermann, former special prosecutor Ken Kratz and they've recently made Sheboygan County Circuit Judge Angela Sutkiewicz one of their new heroes. This week, people affiliated with the Steven Avery Is Guilty group on social media went ahead and hired a third-generation florist in Sheboygan to send the local judge a nice arrangement of flowers. They did this as their way to thank the judge for doing her part to keep Steven Avery imprisoned for the Halloween 2005 murder of Teresa Halbach. This is the murder case that became world-famous two years ago this month thanks to the acclaimed Netflix series, "Making a Murderer."
In recent months, the Sheboygan judge's rulings made it clear that she, too, believes Steven Avery is guilty, despite the widespread allegations of planted evidence and prosecutorial misconduct outlined in the Halbach case. Those allegations have been raised by Downers Grove, Illinois attorney Kathleen Zellner, the world-famous exoneration lawyer who is highly respected across the country, but not necessarily around Manitowoc and Sheboygan, the area where Avery and his family call home.
This week, Patch reported that Zellner celebrated another momentous legal victory as murder charges against another client, James A. Bates, were dropped. The Arkansas case drew national attention after prosecutors demanded access to audio from Bates' Amazon Echo smart home device, claiming it may contain evidence of a crime.
Several weeks ago, Judge Sutkiewicz, in a brief written ruling, rejected Avery's request for a new murder trial. The judge made her decision without even conducting an evidentiary hearing on Zellner's post-conviction motion that was more than 1,200 pages in length. This week, Judge Sutkiewicz issued a follow-up ruling that informed Zellner that she will not change her mind and rule otherwise. Zellner will now take up Avery's crusade before one of Wisconsin's appeals courts.
But what happened next stunned everyone, most notably the judge.
CONTINUED...
On Thursday, Judge Sutkiewicz issued a letter to Zellner as well as Assistant Wisconsin Attorney General Tom Fallon and Manitowoc County District Attorney Jacalyn C. LaBre. She informed the lawyers for both sides about the gift she received as a result of her judicial rulings in the Steven Avery post-conviction process. The person who sent the judge flowers used Hoffman's Flowerland in Sheboygan.
ReplyDeleteThe company's website states that "Harry and Sarah Hoffman opened Hoffman's on October 30, 1929 at the start of the Great Depression ... Today, the third generation is in charge, and ensuring that the Hoffman name is synonymous with quality and service. That is why our slogan remains 'Pleasing you is our pleasure.'"
Obviously, the Sheboygan judge wasn't so pleased about getting the flowers.
"Greetings: I wanted to notify the parties that an individual sent a floral arrangement to the courthouse on November 29, 2017, addressed to me and it was forwarded to my office," Angela Sutkiewicz wrote in the letter. "It contained a piece of paper which stated, 'Best wishes from your admirers at SAIG (Steven Avery Is Guilty).' A copy is enclosed.
"The Sheriff's Department was contacted in an abundance of caution. They determined that the sender is neither a party to the case nor representing a party in this case.
"Since the floral arrangement is a gift, I rejected it by returning it to the flower shop today (Thursday)," the judge wrote.
No blood, DNA or trace evidence was found in Avery's trailer tying him to Halbach's murder.
On Friday afternoon, Patch spoke with Avery's lawyer about the unusual matter.
"It's a disturbing reflection on the culture of the people who believe that Steven Avery is guilty," Zellner told Patch. "It indicates that they believed that the judge is susceptible to being influenced. (Fortunately) She sent a clear signal that it's definitely inappropriate and unethical and she notified us immediately."
Zellner also went on to say that "although we disagree with her rulings, we respect the court and she has every right to rule against us. But a gesture like this really crosses the line. This is something I've never seen before."
In retrospect, the fact Sutkiewicz ruled against Zellner's case was hardly shocking considering the judge's history around Sheboygan.
A 2016 investigative story produced by USA TODAY NETWORK-Wisconsin focused on the issue of judges around Sheboygan County and found that Judge James Bolgert had only two defendants file substitution requests in his felony cases. Judge Bolgert was known to go easy on sex offenders. On the other hand, the reporting showed, one other Sheboygan County judge had seven substitution requests, but the rest had 75 or more, led by Judge Angela Sutkiewicz whose tally of 359 felony substitution requests was fourth-most in the state, the story revealed.
https://patch.com/illinois/joliet/steven-avery-guilters-send-sheboygan-judge-flowers-murder-case
[–]MrDoradus
ReplyDeleteI guess that the Zipp's voicemail being "missplaced" and never given to the original defense is "nothing new". I guess clearly establishing with new technology and experiments that the bullet never passed through bone is "nothing new". I guess all the tests showcasing the abundance of DNA on the most critical items and strongly suggesting, if not already proving, it was planted is "nothing new". I guess overcoming Deny limitations and now being able to present a strong alternative suspect is "nothing new".
I guess a court that ignores all these things and plenty more is still "professional" when it issues a decision that can easily be summarised as "no, because I said so".
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/7gk3cx/law_crime_judge_rips_into_steven_averys_attorney/
[–]Harrison1963
It will not be anything favourable to SA. The judge is not remotely interested in the truth or protecting the rights of citizens. She like the rest of WI are interested in protecting themselves and being right.
They are in way to deep to turn back. They will all fall on their swords to protect the lies. Arrogance abounds!!!!!
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/7gw72k/sa_court_record_update_letter_from_judge/
List of KZ filings in SA Case (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeleteby tlp70
1/11/2016 – Notice of Appearance and Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice for Kathleen Zellner and Douglas H. Johnson filed with the Wisconsin Court of Appeals. *Admission Pro Hac Vice means that an attorney who is not licensed to practice in a state is asking for permission to appear in state court on behalf of their client. Attorneys requesting to be added must be sponsored by an attorney who is licensed to practice in the state, in this case local counsel was Tricia Bushnell.
1/19/2016 – Notice of Appearance and Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice for Kathleen Zellner and Douglas H Johnson filed with the Circuit Court.
3/8/2016 – Motion to Correct the Record and Motion for Additional Time to Inspect the Record filed with Court of Appeals *The Circuit Court Clerk is required to file the Record of a case with the Court of Appeals within 20 days after the Statement on Transcript has been filed. 10 days prior to the due date, the clerk must inform the attorneys for both sides that the record is ready for inspection so they can request any corrections to be made if they feel that the record is not complete. In this motion, KZ is asking for corrections to be made to the record and for additional time to inspect the record.
5/24/2016 – Motion to Extend Time filed in Court of Appeals *KZ requested a 90 day extension to file SA’s Appellant Brief, which was granted.
8/26/2016 –Motion to Hold in Abeyance and Suspend the Briefing Schedule filed in Court of Appeals. *KZ requested that the Court of Appeals put a hold on SA’s pro se appeal and suspend the briefing schedule pending further proceedings in Circuit Court.
8/26/2016 – Motion for Post-Conviction Scientific Testing filed in Circuit Court. *KZ requested items of evidence for additional scientific testing to be performed by her own labs and experts at no cost to the State.
9/2/2016 – Motion to Substitute Local Counsel and File Appearance filed in Court of Appeals. *KZ requested that Steven G. Richards be substituted as local counsel in place of Tricia Bushnell.
6/7/2017 – Motion for Post-Conviction Relief Pursuant to Wis Stat. 974.06 and 805.15 filed in Circuit Court. *974.06 is a form of post-conviction relief that isn’t considered an appeal, but rather a collateral attack on a prisoner’s sentence. Only Constitutional and Jurisdictional issues can be brought up in a 974.06 petition. Any issues previously decided on direct appeal or previous post-conviction or 974.06 motions are procedurally barred from being brought up again. The 805.15 Motion for a New Trial in the Interest of Justice was misplaced and procedurally incorrect. An 805.15 motion is only for civil cases. Requests for a New Trial in the Interest of Justice can only be brought up on direct appeal (State v Henley, Wisconsin Supreme Court 2010).
7/13/2017 – Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Wis. Stat. Rule 809.18 filed in Court of Appeals. *Since an appellant can’t have 2 post-conviction proceedings active at the same time, KZ filed this motion to dismiss Steve’s pro se appeal in the Court of Appeals, so she could move forward with her Motion for Post-Conviction Relief in Circuit Court.
7/13/2017 – Letter from KZ to Judge Sutkiewicz, Circuit Court Judge. *Letter in response to AAG Fallon’s letter to the Judge dated 7/13/2017. KZ informs the Circuit Court Judge that she has dismissed the pro se appeal pending in the Court of Appeals so there are no jurisdictional issues and the Circuit Court has full jurisdiction over the Petition for Post-Conviction Relief.
7/14/2017 – Letter from KZ to Judge Sutkiewicz, Circuit Court Judge *Letter to the Circuit Court clarifying issues regarding the scientific testing pursuant to the Motion for Scientific Testing filed with the Circuit Court on 8/26/2016.
CONTINUED...
10/6/2017 – Motion for Relief from Judgement or Order of October 13, 2017 filed in Circuit Court. *KZ is asking the Circuit Court Judge to vacate her decision on the Petition for Post-Conviction Relief.
ReplyDelete10/23/2017 – Motion for Reconsideration filed in Circuit Court. *KZ asks the Circuit Court Judge to reconsider her denial of SA’s Petition for Post-Conviction Relief.
10/31/2017 – Supplement to Previously filed Motion for Reconsideration filed in Circuit Court. *Additional evidence that KZ is asking the Circuit Court Judge to review while reconsidering her decision on the Petition for Post-Conviction Relief.
11/17/2017 – Second Supplement to Previously filed Motion for Reconsideration filed in Circuit Court. *More additional evidence that KZ is asking the Circuit Court Judge to evaluate while reconsidering her decision on the Petition for Post-Conviction Relief.
11/17/2017 – Notice of Appeal filed in Circuit Court. *KZ is notifying the Circuit Court that she intends to appeal the decision denying SA’s original Petition for Post-Conviction Relief. Usually, an attorney will wait until the Motion for Reconsideration has been made, but a denial of a 974.06 petition must be appealed within 45 days and that time is not tolled by a pending Motion for Reconsideration.
11/30/2017 – Additional Notice of Appeal filed in Circuit Court. *KZ is notifying the Circuit Court that she intends to appeal the decision denying the Motion for Reconsideration.
1/16/2018 – Motion to Extend Time filed in Court of Appeals. *KZ requested a 60 day extension to file SA’s Appellant Brief. The new due date is 3/30/2018.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/7xdeoy/list_of_kz_filings_in_sa_case/
Inuit hunting tactic as a metaphor for KZ's strategy regarding the discrepancies concerning the phone records: (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeletesubmitted 3 months ago by NAmember81
The Inuits had a tactic where they'd place the handle of a knife firmly in the ice and then they'd coat the knife blade in a layer of blood in order to lure polar bears to their death.
The polar bear would take one lick of the blood from the knife and taste blood while simultaneously it cut their own tongue and they'd taste more and more blood and they'd LICK and lick and lick and lick - thinking they are getting a hearty meal while they are actually being bled out to die while they "feast".
If indeed KZ knows that the state made up these calls to concoct a more coherent and cohesive narrative, what better way to expose it than inviting them to "lick the blade"?
Since they already have to account for the missing Zi's phone messages and anomalies surrounding dawn phone calls, why not use the exact documents that they used during the trial in order to lure them?
In all reality she should 100% trust these documents as 100% accurate. However, I believe she knows they are falsified and is leading them to their demise.
The state can either A. try defending a narrative based on falsified evidence or B. come out and try to explain why they appear to be false, knowing themselves that KZ knows.
Either way is a death trap. They choose A. and dig a deeper grave or B. decline to defend their arguments based on the false documents and try to restructure why they appear to be the way they are but really aren't (i.e. Fake).
If she called this out in the brief I don't see it playing out as disastrously. Instead, Invite the state to defend their arguments based on the exact documents that they themselves presented as authentic in the trial. This follows the logical and natural progression of revealing truth in a court of law.
If she called it out in her brief, they'd be readily prepared to explain it away via more bullshit. By presenting them with the blood covered knife blade, they can either lick it or try to get out in front of it and have a argument already prepared to account for the discrepancies i.e. admitting they see fake. Either path is equally devastating.
This is if the phone records are indeed falsified, which I think they are. There's a reason that KK designed his own little exhibits. Now set those exhibits (knife blade) in front of them and let them feast, or not. :)
This is just a random thought I had but I highly suspect that KK was desperate for a coherent narrative that patched up all the holes and resorted to falsifying the records.
[–]bigmouthlurker
maybe the difference in the phone records is so blatant that if the judges who review the documents don't bring it up then she knows that they are in on the conspiracy. Any review board who examines the documents and accepts 'duplicates' that are not identical is not in the business of pursuing justice. She has basically put the elephant in the room and is waiting to see who points it out.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/6hltld/inuit_hunting_tactic_as_a_metaphor_for_kzs/
Avery’s case
ReplyDeleteAttorney Kathleen Zellner of suburban Chicago has a May 21 deadline to file a legal brief with the Wisconsin Court of Appeals District 2. The appeal was filed in response to an Oct. 3 ruling by Sheboygan County Circuit Court Judge Angela Sutkiewicz that Avery had not met the legal standard to receive a new trial.
After that decision, Zellner posted this on Twitter: “The battle continues. We have new evidence & new witnesses. An innocent person never quits nor do we.”
The deadline had been set for March 30, but was extended at the request of Zellner, who has argued that new evidence points away from Avery as Halbach’s killer and claims that authorities planted evidence.
The Wisconsin Department of Justice has repeatedly rejected those claims, and says Avery’s guilt is firmly established.
“DOJ will continue to vigorously defend Avery’s conviction, which was handed down by a jury of his peers,” Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel said in the wake of the ruling by Sutkiewicz.
After Zellner’s brief is filed, the Department of Justice will have an opportunity to file a response brief. The appeals court will eventually issue a ruling, which could be appealed to the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
https://www.postcrescent.com/story/news/local/steven-avery/2018/05/02/steven-avery-brendan-dassey-appeals-may/567522002/
[–]Temptedious[S]
ReplyDeleteSummary of events surrounding Zellner's (now remanded) appeal.
August 26, 2016
Zellner files her Motion for Post Conviction Scientific Testing. In the Motion Zellner requests access to the vast majority of the evidence, including the RAV4.
November 23, 2016
A stipulation was signed which permitted Zellner access to certain critical pieces of evidence. However the RAV was not released.
June 7, 2017
Zellner filed her Post-Conviction Motion, pursuant to Wis. Stats. 974.06.
September 18, 2017
Behind the scenes, Zellner and the Attorney General’s Office reached another agreement that would have allowed Zellner access to RAV so her experts could conduct a complete examination of the interior and exterior of the vehicle for additional forensic evidence. A big fucking deal. Further, it was also agreed that Zellner could test (1) the license plates, (2) the lug wrench, and (3) the suspected human pelvis bones found in the Manitowoc County gravel pit. These are all items of evidence which Zellner has said she believes might produce exculpatory results. Zellner says the State agreed to let her examine the RAV before the 2017 winter.
October 3, 2017
The Circuit Court abruptly denied Zellner’s 1200 page Motion without ordering the state to reply and without ordering an evidentiary hearing. This prevented Zellner from accessing the RAV and pelvis bones.
October 6, 2017
Zellner files her Motion for Relief from Judgement and Order, filed pursuant to Wis. Stats. 806.07(1)(a). In the Motion Zellner informs the Court of the agreement between her and the State wherein it was agreed Zellner would get access to the RAV, the hope being the Judge would reverse her order and allow this agreed upon testing to go forward. Zellner informs the Court that the Attorney General's office has even agreed that an evidentiary hearing would be necessary to resolve some issues.
October 23, 2017
Zellner filed her Motion for Reconsideration. Zellner identified numerous manifest errors made the by Court. She also introduces numerous pieces of new evidence, including her discovery of violent pornography on the Dassey hard drive, and her opinion that Bobby Dassey was the one viewing said images.
November 1, 2017
Zellner filed her first Supplement to the Motion for Reconsideration. In the supplement Zellner points the finger at Barb, Scott and Bobby, suggesting they are part of a cover up, and specifically alleges Barb has knowingly tried to delete material evidence from her computer before it was seized by investigators.
CONTINUED
November 16, 2017
ReplyDeleteZellner filed her second Supplement to the Motion for Reconsideration. Also, Strang and Buting make an appearance in this filing, asserting (1) they were ineffective in their defense of Avery, and (2) that evidence was withheld from them, specifically the Dassey Final Invesitgative CD report, which was put together by Detective Velie, who examined the Dassey hard drive for the State. Fassbender reported that he kept the CD in his possession (DOJ's possession) instead of turning it over in discovery.
November 28, 2017
The Circuit Court issued another denial of Zellner’s Motion for Relief and her Motion to Reconsider as well as the two supplements.
At some point in late 2017 or early 2018 the record was transferred to the Court of Appeals.
May 15, 2018
Zellner "moves for the Court to supplement the Record on Appeal with a CD disclosed to Defendant for the first time on April 17, 2018 ... This Court's review of the CD is relevant to the Court's review and will aid in its resolution of the Brady issue.”
May 25, 2018
The State replied saying they “oppose Avery's motion to supplement the record" as the "record on appeal is limited to the record before the circuit court when it made the decisions under review by this Court.”They argued Avery cannot alter the appellate record with material that was not before the circuit court.
May 29, 2018
Zellner replies before the Court of Appeals rules, saying “the State should not be rewarded for having suppressed the CD until after the appellate record was complete,” and that, “this court should not allow the State to hinder Mr. Avery's appeal by allowing it to deliberately withhold evidence that has been in its possession for years and is crucial to the determination of Mr. Avery's Brady Issues.”
CONTINUED
June 7, 2018
ReplyDeleteThe Court of appeals rules that the defense motion to supplement the record is denied, but that “the appeal is remanded forthwith to the circuit court to permit Steven A. Avery to pursue a supplemental post conviction motion in connection with Avery's receipt of previously withheld discovery or other new information.” This is exactly what Zellner was going to ask for with her appeal anyway, so this saves us some time.
The Court also ordered that “any supplemental post conviction motion shall be filed in the circuit court within thirty days.” So that is good news for us. New evidence and soon.
The Appeals Court ordered the circuit court to “conduct any necessary proceedings and enter an order containing its findings and conclusions within sixty days after the supplemental post conviction motion is filed.” That is a very short timeline, IMO. Good news.
The Appeals Court also ordered that the appellant (Avery and Zellner) “shall file an appellant's opening brief presenting all grounds for relief within forty days after the filing of the record.”
CONTINUED...
At this point Zellner will be exactly where she wanted to be when she filed the May 15, 2018, motion to supplement the record with the CD. The Circuit Court technically denied the motion, but allowed Zellner to file a supplemental post conviction motion instead of going back to the circuit court and starting all over, which would have precluded Zellner from using the many, many arguments she included in her first post conviction motion, which is what the State no doubt would have preferred. This is absolutely a win for Zellner and Avery, the Court allowing them to supplement their original Post Conviction Motion. Don’t let anyone else tell you otherwise. Oh, let me clarify something - Zellner couldn’t have just supplemented her original motion whenever she wanted, as it had been denied, and that was whole point of being in the Court of Appeals, because Zellner wanted the case remanded back to the circuit court, which is what happened. I saw someone suggest Zellner was an idiot because she didn’t need to go to the Court of Appeals to get permission to supplement her post conviction Motion. I'm sorry, but no, that is simply not true. Zellner could have filed a brand new motion with the Brady claim (CD) but she couldn’t have supplemented her original motion that had already been denied. How do you supplement a motion that was denied!? Some people, I tells ya.
ReplyDeleteWe don’t know much about the CD that was withheld, only that Fassbender received it on May 11, 2006 (mentioned in the post). He kept it is his own possession and didn’t hand it over to Avery’s counsel. Zellner just recently was provided with the CD. This was a clear Brady violation.
So far we know Zellner's expert Hunt discovered 14,099 images, an additional 1,625 recovered pornographic images, and 2,632 search results for the terms "Blood, body, bondage, bullet, cement, DNA, fire, gas, gun, handcuff, journal, myspace, news, RAV, stab, throat and tires."
I know I’ve made a big deal about the possibility of images being found of Teresa on a bed, but I don’t at all think that is what would be on the CD. However, Zellner does say the pictures on the computer are of women who resemble Teresa. That is weird. I’m not sure what Zellner was getting at with that. Also, one user suggests a very interesting theory. That the deleted files on the computer were all photos of Teresa, but not of Teresa being subjected to sexual sadism, they were photos showing Teresa meeting with Avery. Meaning Bobby Dassey was watching and photographing Teresa and Avery every time she came to the property. This would have satisfied some weird urge. I don’t know what else Zellner has found on the CD, but I don’t think it will be exculpatory per se, I believe the info will be more so, as she says, impeaching information. Still even from what little we know about the CD, it doesn’t look very good for Bobby. We should be finding out one way or the other, at least more information about the CD, if not all of the information. 30 days.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/8qbofd/in_nov_2005_averys_computer_was_seized_nothing/
The significance of the withheld CD versus the 7 DVDs (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeleteby Truth2free
There is a misconception that everything from the CD was on the 7 DVDs. That's not true. The CD -- which was not even listed in evidence -- contained Velie's criteria for the examination, as well as his conclusions and the detailed investigative report.
This is why it's a Brady violation. That report alone could have been used to make the Denny claim, but the defense team had no knowledge of it. I don't even think Fallon was aware of it, since it took KZ three attempts to finally obtain it from him.
Read Hunt's examination of the CD here
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0xcvkt4p5ptj8gx/Hunt%27s%20analysis%20of%20CD.docx?dl=0
[–]TheEntity1
It depends on what you mean by "everything." No, the DVDs did not contain Velie's analysis. However, the DVDs did contain the computer image, which itself could have been extrapolated to reveal the underlying data -- which is exactly what Hunt did in 2017.
But this doesn't let the state off the hook. The state misrepresented the DVDs as Brendan's computer; Kratz lied to the defense when he said Velie produced no evidence; the state intentionally hid the existence of Velie's analysis CD; and the defense could not have done the forensics that took Velie over 2 weeks with so little time before the trial and after being told the underlying material contained no relevant evidence.
And now the state, after being outed as doing another analysis of the computer over the last 6 months, once again refuses to turn over their findings to the defense.
[–]woody94
Looks like the police took a Hard drive and 12 CDs into evidence. The hard drive was backed up onto 7 DVDs, and the examiner prepared a summary report which was put onto a separate CD.
This CD with the analysis is the key item not disclosed.
permalinkembedsaveparentreportgive goldreply
[–]Truth2free[S]
Yep, and the CD also contained the info from the 7 DVDs, so if the defense had simply been given a copy of the CD, they would have had everything they needed and it would have been instantly accessible -- no EnCase needed.
[–]AVERYMANOR
I thought the defense's issue was the cost/use of EnCase Forensic Software to dissect the contents of the CD for themselves?
The Prosecution dissected the contents and told trial defense there was nothing of "evidentiary value", the defense took sweaty's word for it to avoid the "unneeded" expense and the actual investigative report from "Velie" that "DETAILED" what the contents of that CD revealed was kept secured in Fassbenders private possession?
Basically, the trial defense never knew of a written/investigative report that "outlined" what was found on the Dassey hard drive. The Velie investigative report was not turned over!?!?
[–]Truth2free[S]
That is correct. Not only was it withheld, it did not even appear on the evidence sheet.
And regarding the use of EnCase -- It's not just a cost issue. On short notice, they would have to hire a forensic examiner to use a forensic tool to extract the files from the DVDs. It's basically the raw data. That takes time, and they didn't have it with the Denny motion deadline approaching.
Since KK told defense there was nothing of value, they trusted him, so didn't pursue it.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/8x4gg9/the_significance_of_the_withheld_cd_versus_the_7/
[–]AVERYMANOR
ReplyDeleteWhy didn't the prosecution turn over their unencrypted version? Yes, it was on their dime but, isn't the prosecution obligated to turn over everything they find regardless of what it cost them?
For example, if a prosecutor pays an investigator to find incriminating evidence against the defense isn't that turned over?
The only difference is.......the CD revealed NOTHING against Steven and the prosecution wasn't going to use it so it became "DEAD" evidence.
Sadly, it wasn't "DEAD" evidence for Avery to help meet the Denny requirements. So, in essence, Kratz withheld exculpatory evidence from the defense. That cries Brady. That cries "Bobby Dassey" would no longer be a valuable witness for the State.
To me, what Kratz did was criminal! I suggest the US Criminal Justice System re-thinks Prosecutorial Immunity.
WHEN DASSEY BECAME BRENDAN & DVDS BECAME CDS | STATE FILES RESPONSE TO STEVEN AVERY’S MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT THE RECORD. KATHLEEN ZELLNER TO REPLY AUGUST 3RD
ReplyDeleteAugust 2, 2018
James Didcock
Whilst the timing and style of Kratz’s emails gradually sought to muddy the waters of discovery, it would not be until January 25th, 2007, that he would make mention of Velie’s ‘Dassey, Final Report’ via a stipulation email sent to Strang. As with the 7 DVDs, that Kratz incorrectly identified as CDs, he would attribute the ‘Dassey Final Report’ to that of Brendan Dassey, and further state that Velie “[f]ound nothing much of evidentiary value. Of course by this time Avery was less than 2 weeks away from standing trial and the possibility of introducing third party suspects had passed.
https://criminaljusticereformjournal.com/2018/08/02/when-dassey-became-brendan-dvds-became-cds-state-files-response-to-steven-averys-motion-to-supplement-the-record-zellner-to-reply-august-3rd/
[–]Temptedious[S]
ReplyDeleteReviewing Zellner’s multiple requests made of Fallon to provide her with missing pieces of evidence
From the post we can tell that Zellner had to ask Fallon for multiple pieces of missing evidence. Here is a brief summary of evidence Zellner mentioned in her emails included in the post.
Zellner had to directly ask Fallon for a copy of the voicemail Teresa left on the Zipperer machine. (Fallon told Zellner they lost the voicemail and could not provide it).
Zellner had to ask Fallon for the unedited version of the State’s flyover video of the Avery’s property. (Fallon told Zellner the edited version of the flyover video was the only video he could find).
Zellner asked Fallon if anyone documented the level of gas in Teresa’s vehicle upon finding it on Avery’s property. (Fallon told Zellner the Wisconsin State Crime Lab failed to determine how much gas was left in the vehicle).
Zellner had to ask Fallon for any Calumet County Dispatch tapes. (Fallon granted this request).
Zellner had to ask Fallon for the results of a 2006 examination of the Dassey computer (Velie CD) three times over the span of four months. (After some gas-lighting Fallon finally admitted the CD was not turned over in 2006 and then provided Zellner with a copy of the Velie CD, not the original).
Zellner asked Fallon for the results of a 2017 - 2018 examination conducted on the computer three times in less than one month. (Fallon has refused Zellner’s requests at every turn, and has also challenged Zellner’s motion to compel).
Zellner had to ask Fallon for Barb, Bobby and Scott’s phone records, saying the records were subpoenaed by the State but never received by her in 2016 or by Strang or Buting in 2006. (Fallon eventually provided the phone records, although he disputes Zellner’s claim that the phone records were not provided to Strang and Buting in 2006).
Zellner had to ask Fallon for audio of a Bobby Dassey interview twice. (Fallon eventually granted this request but the recording was not even audible and had to be enhanced by Zellner’s expert).
Most recently, Zellner revealed she wanted access to the Dassey computer tower. (Zellner filed a motion to subpoena Barb and Fallon replied to that motion asking the Circuit Court to deny Zellner’s motion). After some mysterious behind the scenes happenings, Barb suddenly and freely provided Zellner with her computer, which Zellner delivered to her expert.
While this is quite the list, note that I only stuck to content from the emails. I didn’t mention any of Zellner’s witnesses who say they were interviewed by police in 2006, interviews for which Zellner discovered there was no resultant report, meaning law enforcement interviewed these individuals and never provided a summary of the interview to the defense because doing so would have hurt the State’s case. Zellner has found multiple witnesses who she says provided law enforcement with material information that was never turned over. Some of those witness interviews are summarized in this post which details Zellner’s many alleged Brady violations. Now we can understand a bit better as to why Fallon was forced to tell Zellner he thinks he has provided all discovery material.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/99exwh/here_is_a_chronological_compilation_of_available/e4n38x8/
[–]knowfere
ReplyDeleteIn April 2018, the DOJ finally turned over the Velie CD that never was turned over to B&S, proving exactly what KZ's investigator found....the description of the deletions and, in my opinion, maybe more because why would the courts SEAL something already known by everyone? It has to contain more than we even have heard. Because this CD is proof of what KZ's investigation already uncovered, and was discovered back in 2007 at trial but was not turned over, it is proof of BRADY. I believe the CD does have exculpatory information on it and that is why it's sealed up.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/8r2kez/i_am_very_confused_about_this_cdhelp/
[–]DarthLurker
I think the best way to look at it is that the 7 dvds were effectively the hard drive, not the forensic analysis of it which was done by an expert. If the prosecution required the analysis to comprehend what was on the hard drive then the defense should also receive the analysis, withholding the work product of an expert is not acceptable.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/9363d6/states_response_to_zellners_motion_to_supplement/
Zellner's motion is in two parts - the CD Brady assertion and, should that fail, Ineffective assistance of trial counsel.
https://nofile.io/f/FbjF8G12PxB/supplement.pdf
Motion to Supplement - Redacted
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/8luj64/motion_to_supplement_redacted/
Zellner’s new motion: Dassey computer was in the Dassey residence from Nov 5 - 12, 2005 while law enforcement had control of property. Zellner says computer records are missing from that same time period. Did the State later delete records of computer activity from a time when only LE had access?
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/8yn0tc/zellners_new_motion_dassey_computer_was_in_the/
State's response to Zellner's Motion to Supplement the Record:
https://criminaljusticereformjournal.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/states-response.pdf
The State's Response.....some observations and comments.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/94lroq/the_states_responsesome_observations_and_comments/
Link to September 6, 2018 decision by Circuit Court Judge Angela "Flowers" Sutkiewicz #MakingAMurderer
Delete"This court followed the order of the Court of Appeals and only considered the initial brief of the defendant."
https://criminaljusticereformjournal.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/9-6.pdf
One of the many Kratz lies/ Dassey computer
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/93sbgk/one_of_the_many_kratz_lies_dassey_computer/
[Article] 'According to Mr. Buting, those 7 DVD’s were unreadable ‘by any lawyer.” He states that they were all in 1’s and 0’s, or binary code. The report translating this code was already prepared, but was withheld from the defense.'
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/93d5lj/article_according_to_mr_buting_those_7_dvds_were/
The significance of the withheld CD versus the 7 DVDs
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/8x4gg9/the_significance_of_the_withheld_cd_versus_the_7/
By withholding the Dassey PC Summary CD, the State deprived Steven Avery of a fair trial. "You gotta have the Ante, to get in the game."
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/8w83a1/by_withholding_the_dassey_pc_summary_cd_the_state/
Understanding CDR and DVD Storage
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/93qaj4/understanding_cdr_and_dvd_storage/
My Theory on why there were 7 DVD's instead of 6 DVD's & 1 CD but no one thought to ask about the CD
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/8m2idc/my_theory_on_why_there_were_7_dvds_instead_of_6/
[–]raiph
DeleteThe report on the DVD's contents was not on the DVDs.
To understand the problem, here's an analogy.
Let's say there's a murder. 1,000 things are found in a house where someone was murdered. All these items are handed over to the defense. There's a key piece of evidence among those 1,000 items. The defense just has to find it.
Now imagine that an LE investigator had discovered that there were two microbes of blood, invisible to the human eye, on the base of a coffee mug, one of the 1,000 items the defense is due to be given.
One microbe matches the dna of the victim, the other a suspect that LE is ignoring. In the meantime the suspect they're ignoring has claimed they were never in that house. In addition, it turns out that mug belonged to that suspect.
Now imagine that the prosecutor kept quiet about the report and just hands over the 1,000 items, and annotates the coffee mug with "mug, belonged to prime suspect, and of no evidentiary value", where "the prime suspect" is the defense's client, not the suspect who LE know it actually belonged to.
Can you see how the defense might choose to ignore the mug when they've got 1,000 items of evidence they've just been handed to go thru and only 22 days over christmas to get their Denny case together? If the prosecutor who is prosecuting their client says the client's mug has no evidentiary value, why would they focus on it?
And finally, imagine that the law requires that LE hand over evidence. Is the report by the investigator noting the blood and the fact it belonged to the suspect they're ignoring, evidence? Or is the defense supposed to work that out for themselves?
The analogy is arguably over the top. The defense should not have taken the annotation at face value -- it's clear now that calling it "Brendan's computer" was a clever lie and obvious LE were hiding shit all over the place so why on earth would they hand over such a crucial analysis -- and so the defense should have spent the money to get analyses done of all 4,000+ items in SA's case without worrying about the fact that that would bankrupt them many times over.
Which leads to the final point. KZ is saying, if the defense should have known they were being lied to, or should have known they'd not go bankrupt because nice anonymous donors would have given them a million dollars during christmas 2006 if they'd made the bold leap to just analyze everything, or should have just glanced at the content of the DVDs because it was all obvious, then they were ineffective counsel.
[–]MaxMathematician
Well argued. Is the proposition that defence lawyers should assume that prosecution lawyers might be lying to them? Surely not even in this dismal case anyone is going to argue that.
[–]raiph
DeleteListen to 60 seconds of this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2yYfUwPKsI#t=19m25s
This is a high level state attorney comfortably defending evidence fabrication on a massive scale and apparently genuinely thinking courts have said that it's OK. Well, "not OK", as he intones, but definitely something legal and not something inconsistent with the constitution. Look where his finger goes as he answers the judge's question "You plant evidence, and that's OK? ... Yes or no?" with "No, it would not be a violation of due process.".
Recent brain science discussed in an article in The Atlantic suggests that being professionally effective at wielding empathy and intelligence leads to promotion and greater power -- and that then leads to typically undetected erosion of empathetic sensitivity. Apparently there can be exceptions -- I got the impression that the judges in the above court were still humble and on the ball -- but the prognosis for justice worldwide given attorneys like the one in the above video and the judges involved in this case isn't good. And there's really not a lot ordinary defense attorneys can do about it.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/92guy3/the_state_has_filed_a_response_to_zellners_recent/
Reasonable or not? self.MakingaMurderer
Deleteby makingacanadian
The state giving the defense the 7 dvd's of the Dassey computer one week before they had to argue to meet Denny. Is this a reasonable amount of time to hire someone to analyze the DVDs, if they did not trust kratz's statement about the DVDs being nothing of evidentiary value? Could they have asked for an extension? The state knowing the DVDs needed special software to open. The state possessing a simple summary of the analysis of those 7 DVDs in the form of a cd. The cd clearly establishing that someone in the Dassey household may indeed have had motive. Is this common tactics used by prosecutors in the US?
[–]Aydenzz
Fassbender mentions the CD in his report which they received 26 days before Denny was due.
Fassbender writes in his report
Fassbender subsequently received from Det. Velie materials pertaining to his computer analysis of the hard drive and CD'R. This included numerous hard copy pages of instant message conversations from the hard drive and a CD titled 'Dassey's Computer, Final Report, Investigative Copy'.
The CD contained information on web sites and images from the hardrive.
Fassbender examined the items received and made the following observations:
There were numerous images of nudity, both male and female, to include pornography. The pornography included both heterosexual, homosexual and bestiality. There were images depicting bondage, as well as possible torture and pain.
There were images depicting potential young females...There were images of injuries to humans, to include a decapitted head, a badly injured and bloddied body. a bloody head injury and a mutilated body.
The disc received from Det.Velie...were maintained in Fassbender 's possession.
If Strang and Buting had been interested they would have asked for the CD from Fassbender. Why didn't they?
[–]makingacanadian[S]
Innefective assistance?
[–]Aydenzz
No idea
[–]makingacanadian[S]
She says if they deny Brady she is claiming innefective assistance. It's in the motion.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/8yt82k/reasonable_or_not/
[–]cjfreeway
DeleteThe Brady doctrine is a pretrial discovery rule that was established by the United States Supreme Court in Brady v. Maryland (1963).[2] The rule requires that the prosecution must turn over all exculpatory evidence to the defendant in a criminal case. Exculpatory evidence is evidence that might exonerate the defendant.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/8luwg2/avery_motion_to_correct_the_record_with_cd_may_15/
Brady or Not? The 2 Sides of the CD Debate
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/8lzpyg/brady_or_not_the_2_sides_of_the_cd_debate/
State's approach to discovery self.MakingaMurderer
by MajorSander5on
I have no idea whether the CD represents exculpatory evidence or not, or whether it would qualify as a Brady violation in another court, etc. and that is not the subject of this post.
I do not however understand why the State provided the DVDs under discovery, but did not apply the same criteria to the CD which was an accompanying expert report summarising the contents of the hard drive.
Why in response to the defense request under discovery did the State provide the DVDs comprising the contents of the Dassey computer hard drive to the defence but not the accompanying CD.
What was different about the CD which caused the State to treat it differently and omit it from discovery (in terms of materially providing the CD / report as opposed to just referencing its existence).
Regardless of what criteria is used (and the defence did ask under discovery for any expert reports in relation to the case which may be used in the trial) - it strikes me as odd that the raw data in hard copy DVD format would be interpreted as something which should rightfully be submitted but the expert report on the data (which Zellner claims contains additional information) would not?
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/8nlvvu/states_approach_to_discovery/
The CD is exculpatory
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/8t18qg/the_cd_is_exculpatory/
DVD, CD, and Denny struggles
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/8zeswi/dvd_cd_and_denny_struggles/
Why hold back the cd?
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/93yf0w/why_hold_back_the_cd/
Questions about CD
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/8xv1ao/questions_about_cd/
[–]makingacanadian[S]
Don't see anything labeled Bobby Dasseys computer in the discovery logs. Only Brendans computer, whom deaner and butes were not representing NOR was Brendan testifying against their client. The failure of the state to disclose of cd and DVDs hard drive recovery of BOBBY Dasseys computer is a Brady violation as Bobby Dassey was the states most important witness. The witness also had conflicting statements to investigators in regards to Teresa being seen walking towards Stevens trailer. They knowingly allowed there witness to lie under oath for the purpose of destroying steven Averys due process.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/8x25kw/brady/
TruthAlwaysWins
Delete@TruthAlwaysWin4
Aug 2
Why did WISDOJ decide not to go after Dassey computer porn findings? The state had already established a star witness within the first week of Nov 2005. The report would have impeached his witness statement as to what he was doing that day other than "SLEEPING". #MakingAMurderer
TruthAlwaysWins
@TruthAlwaysWin4
Sep 1
What if; Dassey computer in HIS room was used to persuade Bobby to provide a tailored witness statement after we KNOW LEO was on that PC 11/5 - 11/11/2005 when ASY was on lock down. The Hunt Four Red November. Fourth of November is an MTSO hiding holiday #MakingAMurderer
TruthSeeker
@lilkellbell
Sep 10
They were on his computer, when the yard was on lockdown. In the prison phone call, Steven calls Barb out for leaving and allowing them to search the property.
Susan Lee Sexton
@susanleesexton
Sep 2
Yep. Probably used it to blackmail Bobby into testiLYING for the State
Walther White
@44_Walther
Bingo....you got Bingo ! Plus deer poaching. Most likely night hunting and no auto struck deer. Life in rural areas is what you can get away with.
TruthAlwaysWins
@TruthAlwaysWin4
Sep 1
What do you think of all the reports, radio communications and recorded phone calls on the Fourth Of November local Holiday? Oh, they're missing, interesting. #MakingAMurderer must have left that out of their docuseries too.
TruthAlwaysWins
@TruthAlwaysWin4
Sep 1
Maybe on 11/5 until 10:00 AM.... No one but LE from 11/6 thru 11/11 was allowed on the property and the place was crawling with LEO. Report shows Dassey computer activity 11/4 - 11/13/2005. Someone needs to explain.
“You must, if you can, create reasonable doubt by having an alternative theory that matches the evidence. That’s when you’re most likely to win a murder case.”
ReplyDelete“The higher court is going to review all of this new evidence. After we file, the state will file their response, and then the court will have an oral argument, and then they’ll make a decision. Whatever decision they make, it’s going to go to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. So even if we win, the state will still force it to be decided by the highest court in Wisconsin.”
She continued: “My goal is to not just to find the constitutional violation to get Steven Avery a new trial, because many people are convicted again in their second trial. I am trying to get the evidence to what I believe is the truth of what happened, so that there won’t be another trial.
“None of my exonerations has anyone been retried. None of them. Just this week we got a tip that was just jaw-dropping. Like, woah, somebody actually knows this. We’re getting close.”
Despite being disappointed with the lower court’s opinion, Kathleen explains the battle has “only just started”.
“We’ve only been in front of one judge,” she continued. “This is what is important to know. A lot of people were saying, ‘well you were turned down’. But we’ve only been in front of one judge, in the small county at the trial level, so she’s at the lowest level.
“With wrongful convictions, those get turned over by the higher court. The trail court judge typically is not going to undo a big case like this, they just let it go to a higher court.
“We’ve never been in front of a higher court with all of this information. So Brendan’s case is ten years ahead of Steven’s. We’ve only just started.”
While Kathleen – who has overturned the convictions of 19 men during her career - is confident in the new evidence she is bringing forward, she adds that witness tips still continue to be invaluable even 13 years after the murder.
She continued: “I think another thing that goes on in these cases that people don’t realise is that most murder cases, cold cases, end up being solved by witnesses finally coming forward.
“Someone else knows who committed this murder, and we are already getting tips about that. I believe – it’s happened on several of my cases – that someone will come forward and say ‘I know who committed the murder, they told me they committed the murder’. That’s still in play.”
“Our longest case has taken four years, we’ve been on this two and a half. Many of these cases take 10 or 15 years – I don’t think that’s going to happen. I can already see with the tips that are coming in, there are people that know what happened. It’s just a question of – will they come forward.
“We’ve gotten some really, really strong tips just this week. We’re closing in on what happened.”
https://www.ok.co.uk/celebrity-news/1528607/making-a-murderer-steven-avery-free-kathleen-zellner-lawyer-appeal-whats-next-brendan-dassey
10:08 PM - 17 Dec 2018
ReplyDeleteKathleen Zellner
@ZellnerLaw
We discovered there were 3 bone piles in MCGP not just 1 & they all have human bone in them
10:08 PM - 17 Dec 2018
Kathleen Zellner
@ZellnerLaw
Zellner Law - Dr. R. Selden, is willing to test the bones in the Manitowoc Cty Gravel Pit with new Rapid DNA ID. If allowed, we believe the bones will be Ms. Halbach's. This will prove the murder and mutilation occurred in the Manitowoc County Gravel Pit and the bones were planted to frame Steven
Zellner Law - Kratz said that because it couldn't be shown the bones were human that he wasn't going to spend 20 seconds on them. We believe that identifying the bones as Ms. Halbach's will cause the case to be reversed for a new trial.
WI AG had already approved microscopic examination of bones from Manitowoc County quarry, including suspected pelvis.
Gravel pit bones in County pit, including pelvic bone. AG has them.
KZ found that there were 3 burn pits at the county pit and all 3 had human remains.
Those bones were never tested from the quarry as they were too degraded. But now there is a new technology in dna testing which can prove they are Teresa's.
ANDE DNA testing recently approved by FBI (6/2018); creates NDIS and CODIS compatible results in less than 2 hours.
ANDE DNA ID was successfully used to identify burn victims from California wildfires.
All signs are leading to body being burnt in gravel pit, scattered, found, then moved back to SA fire pit.
They were pretty adamant that SA burned the body in his fire pit. Basically they have no proof that SA moved bones from gravel pit to his fire pit or vice versa.
Actually, the State said that the bones found in the quarry weren’t human so they had no relevance. That means that if it turns out that they are, in fact, not only human but TH’s, they’re hooped. They cannot turn that around because their statements were that those bones weren’t relevant. Goes to KK and his “I’m only going to spend 20 seconds on the [gravel pit] bones” in his closing.
It was the State's position that those bones weren’t human. Can’t change that now.
The state can't change their story. These bones were too degraded for the FBI to test and they claimed they were most likely animal remains. If they are THs bones their story gets blown apart. It would force a retrial.
KZ said she is expecting the state to cooperate because they agreed in 2017 to a re-examination of the pelvic bone.
KZ has confirmed the AG agreed to microscopic examination of the pelvic bone in 2017 so really they will have a difficult time to refuse now the science is capable.
She's confirmed she's filed a motion today to be able to do this testing.
She said it’s significant because it creates doubt according to what was said to have happened at trial - burning was on SA property. We could speculate that he could have moved some here and there but that wasn’t the narrative the State went with so it doesn’t matter. It disproves what they said happened.
The dogs are the key their noses told the story of were she was and that was ignored stupid stupid stupid or that is what the police/sheriff dept. and prosecutors did not want to know they wanted Every this is personal they should be locked up not Every!!!
ReplyDelete