We discovered there were 3 bone piles in MCGP not just 1 & they all have human bone in them. @lifeafterten @michellemalkin @newsweek @johnferak #RecklessInvestigation #MakingAMurderer2— Kathleen Zellner (@ZellnerLaw) December 17, 2018
KZ uncovered evidence in Discovery of 3 places in the Gravel Pit (not just 1) where human bones were found, 2 of which were ignored by the State during trial. It was Eisenberg who documented evidence tags in the 7400s as more human bones with cut marks.https://t.co/FtkQpudBfN— Lick The Knife (@RenyRoha) December 19, 2018
There are three locations in the Manitowoc County Gravel Pit were human bones were discovered, per Eisenberg's reports. This evidence was not presented at trial. Zellner is requesting ANDE Rapid DNA ID of the bones. #MakingAMurderer #MakingAMurderer2 https://t.co/iMYKwrzW0j— Lick The Knife (@RenyRoha) December 21, 2018
Eisenberg's documentation of the bones recovered from the Manitowoc County gravel pit:https://t.co/cmVuYefgRP— Lick The Knife (@RenyRoha) January 1, 2019
The pelvic bone is not underlined. Only the "new" bones, the ones not presented to the jury, are underlined. #MakingAMurderer #MakingAMurderer2 #WorkWithKZ
No human bones were found in Radandt's pit. It was the county quarry where the 3 piles of human bones with cut marks were recovered. These were described by Eisenberg as being human—not possibly human—but human. And they have cut marks. GPS locations:https://t.co/Uf8AasIi6P— Lick The Knife (@RenyRoha) January 1, 2019
MARCH 11, 2019 UPDATE:Items to be examined from the 3 piles of bones in the MC Gravel Pit: 7411, 7412, 7413, 7414, 7416, 7419, 7422, 7424, 8675 (according to the attachment in KZ's motion). So these items overlap and were given back to the family: 7411, 7412, 7414, 7416, 7419.https://t.co/FgJ1Srtc9P— Lick The Knife (@RenyRoha) December 22, 2018
[WBAY] Steven Avery's attorney has filed a motion asking the circuit court to reverse his conviction for the 2005 murder of Teresa Halbach and order a new trial. The motion also requests a new judge to preside over the case.
Kathleen Zellner filed the post-conviction relief motion March 11 in Manitowoc County. The case, which had been in the appeals court, was sent back to circuit court so Zellner could file this motion.
The motion says the State of Wisconsin "spent an enormous amount of time and effort perpetrating a fraud upon Steven Avery's jury" during his 2007 trial for 1st Degree Intentional Homicide. Zellner claims that the state "created a narrative that Teresa Halbach was murdered in Mr. Avery's garage and burned in his burn pit."
Zellner says it is possible that remains found at a Manitowoc County gravel pit belonged to Teresa Halbach, and that would have poked a hole in the prosecution's theory that Halbach never left the Avery property on the day of her murder -- Oct. 31, 2005.
The state handed the gravel pit remains over to the Halbach family in 2011.
"The State, by its actions in returning Manitowoc Gravel Pit bones to the Halbach family in 2011, has implicitly admitted that the bones were not only human but that they belonged to Ms. Halbach," reads the motion.
The motion claims the State of Wisconsin violated Youngblood v. Arizona when it returned the bones to the Halbach family but failed to inform Steven Avery about it.
Zellner also states that Special Prosecutor Ken Kratz concealed that there were gravel pit bone fragments.
"Because of Prosecutor Kratz's misrepresentations to the jury, Mr. Avery's conviction must be reversed," Zellner states.
The motion also calls for Judge Angela Sutkiewicz to remove herself from presiding over the Avery case in circuit court. Zellner says Sutkiewicz lacks the ability to be impartial.
"By virtue of having presided over the prior civil suit filed against Mr. Avery by the Halbach family for the death of Teresa Halbach, Judge Sutkiewicz should recuse herself from the pending post-conviction case, and it should be reassigned to a different judge," Zellner says.
Zellner also notes that Sutkiewicz and Kratz served together on a Crime Victim's Rights Board in 2007-2008. That's during the time frame of the Avery trial.
CLICK HERE to read the full motion.
Zellner also filed exhibits to supplement the motion. CLICK HERE to view the exhibits.
Action 2 News reached out to the Wisconsin Department of Justice for statement on the new filing. We have not received a response at the time of the publication.
No future hearings have been scheduled.
- END UPDATE -
DEFENDANT-APPELLANT'S MOTION TO STAY APPEAL AND REMAND THE CAUSE FOR PROCEEDINGS ON CLAIMS FOR RELIEF IN CONNECTION WITH THE STATE'S VIOLATION OF WIS. STAT. § 968.205 AND YOUNGBLOOD V. ARIZONA
Defendant-Appellant, Steven A. Avery, Sr., ("Mr. Avery'') by his undersigned attorneys, Kathleen T. Zellner and Steven G. Richards, moves this Court to stay this appeal and remand the cause for a hearing on a claim for relief in connection with the State's violation of Wis. Stat. § 968.205 and Youngblood v. Arizona.
In support of this motion, Mr. Avery states as follows: Undersigned counsel has uncovered the State's violation of Wis. Stat. § 968.2.05 where it failed to (1) preserve certain suspected human bone evidence and (2) notify Mr. Avery and his attorneys of record of its intent to destroy such evidence.
Mr. Avery hereby moves for a remand to the circuit court to conduct proceedings consistent with the claim alleged herein.
After filing Mr. Avery's December 17, 2018, Motion, undersigned counsel discovered a previously undisclosed police report ("September 20, 2011 report"). Specifically, a third party provided counsel with a copy of the report.
The September 20, 2011, report reflects the Calumet County Sheriff''s Department's transfer of multiple suspected human bones from the Manitowoc County Gravel Pit to the Wieting Funeral Home for return to Ms. Halbach's family.
Specifically, the suspected human bones from the Manitowoc Quarry property tag numbers 7411, 7412, 7414, 7416, 7419-were returned to the Halbach family, according to the September 20, 2011 report.
The exhibits attached to Mr. Avery's December 17, 2018 Motion describe the location of the suspected human bones in the Manitowoc Gravel Pit, as reflected in Dr. Leslie Eisenberg's ("Dr. Eisenberg") report. (Group Exhibit 1 to the December 17, 2018 Motion)
In 2016, Suzanne Hagopian ("Ms. Hagopian") of the Wisconsin State Public Defender's Office ("WSPDO"), who had been Mr. Avery's prior postconviction and appellate attorney, provided to undersigned counsel's office entire file pertaining to WSPDO's representation of Mr. Avery.
The September 20, 2011 report is not present in undersigned counsel's file kept on this case. (Attached and incorporated herein as Exhibit B is the affidavit of Kurt Kingler, law clerk for undersigned counsel).
On January 3, 2019, undersigned counsel contacted Ms. Hagopian to request that she confirm whether she had ever seen the September 20, 2011 report.
Counsel has obtained an affidavit from Ms. Hagopian. (Attached and incorporated herein as Exhibit C is Ms. Hagopian's affidavit).
In her affidavit, Ms. Hagopian explains her representation of Mr. Avery began in July 2007 and ended when the Wisconsin Supreme Court denied his Petition for Review on December 14, 2011 (the Wisconsin Supreme Court's order was filed in Manitowoc County on December 15, 2011 (470:1-2)).
On September 20, 2011, Ms. Hagopian and her co-counsel, Martha Askins ("Ms. Askins"), were Mr. Avery's attorneys of record.
Ms. Hagopian has no recollection of having seen this police report before undersigned counsel delivered it to her on January 3, 2019.
Further, Ms. Hagopian does not recall having a conversation with a representative of the State pertaining to tendering items of evidence from Mr. Avery's criminal case to the family of Ms. Halbach.
Moreover, Ms. Hagopian avers that, had she seen this report or had a conversation with a representative of the State regarding the return of items of evidence to the family of Ms. Halbach, she believes she would recall it.
Attorneys Hagopian and Askins filed Mr. Avery's Wis. Stat. § 809.30(2)(h) postconviction motion on June 29, 2009. (429:1-28; 427:1-31). That motion was denied by the circuit court on January 25, 2010 (453:1-106) and Attorneys Hagopian and Askins timely appealed on February 10, 2010. (454:1-4). This Court affirmed the circuit court's order denying relief on August 24, 2011. (468:1-44).
Then, on September 20, 2011, during the pendency of Mr. Avery's appeal, the Calumet County Sheriff's Department, together with Assistant Attorneys General Thomas Fallon ("Attorney Fallon") and Norman Gahn ("Attorney Gahn"), arranged for the return of certain suspected human bones from the Manitowoc County Gravel Pit to the family of Teresa Halbach.
On September 22, 2011, Attorneys Hagopian and Askins filed their petition for review in the Wisconsin Supreme Court. (469:1-2). That petition was denied on December 14, 2011. (470:1-2).
The State, without notifying Mr. Avery and his attorneys and during the pendency of Mr. Avery's direct appeal, caused material and potentially exculpatory evidence to be transmitted to the Halbach family for its potential destruction by cremation or burial.
On January 24, 2019, undersigned counsel received her own copy of the September 20, 2011 report from the Calumet County Sheriff's Office and was able to verify the accuracy of the report provided to Ms. Hagopian.
Because the State violated Wisconsin's preservation of biological evidence statute, Mr. Avery's due process rights were per se violated. His conviction cannot stand.
Wis. Stat. § 968.205 (2001) (amended 2005) governs the preservation of physical evidence collected subject to criminal investigations.
[...]
It is beyond question that the State violated § 968.205 when it failed to (1) preserve the suspected human bone evidence and (2) notify Mr. Avery and Ms. Hagopian of its intent to do the same because the suspected human bones were biological evidence collected in the course of the State's investigation of Mr. Avery, which ultimately led to his conviction.
Additionally, the human bones were-at minimum-suspected of belonging to the victim in the crime of which Mr. Avery was convicted. Therefore, the suspected human bones recovered from the Manitowoc County Gravel Pit are properly considered within the ambit of § 968.205(2).
Because § 968.205 does not provide a remedy for convicted persons in the event of a violation, fashioning a remedy is left to the courts-an action Wisconsin courts have yet to take.
[...]
Additionally, the State acted in "bad faith" where it was on notice that the trial court had ordered preservation of certain items of DNA evidence yet proceeded to effectuate the loss of biological evidence within its control.
On April 4, 2007, the trial court entered an order for the Preservation of Blood Evidence and Independent Defense Testing. This order contemplates and allows future DNA testing by Mr. Avery. (395:1-3). In its order, the trial court gave Mr. Avery the opportunity to, at any time, submit items of evidence for DNA testing. (396:2).
It is clear that the parties have broadly construed the scope of the April 2007 order to permit testing of a variety of biological samples deemed relevant to the instant case. The State was on notice of this agreement in September 2011 when it facilitated the destruction of suspected human bones recovered in the Manitowoc County Gravel Pit.
That the State knew it bore a duty to preserve biological material at the time it facilitated the potential destruction of the suspected human bones without notifying Mr. Avery and his attorneys.
The State, by taking these actions, acted in "bad faith" and with "official animus" as defined by Youngblood and Greenwald. See, e.g., United States v. Bohl, F.3d 904 (10th Cir. 1994) (finding bad faith where government actors destroyed potentially exculpatory evidence when they were on notice that the evidence at issue should be preserved); United States v. Cooper, 983 F.2d 928 (1993) (finding bad faith where law enforcement agents destroyed evidence they knew the defendants asked to preserve).
[...]
In the instant case, the suspected human bones are "potentially useful," meaning that retesting of the suspected human bones from the Manitowoc County Gravel Pit could demonstrate Mr. Avery's alleged actual innocence.
It is indisputable that the State violated the DNA evidence preservation statute by returning the suspected human bones to the Halbach family. Mr. Avery's due process rights under Youngblood had been violated.
According to federal and state due process jurisprudence regarding the State's duty to preserve evidence, the appropriate remedy for a violation of Wisconsin's DNA evidence preservation statutes is the reversal of the criminal defendant's conviction.
Therefore, the case should be remanded to the circuit court to conduct proceedings to determine if there has been a due process violation and how that violation should be remedied.
Mr. Avery has brought this issue to the court's attention in a timely manner. He does not want to waive this issue by not addressing it at this time.
The appeal must be stayed and this issue must be remanded to the circuit court for proceedings that should include a hearing in which Deputy Jeremy Hawkins, Sgt. Inv. Mark Wiegert, Attorney Thomas Fallon, and Attorney Norman Gahn would be subjected to cross-examination concerning the illegal transmission, without notice to Mr. Avery's prior counsel, and the presumed destruction of the Manitowoc County Gravel Pit suspected human bones.
The undisclosed September 20, 2011 report contradicts Mr. Kratz's representations to the jury that "these bones in the quarry, I'm going to take 20 seconds to talk about, because the best anybody can say is that they are possible [sic] human." (716:78).
The State by its actions has implicitly admitted that the bones are not only human, but that they belong to Ms. Halbach. The State cannot credibly argue that it returned animal bones to the Halbach family for burial or cremation.
The State's actions demand that further proceedings be conducted to determine if Mr. Avery's due process rights have been violated and if the State acted in bad faith in returning the suspected human bones to the Halbach family.
Conclusion
Wherefore, undersigned counsel respectfully requests that this Court enter an order staying this appeal and remanding the cause to the circuit court for proceedings to determine whether the State has violated Wis. Stat. § 968.205 and Youngblood v. Arizona.
Dated this 24th day of January, 2019.
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/55203379e4b08b1328203a7d/t/5c4a2f4eaa4a99ab401263ab/1548365666171/2019.01.24+-+Motion+to+remand+and+stay.pdf
Unless I’ve made a boo-boo, some of the items returned to the Hallbach’s are in KZs motion to test with rapid DNA (self.TickTockManitowoc)
by Coriolana
December 18, 2018
I’ve checked CASO pages 1114-1115. The following property tag numbers were returned to the Hallbach’s on 20th Sept 2011, via the Weiting Funeral home: #8318, 7924, 7925, 7936, 7944, 8675, 7964, 8675, 7964, 6200, 6197, 8118, 6200, 6197, 8113, 8148, 8150, 8140, 7411, 7412, 7414, 7416, 7419, 7420, 7421, 7426 and 7434.
KZ has asked for these items to be examined from the Manitowoc County Pit piles (3 piles): 7411, 7412, 7413, 7414, 7416, 7419, 7422, 7424, 8675 (according to the master index of gravel pit piles in the attachment to the motion.
So these items overlap and were given back to the family: 7411, 7412, 7414, 7416, 7419.
Have I red this right? Is KZ going to want to exhume remains? Were they buried?
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/a7avmy/unless_ive_made_a_booboo_some_of_the_items/
I’ve checked CASO pages 1114-1115. The following property tag numbers were returned to the Hallbach’s on 20th Sept 2011, via the Weiting Funeral home: #8318, 7924, 7925, 7936, 7944, 8675, 7964, 8675, 7964, 6200, 6197, 8118, 6200, 6197, 8113, 8148, 8150, 8140, 7411, 7412, 7414, 7416, 7419, 7420, 7421, 7426 and 7434.
KZ has asked for these items to be examined from the Manitowoc County Pit piles (3 piles): 7411, 7412, 7413, 7414, 7416, 7419, 7422, 7424, 8675 (according to the master index of gravel pit piles in the attachment to the motion.
So these items overlap and were given back to the family: 7411, 7412, 7414, 7416, 7419.
Have I red this right? Is KZ going to want to exhume remains? Were they buried?
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/a7avmy/unless_ive_made_a_booboo_some_of_the_items/
Kathleen Zellner
ReplyDeleteVerified account
@ZellnerLaw
19 hours ago
AVERY NEWS: Today we filed our motion re the State’s violation of Wisconsin statute & 14th Amendment in giving bones back to TH family. Posted on our website. @Newsweek @guardian @TheTelegraph @lifeafterten @michellemalkin http://kathleentzellner.com #MakingAMurderer2
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/55203379e4b08b1328203a7d/t/5c4a2f4eaa4a99ab401263ab/1548365666171/2019.01.24+-+Motion+to+remand+and+stay.pdf
[–]Coriolana[S]
ReplyDeleteI’m just as confused, which is why I went to find the property tag numbers of items returned to the Hallbach’s as listed above, then when looking at the master list for the burn piles, some numbers overlap. EDIT: typo
[–]BugDog1
This seems like a bad move. Either she knows
these bones are still in evidence and weren’t returned to Halbachs
she’s using the request to highlight that they in fact did think these were human bones at multiple sites and so returned them to the Halbachs
...or she’s planning to seek an exhumation which I think would be a largely unpopular move.
[–]Coriolana[S]
I think she may want to make something out of them defying an order made in 2007 by the trial court to preserve any evidence for future DNA testing (mentioned in her motion) and the fact that they have returned likely bone fragments without proof they are of TH. Hopefully, she won’t have to go down the path of exhumation and that the remaining bones are still available for testing. When you read the description in CASO, pages 1114-1115 you’ll see they just picked out what they thought were human bones based on Dr E’s notes and photos. God know what they actually got.
[–]BugDog1
DeleteThat would be a difficult one because I imagine they could claim they were balancing victim’s rights against that order?
There are obviously many cases where families are denied a body for extended periods of time and I don’t think that’s ever a popular decision with the public but then if it’s the letter of the law and they didn’t seek the relevant permission I guess she could win that.
[–]Coriolana[S]
It may not be necessary, the remainder may be enough, but if a profile can’t be obtained, she may have to request access to the buried bones. Hopefully it won’t come to that.
[–]jamiegirl21
Wouldn’t that mean that all the bones are mixed up and how would you know which ones are from the quarry? And why would the state give them to the family from quarry if it was animal bones? Why would it even be considered evidence if they were animal bones
[–]Btrfliz23
I feel as if I may be a little confused. Has there been 3 known piles in the MCGP all this time? Or just 1 and KZ has found 2 more?
[–]Coriolana[S]
The 3 piles came up in MAM2. But only one was ever mentioned by the State during trial, if I remember correctly.
[-]magiclougie
Zellner uncovered the other two piles of human bones with cut marks discovered in the MCGP when she read Eisenberg's reports in Discovery. On one "quarry pile" with the pelvic bone was mentioned at trial, not the other two piles of human bones with cut marks,
[–]BugDog1
I think the co-ordinates of the finds were noted by LE so I assume that is where the multiple locations come from?
[–]Coriolana[S]
Yes, the coordinates were noted and are attached in KZ’s latest motion. I’m yet to see how close they were though.
[–]79sunrise
I believe two piles were around 500 yards apart, and one was about100 yards from the other. Don't quote me.
[–]Blondieblueeyes
DeleteWhat I don’t understand is why ANY of the bones not found in the burnpit or barrels was given to the halbachs.
I thought the gravel pit discoveries were ruled out by Kratz as having nothing to do with THs body.
Or am I missing something?
[–]Moonborne11
Agree. How can future DNA testing occur if the evidence is released and not preserved?
[–]katish
Agree. How can future DNA testing occur if the evidence is released and not preserved?
isnt the question more like.. why are they even giving bones to the family that were not found at SA property? i dont think KZ mentioned to test any bones than the one found on this weird area.
[–]sudden_crumpet
Maybe the whole point of Zellner's request is to highlight that not even the authorities believe their own stories about those bones?
[–]Tiger_Town_Dream
I was about to make a similar point. Maybe KZ is trying to force the State to admit that they gave those bones to the family which also forces them to admit why- that they believed the bones to be Teresa's. And if they did believe that, they have a whole lot of explaining to do.
[–]Coriolana[S]
DeleteI’m just as confused, which is why I went to find the property tag numbers of items returned to the Hallbach’s as listed above, then when looking at the master list for the burn piles, some numbers overlap. EDIT: typo
[–]BugDog1
This seems like a bad move. Either she knows
these bones are still in evidence and weren’t returned to Halbachs
she’s using the request to highlight that they in fact did think these were human bones at multiple sites and so returned them to the Halbachs
...or she’s planning to seek an exhumation which I think would be a largely unpopular move.
[–]Coriolana[S]
I think she may want to make something out of them defying an order made in 2007 by the trial court to preserve any evidence for future DNA testing (mentioned in her motion) and the fact that they have returned likely bone fragments without proof they are of TH. Hopefully, she won’t have to go down the path of exhumation and that the remaining bones are still available for testing. When you read the description in CASO, pages 1114-1115 you’ll see they just picked out what they thought were human bones based on Dr E’s notes and photos. God know what they actually got.
[–]BugDog1
That would be a difficult one because I imagine they could claim they were balancing victim’s rights against that order?
There are obviously many cases where families are denied a body for extended periods of time and I don’t think that’s ever a popular decision with the public but then if it’s the letter of the law and they didn’t seek the relevant permission I guess she could win that.
[–]Coriolana[S]
It may not be necessary, the remainder may be enough, but if a profile can’t be obtained, she may have to request access to the buried bones. Hopefully it won’t come to that.
[–]jamiegirl21
Wouldn’t that mean that all the bones are mixed up and how would you know which ones are from the quarry? And why would the state give them to the family from quarry if it was animal bones? Why would it even be considered evidence if they were animal bones
[–]Btrfliz23
I feel as if I may be a little confused. Has there been 3 known piles in the MCGP all this time? Or just 1 and KZ has found 2 more?
[–]Coriolana[S]
The 3 piles came up in MAM2. But only one was ever mentioned by the State during trial, if I remember correctly.
[-]magiclougie
Zellner uncovered the other two piles of human bones with cut marks discovered in the MCGP when she read Eisenberg's reports in Discovery. On one "quarry pile" with the pelvic bone was mentioned at trial, not the other two piles of human bones with cut marks,
[–]BugDog1
I think the co-ordinates of the finds were noted by LE so I assume that is where the multiple locations come from?
[–]Coriolana[S]
Yes, the coordinates were noted and are attached in KZ’s latest motion. I’m yet to see how close they were though.
[–]79sunrise
I believe two piles were around 500 yards apart, and one was about100 yards from the other. Don't quote me.
[–]normab8tes
DeleteI have posted this previously, so just in case you missed it.
Wisconsin Retention of Crime Law - Wis. Stat. §§ 165.81, 757.54, 968.205, 978.08. Until every person in custody as a result of the conviction, adjudication, or commitment has reached his or her discharge date. Exception if Petition/ Notice is filed.
[–]Coriolana[S]
Right, I wasn’t talking about the legalities of this, and never have, as I know nothing about US law. I was just pointing out that some of the items KZ was seeking to have tested in her latest motion, have been returned to the Halbachs,
[–]normab8tes
Yes I know that you were. I was just saying either way, the law doesn't allow LE to give them back without a court judgement. So the items Halbach's have were illegally obtained if a court order is not found. Plus, if the remains are buried they no longer belong to Halbach's they belong to the state. And they don't have a say as to whether KZ can have them for testing or not.
[–]Coriolana[S]
You may be right about the buried bones. I have no idea about that.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/a7avmy/unless_ive_made_a_booboo_some_of_the_items/
[–]J4_C4
ReplyDeleteBrendan made a claim that Steven buried some near his burn pit. He also said Steven told him he put some in a 5 gallon bucket and disposed of them in Radandt's gravel pit (fairly near Avery's house). He made no mention whatsoever to distributing bones to the MCGP.
He identified it on a map.
Brendan never specified "Radandt's GP". He just showed W&F that he dumped them behind his house "here".
"Here" clearly being Radandt's GP.
The MCGP is a mile or so from where he was pointing.
Don't take my word for it though, go watch his confession.
Brendan showed Weigert this area on a map he drew. Weigert asked if he saw Steven dispose of the bones here and Brendan says No. Weigert asks Brendan how he knows Steven did that? Brendan says because Steven told me. Brendan though never verbally specifies the Radandt GP. He only visually specifies it through the map he drew. The MCGP is too far in relation to where he pointed.
Brendan specifically points on his map to an area behind Steven's house and says "It would be like over here somewhere." The MCGP is nowhere in relation to where he points. Oh and don't misinterpret what I'm saying. I don't believe anything Brendan says in relation to this matter. My point only is that if one is to believe what he is saying to be factual then he never does ever reference disposing bones in the MCGP.
You have to watch Brendan's confession. I matched up the transcript in CASO to the video. They have him draw things and then they ask him about where Steven threw the bones that he placed in the bucket and he specifies it was just behind his house. Right behind his house is Radandt's pits.
I think they would easily showcase where he was pointing to and by putting him on the stand it would clarify it even more. There is no way the prosecution would convince anyone that he's pointing just behind Avery's house and that means he's referring to the far off in the distance MCGP. Anyways, in regards to the up votes, down votes. I really don't bother with it other than to up set some vile guilters. I'm here to discuss the case not win a popularity contest.
[–]dugdiggins
DeleteThis is correct.
The MCGP, where the three piles of human bones with cut marks were found, is a mile or so from Avery's property.
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Avery's+Auto+Salvage/Bone+Pile,+Gibson,+WI+54241/@44.2500488,-87.7005594,2246m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x88032f8641fb3e73:0xb85fa553298bb0bf!2m2!1d-87.6905912!2d44.2545967!1m5!1m1!1s0x8803256b737e0367:0x1dd99981956cdfee!2m2!1d-87.7022805!2d44.2454061!3e2
CASO Page 637
FASSBENDER: What did you guys do with Teresa's body after that, after it was burned?
BRENDAN: I don't know, I didn't, I didn't do nothin' with it.
FASSBENDER: Did Steven do anything with it?
BRENDAN: Yeah. but I don't know what.
FASSBENDER: How do you, what do you mean by yes, but you don't know what?
BRENDAN: Like he tried to bury it or somethin'.
FASSBENDER: How'd he do that?
BRENDAN: With the shovel.
FASSBENDER: Did he take some of her body out of that fire pit?
BRENDAN: (nods "yes") Yeah.
FASSBENDER: He did. How tell me how he did that.
BRENDAN: Like when the bones were left behind, he would like try to take the shovel and try to break the bones apart and he would bury 'em, like right in front of the fire almost.
WIEGERT: What do you mean he'd bury them right by the fire?
BRENDAN: Like he dug a hole and he'd put the bones in there and he buried it.
WIEGERT: Where in relation to the fire?
BRENDAN: Like two, three feet away.
WIEGERT: Which way from the fire?
BRENDAN: Like towards the garage.
WIEGERT: OK.
FASSBENDER: Did you see him do that?
BRENDAN: (shakes head "no") I just heard that.
FASSBENDER: Heard it from who?
BRENDAN: Him.
FASSBENDER: Oh. So he told you that he used the shovel to break up bones?
BRENDAN: Yeah. (nods "yes")
FASSBENDER: And then buried some of the bones? (Brendan nods "yes") Did he take some of her bones some. Anywhere else?
BRENDAN: On the other side of the, like that, there was like in the back of the yard there was like this steep hill there, like in the pit, there was some there that he threw there.
FASSBENDER: OK, we're gonna, we're in a little bit, we're gonna have you draw on some sketches and stuff and we're a, we're gonna wanna these places. How do you know that there were some bones there?
BRENDAN: He told me that he threw some there.
FASSBENDER: Did he tell you how he did that?
BRENDAN: He had 'em in a bucket.
FASSBENDER: And what I'm understanding is then in the back of both your yards or his yards, down toward into the pit, over that area?
BRENDAN: In like Radandt's Pit.
FASSBENDER: Oh, Radandt's pit, (Brendan nods "yes") not into your ah, (Brendan shakes head "no") the salvage yard area? (Brendan shakes head "no") You think you'll be able to show
us that?
BRENDAN: (nods "Yes") Yeah.
FASSBENDER: Anything else that you did with the bones (Brendan shakes head "no") that he told you or that you helped him, di-did you help him do any of this?
BRENDAN: (shakes head "no") No.
And like you said:
> I don't believe anything Brendan says in relation to this matter. My point only is that if one is to believe what he is saying to be factual then he never does ever reference disposing bones in the MCGP.
[–]J4_C4
DeleteOh see I never went further down in that exchange. He does specify Radandt's pit. Interesting. A while later in this interview they come back to this and they have him draw a series of drawings and here he just points to the area in which Steven dumped a 5 gallon bucket of bones. In the video of this interview you can clearly see it is in Radandt's pit despite him verbally saying so.
I think they would easily showcase where he was pointing to and by putting him on the stand it would clarify it even more. There is no way the prosecution would convince anyone that he's pointing just behind Avery's house and that means he's referring to the far off in the distance MCGP. Anyways, in regards to the up votes, down votes. I really don't bother with it other than to up set some vile guilters. I'm here to discuss the case not win a popularity contest.
You have to watch Brendan's confession. I matched up the transcript in CASO to the video. They have him draw things and then they ask him about where Steven threw the bones that he placed in the bucket and he specifies it was just behind his house. Right behind his house is Radandt's pits.
I think Zellner's goal was to try to prove those bones were TH's and then she was going to submit in her motion to supplement the record a witness who corroborates seeing two individuals having a fire in the MCGP. There is no way the Court could ignore this.
Brendan never specified "Radandt's GP". He just showed W&F that he dumped them behind his house "here". Here clearly being Radandt's GP. The MCGP is way far from where he was pointing. Don't take my word for it though, go watch his confession.
There seems to be some confusion here. Brendan showed Weigert this area on a map he drew. Weigert asked if he saw Steven dispose of the bones here and Brendan says No. Weigert asks Brendan how he knows Steven did that? Brendan says because Steven told me. Brendan though never verbally specifies the Radandt GP. He only visually specifies it through the map he drew. The MCGP is too far in relation to where he pointed.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/aaovvb/solution_to_kzs_problem_have_dasseys_team_file/
[–]tuckerm33
ReplyDeleteLet's face it. They were not likely Teresa's bones, they were Carmen's and that's why the State gave them over to the Halbachs.
Look at it this way. The State had two choices.
Retain the bones in evidence and then take the chance of getting caught some day when new DNA testing proves them to be Carmen and not Teresa, proving the State framed Steven.
Get rid of the bones, give them to the Halbachs and basically destroy evidence and pray no one ever asks for the bones for DNA testing down the road. However, even if the situation arises, as it now has, they know at least there's no way to prove they planted Carmen's bones and framed Steve. The most they will get in trouble with is destroying evidence. They will not even suffer any punishment for this as there is not legislative remedy for this violation.
The point is, the State knew that either way, Steven would likely go free if this came up years down the road, but option two was the lesser of two evils for them as now there is no "evidence" of their framing and planting of the bones. Much harder to sue them and they likely won't face jail time.
It is painfully clear that the did indeed frame Steven and that they deliberately destroyed any biological "evidence" of it.
I'm not suggesting this means she is alive, I'm suggesting that they used bones that were not hers to frame Steven.
Teresa may have very well been killed and cremated in the smelter by Skinney,(Scott) as the letter said.
The State though wanted to pin it on Steven and they had no bones. They needed bones to make it more visual and believable for the jury.
They borrowed some from Carmen to do the job. Carmen was creamated too, paid for by Calumet. Don't forget that. Take a few body pieces, burn them in the quarry, plant them in the pit, avoid letting the coroner on site to look at them, then presto magic, make them disappear before anyone can prove they weren't Teresa.
Hocus pocus
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/ajpiu3/prediction/
[–]sunshine061973
ReplyDeleteNo what i think the issue is is actually 14th amendment related: while SA (and BD) had legal motions before the court the state without notifying or getting approval (which is required) removed biological evidence of exculpatory value and disposed of it (delivered it to funeral home).
They didn't tell the defendants or their attorneys.
They did however generate a police report.
That police report WAS NOT given to KZ when it was requested in her FOIA request.
It was somehow given in an independent FOIA request made and put on the stevenaverycase.org website.
A 3rd party provided a copy to KZ who verified authenticity and the fact that no it didn't come thru in their request.
The fact that they both had appeals pending at the time the CASO gave bones away makes it a right to due process violation. Which can cause the case to be thrown out and lead to a new trial.
The fact that they didnt give her a copy of the police report speaks volumes to the argument the sweaty stain made about how to believe the cops planted evidence you have to believe that multiple agencies were involved. This goes to show that they were IMO.
There's a great video explaining the legal ramifications and KZs motion linked below. This guy has gotten together some very knowledgable and talented people who are working together...
https://youtu.be/_xLI0ByNux0
[–]tuckerm33
DeleteYou would think it was over. The problem is WI has judges like Flowers.
We've seen her in action before. I mean for god's sake, KZ has spelled it out in black and white for the court.
This is the law, these are the cases supporting the law, this is the remedy. Period.
What happens though is the judge ignores the law and comes up with some ridiculous reason to sidestep it. Now, the judge may be wrong and probably is wrong, but it doesn't matter. All the judge is trying to do is bury the issue and keep it circulating through the court and forcing KZ to have to keep refiling.
The State will try to keep this thing in the court for as long as it can while trying to avoid and actual hearing where Fallon and all of his patsies ever have to answer any questions under oath.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/ajp4y7/so_basically/
No pictures of the quarry burn site , no police reports written (to my knowledge). I think TH remains were removed discreetly from the quarry , and everyone with knowledge (including the Halbachs) , bought into LE argument to remain silent , because a "body" on SA property made for a stronger case. Halbachs went along with the plan to ensure justice for their daughter , and LE went ahead with planting Carmen Boutwell's "cremated" remains in SA's pit once they commandeered the property on Nov 5.
ReplyDeleteNo pictures of either site , no report written on quarry find , coroner banned from SA property after bone fragments found , and the fact that remains were in "cremated" condition ...? Paints an obvious picture , IMO.
[–]BeatingOffADeadHorse
My super super super crazy theory is that Manitowoc county paid off the Halbach family a lot of money. A lot of money but significantly less money than what they would owe Avery if he was compensated.
And that maybe they utilized some kind of witness protection program to change her identity and get her out of the public eye.
I wanna know what year that recording of Teresa saying that she lived a full life if she were to die young or something, I wanna know when that was recorded.
[–]KennythePrize
Kratz claimed he was trying to spare the family pain. Given the press conference it's pretty much bullshit.
What I was pointing out was that in the email to Culhane he remarks how local opinion was swayed by the way they presented information about the bones. That was February 7th, less than a month before his press conference. When you take that into account with other factors, like they knew that parts of the confession couldn't have happened, he doesn't have a leg to stand on.
Everyone knows what he was doing. The only question has been how do you prove it? Him acknowledging that he was keenly aware how local perception could be manipulated before giving a ridiculous press conference is a really good place to start.
[–]harmoni-pet
For me, the worst part about the press conference is the tone. Kratz begins by dramatically asking for children to leave the room. Then proceeded to read the criminal complaint like its a ghost story. If he was trying to spare the family any pain, he did it in the most backwards, tasteless way possible.
[–]MzOpinion8d
He proceeded to read the criminal complaint like it was his own submission to an erotic fiction publication...
[–]OliviaD2
Not that he would tell the truth, but perhaps there is some correspondence? It was probably a phone call :P. Sheriff Pagel, per the news reporter (I'm talking Jan 19 PC) called in the big story. I believe "someone" gave Pagel the information to give them - it is too "accurately wrong" to be a mistake. They say 'FBI confirms' (which is close, at least they have a good test that suggests), "matched to mother" correct. but then "one in a billion". That's not from the FBI report. That's from SHERRY's report. Of the results that CAN'T ID the remains, per lab protocol, her test was INCONCLUSIVE.
IMO, this is a "Kratzian maneuver". He is intentionally intertwining the results.. people will remember "confirmed" and "one in a billion".. public perception being what they will.
There must be people who will talk.. secretaries.. scorned lovers?....
I'd like to see the REST of those emails.. why was just that one put in evidence? And it wasn't very flattering.... Someone forget to shred?
[–]OliviaD2
DeleteIt's complicated. I would really need to see the raw data to know just how bad that profile is.... But.. there are more "missing" loci, than not. The "test" if you will. did not work because the sample was degraded..(you can tell this because the only the shortest loci got results, because the longer ones were broken up).. which means there could be problems with the amplification step, (when many copies are made of the DNA, there are factors that can mess this up)..
This test should have been reported as INCONCLUSIVE. Even the lab protocol did not allow results this poor to be called a "match" to anything.
You can not honestly say anything other than inconclusive. The mtDNA test is stronger, at least in links the purported remain to the mother., therefore , for a missing persons case, that would be considered a strong ID. FBI didn't confirm that Bone matched a standard from TH though, which bugs me, seems like you would check... damn government labs.....
What the family should do.. for peace.. if they want to know, is try to get whatever material they can, try to get someone to tell them the truth about what came from where, take it to a decent private lab and have it tested. There is more sensitive testing.
Or, if they are good with the results.... they are good. This case is actually an incredible (intellectually) ethical debate... perfect for an ethics committee.....
With the mt DNA supporting them Culhane's results, one can have more confidence. Without that... only inconclusive... It is not black and white..... one in a billion means nothing when you want to know if it is your daughter...
[–]ixid
You're assuming the test result was legitimate, unless the charred flesh item BZ can be tested again and shown to contain DNA that would seem questionable given the level of possible contamination and evidence planting as well as the broken chain of custody.
Picture of the bones in a box:
http://imgur.com/yZongQJ
[–]Strikeout21
I don't think I'm the only one who thought those bones (and the box) were MUCH larger than what they are. I have no doubt that the intention of LE was to fool the public into believing they had close to a whole skeleton, when in fact.. they had less than 4 measuring cups. This is why there are no pictures. They wouldn't have been as dramatic when shown being held up by a pair of tweezers as they are in (what looks like) a big huge box. This whole thing is just so damn unreal.
[–]7-pairs-of-panties
If they only had a couple of measuring cups full of bones it shows a few things
1) TH was not burned there 2) Its very possible that those bones aren't TH's. 3) If it is TH it shows the framing. They would have had to have know who killed and burned her and where, than moved them or some where they wanted them 4) Halbach family was given bones back to them by Weigert. Since they had so little does that mean there is nothing left in evidence to test? Maybe we'll find some rocks there? 5) Holy crap! I can't believe there is still so much to discover w/ the case!
Halbach's remains confirmed
ReplyDeletePost-Crescent
Published Jan. 7, 2016
This story was originally published by The Post-Crescent on Jan. 19, 2006
CHILTON — Nearly 12 weeks after Teresa Halbach disappeared, sophisticated DNA testing by the FBI has confirmed what law enforcement officials and Halbach's family knew.
The charred remains found in the Avery Salvage Yard the week after she disappeared are Halbach's.
That adds another dimension, since DNA scientists at the State Crime Lab had earlier said the chances that the remains were not Halbach's were one in 1 billion.
"It just confirms what the nuclear DNA testing the State Crime Lab said," said Calumet County Dist. Atty. Ken Kratz, the special prosecutor in the Manitowoc County homicide case against Steven Avery.
He said the findings don't change his prosecution of Avery on charges of first-degree intentional homicide, mutilation of a corpse and possession of firearms by a felon.
Avery pleaded not guilty to those charges on Tuesday.
Halbach's brother, Mike, told The Post-Crescent the FBI findings were not a surprise, but should help in the case against Avery.
"It just confirms what we already knew at least a month ago when we saw the death certificate," he said. "(The FBI and State Crime Lab) both came up with the same results. It should eliminate any talk about her not being out there."
He said the family, which had a memorial service for Teresa in November, plans to bury the remains when they are finally released by the court.
But he said the family doesn't know if that will be soon, after Avery's attorneys have a chance to have evidence tested, or later.
Avery's attorneys, assistant state public defenders Erik Loy and Craig Johnson, did not return calls asking for comment.
Calumet County Sheriff Jerry Pagel announced the findings Thursday after receiving a report from the FBI lab in Quantico, Va.
Halbach, a 25-year-old freelance photographer from Calumet County, disappeared Oct. 31 and was last seen at the Avery Salvage Yard near Mishicot.
Avery, 43, was released from prison in 2003 after serving 18 years for a rape he was eventually cleared of through use of DNA evidence.
The identification came as Avery's family works to find enough property to secure a bond.
He continues to be held in lieu of a $500,000 bond, but Manitowoc County Judge Patrick this week said he would consider a surety, or property, bond rather than cash if Avery's family can show sufficient equity in property.
While the family said they believe the salvage yard and a cabin they own near Crivitz would be worth more than $500,000, Kratz said the parties will be back in court to contest the surety if the family posts it.
Property tax records list the market value for the 36.5-acre salvage yard at $225,042, and the adjacent home and 1.3 acres of land at $151,130.
Chuck Avery said the family has not yet arranged for the bail.
"We're still working on it," he said. "It will probably be next week."
https://www.postcrescent.com/story/news/local/steven-avery/2016/01/07/halbachs-remains-confirmed/78436830/
Key Points from Motion to Stay and and what happens next (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeleteby tlp70
I haven't posted in awhile, but a few people asked me to share this here, so I am. This is by no means an exhaustive breakdown of the Motion to Stay and Remand. It just covers some of the key points and answers some questions about what is next.
* This is much different than the previous Stay and Remand Motion. KZ is not asking for any testing or requesting anything that would require initiating a separate statutory procedure. This is a constitutional issue that needs to be addressed in a 974.06 motion, which is what is currently pending. The Court should grant the motion since it could be a due process violation to deny Steve the opportunity to add this constitutional claim.
*KZ was not aware of the disposal of the bones and did not have pages 1114 and 1115 of the CASO report. The report was never given to Steve's previous attorney, so it was not part of the case file the former attorney forwarded to KZ. Steve was not aware of the disposal, either.
* There is no remedy listed in the Preservation Statute; therefore, there is no clear cut definition of the relief that is possible if the statute is violated. The Preservation statute (968.025) was enacted in 2001 and there has been no precedential case on relief since it was enacted, so KZ is relying on 3 pre-statute cases (2 federal cases and 1 WI case) as the basis for her arguments.
*There is essentially a 2 prong test used to determine if there is a constitutional violation of the due process clause of the 14th amendment. A defendant's due process rights are violated if the police: (1) failed to preserve the evidence that is apparently exculpatory; or (2) acted in bad faith by failing to preserve evidence which is potentially exculpatory.
*If disposal of evidence is merely negligent, it will not be considered an action made in "bad faith."
*KZ's arguments include: the timing of the disposal is suspect since Steve's case had not reached it's legal finality. Steve's direct appeal had been denied by the Court of Appeals, but he had not yet filed his Petition for Review by the Supreme Court. (** Side note: Brendan's case was not even that far along in the appellate process. His case was still pending in the Court of Appeals when the bones were disposed of).
*The bones are material to the case since the Prosecution relied heavily on the location of the burn pit and the cremains as "proof" that Steve was guilty during the trial. The defense noted the importance of identifying the bones in the quarry because if they did belong Teresa, Steve could not be guilty based on the State's narrative.
*The DNA testing statute (974.07) specifically allows for post-conviction DNA testing. When combined with the Preservation Statute, it creates 3 presumptions: 1. That the biological evidence is material to the case. 2. All biological evidence collected is "potentially useful." 3. Every violation of the statute constitutes "bad faith."
*By returning the bones to the Halbach family, the State has implicitly implied that the bones are not only human, but that they belong to Teresa.
There is no reason why the CoA should deny the Stay and Remand. It is a potential constitutional violation that needs to be presented in a 974.06 motion. Since that is the motion pending, the court should allow this addition. If they don't, they are opening Steve up to an unfair waiver issue. Once the case is remanded, the court should order a hearing on the issue since it will be ruling on a subjective component of a statute. The State needs to explain their reasoning for disposing of the bones. They could do it in a response to the motion, but since several people were involved with the disposal, the issue practically demands a hearing.
DeleteThe State has 11 days (Feb 4th) to respond to the Motion, but the CoA can rule prior to that. The Motions Judge can decide the motion on his own or he can refer it to the rest of the panel. Because of his prior association with Steve, Mark Gundrum would have to recuse himself if he's the Motions Judge or from any panel discussion. If the CoA grants the Remand, the State would have 11 days to file a Motion for Reconsideration. The remaining procedure depends on the Court of Appeals exact ruling.
Nothing will be due now on Feb 1st. The filing of the brief will be stayed pending the outcome of this motion. If it's denied, they'll most likely give KZ another 30-40 days to file, even though she shouldn't need it. If the motion is granted, the court will set the rules of procedure for the remand.
On remand, if judge S denies the claim, this issue will then be added to the current appeal and the briefing schedule will resume. If judge S grants a hearing and rules in Steve's favor, his conviction will be overturned and the State will be given a specific timeframe in which to either appeal the decision, inititate proceedings for a re-trial or release him. They would appeal the decision and then the case would go back to the Court of Appeals.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/ajtrte/key_points_from_motion_to_stay_and_and_what/
During the 2005 trial, this transfer info is on paper. Kratz sent cover memos with every bit of information sent to Buting/Strang. We have those. The last memo in that package was in March 2007 at the end of the trial.
ReplyDeleteThe last 10 pages of the CASO file are quite interesting. Most were added after the trial. The question becomes exactly when that happened, regardless of the date of the report. One would almost think, these would all be supplemental reports but they aren't.
The last 2 pages of CASO were not in the report KZ has. She got the copy of CASO his prior attorney’s had and they didn’t have it. We have had that report all along, and I wish I knew she didn’t have it cause we’ve always known those bones were long gone. Steven never knew. He just recently found out that the bones were given back to family in 2011. That’s the first he heard of it.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/ajo0zi/pattern_of_conduct_by_wisconsin_officials/
[–]PetrichorGirl
ReplyDeleteIt seems like there could be several explanations for this outcome.
And those explanations need to be analyzed in court via a re-trial. Not by people on Reddit or Twitter.
If the state presented a narrative at trial that SA killed & burned TH on his property and new evidence comes to light that significantly contradicts that narrative, it's not enough that some people on the internet say "but there are possible explanations that could mean he still did it" for the conviction to stand. While those internet commenters might be right, only a court can evaluate this.
Therefore the conviction should be vacated and the charges should be re-examined at a re-trial. And sure, if it turns out there is some explanation that shows SA is guilty, and this can be proven beyond reasonable doubt, let the chips fall where they may. But only in a properly convened court. (Which means a court where the prosecution actually obeys the law!)
And if the state doesn't wish to proceed with a re-trial because they don't actually have any evidence that isn't completely fabricated and they know they will be torn to shreds in court, that is how this saga will legitimately be resolved. Justice.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/alvgjs/jerome_buting_tweet_explaining_states_response_to/
[–]stefanclimbrunner
ReplyDelete1.) KZ filed a motion for post conviction relief in 2017 to get a new trial
2.) She amended that with supplemental motions containing new evidence
3.) Judge AS for the circuit court denied the motion for post conviction relief in October 2017.
4.) KZ filed a motion for reconsideration to make AS change her erroneous denial
5.) That motion was supplemented.
6.) AS did not react.
7.) Because of that KZ started the appeal (against AS's October 2017 denial) at the Wisconsin Court of Appeals.
8.) Then she asked the WCOA to halt the appeal, in order to introduce the Dassey computer searches as well as the Velie CD into the record (which meant at the Circuit Court level) and claim a Brady violation because of it.
9.) The WCOA agreed and halted the appeal while holding control over it.
10.) KZ Introduced the BoD Computer searches and Velie CD at the circuit court and claimed the Brady violation there.
11.) AS denied the introduction of this suppressed evidence.
12.) The appeal technically continued.
13.) KZ wrote a motion to halt it again, to subject the bones from the quarry to RAPID DNA testing for identification. This time the WCOA denied to halt it.
14.) KZ in the aftermath of 13.) discovered the evidence destruction i.e. bone release and again wrote a motion to halt the ongoing appeal (she had to, because she had to introduce it via the circuit Court again). The WCOA granted that and made clear that it expected a hearing at the circuit court level.
15.) KZ wrote the respective motion to the circuit court, and AS denied it in August 2019, after 149 days of paralysis without any hearing.
16.) Now the original appeal (against the October 2017 denial and everything that followed) continues and KZ will finally have the chance to file her brief on October 10, 2019.
So this is the BIG ONE
No appeal has been followed through, filed or denied yet, no other judge ruled on the content or merit of the motions that KZ presented than one person: AS.
So we are actually just leaving the Circuit Court level.
And: The WCOA allowed KZ to substantially surpass the word limit for the brief as well as giving here leave to present every bit of exonerating evidence, even new one, within that brief. The WCOA will read that brief, all that motions, take its time (unfortunately) and with high probability vacate AS denials and either order an evidentiary hearing or even vacate SA's conviction and order a new trial.
https://old.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/d2vhhu/i_know_im_gonna_get_alot_of_hate_for_this_butthis/