Carmen Boutwell was a 25-year-old woman who died in Manitowoc County on the day that Teresa was reported missing, 11/3/05. Pfeffer funeral home, where her body was taken immediately after her funeral on 11/8/05, is owned by Mike Bushman's wife. Retired MTSO deputy Mike Bushman lead the team that discovered the potential burial site on Kuss Road on November 11/7/05 (he ran the K-9 unit until his retirement and then became a reserve deputy for MTSO). Bushman was one of the deputies who arrested Avery in 1985 for the sexual assault of Penny Beernsten. Also, he was the first deputy to respond to the 1999 hit-and-run death of Ricky Hochstetler.
#MakingaMurder #OnThisDay 2005 TH bones apparently found on ASY. CB funeral her cremation to follow after service, WCCA logged CB’s dismissed charges. CB family would not receive her cremains for weeks after service. - Novias, Twitter, November 8, 2017
#MakingAMurderer #onthisday 2005— Novias (@novias_info) November 3, 2017
CB - 8:30 am found dead
TH - 5:30 pm reported missing
StevenAvery - 6:34 pm listed as MURDER suspect
Details on Carmen's death at the 32-minute mark in the video above.
There is simply no evidence that bones were found during the investigation. No one documented the bones on site at any of the three locations where they were allegedly found. Not a single photo exists. No one documented the “charred material” before it was shoveled up and tossed into boxes. The FBI and crime lab reports didn’t even designate the shin bone as bone. If true that no bones were found, one can only speculate about the origin of the tissue sent to the labs. Clearly there were problems identifying the remains as Teresa Halbach’s, though one wouldn’t know that from trial testimony or media reports. The defense accepted Culhane’s report as proof that Teresa’s body was found. How can it be trusted when there is a huge problem with the chain of custody? If Dr. Eisenberg shipped it directly to the FBI as stated, how did Culhane test it at all?
The fact is the remains (if there were any found to begin with) were never conclusively identified and that means the fraud in this case may be much bigger than anyone could have imagined. Hopefully at some point Avery’s attorneys will look into this matter. It is too important to overlook. [Source]
Dead/Missing/Framed
What was really going on in Manitowoc?
November 3, 2005 was a seemingly busy day for Manitowoc and surrounding areas. Carmen Boutwell was found of a suspicious drug overdose that morning at approximately 8:30 am. Teresa Halbach is reported missing later that day at approximately 5:00 pm and Steven Avery shows on the Global Subject Activity Report Summary as HOMICIDE SUSPECT at 6:34 pm.
Can these three events be connected? It certainly looks as though they can.
In October of 2004 Steven Avery had filed lawsuit in regards to his innocence of the 85 case where he was falsely accused of rape. This was also around the same time frame that TH started working for AutoTrader and one of her clients was Steven Avery. She had been to his property many times leading up to her disappearance.
When we look at occurrences that happened leading up to year after the law suit being filed a deposition was taking place those mentioned below had been thru the deposition process.
05/12/05 - Special Agents AL and DS are deposed regarding SA 1985 case. AL testifies that "it appears that there was no real investigation done," and the police "had a suspect and they were going to make it work." Special Agent DS also states that "the sheriff told the DA not to screw this one up because the sheriff wanted SA convicted of this crime." http://stevenaverytrial.com/
09/08/05 - DJ, Assistant DA for Manitowoc County, has a telephone conversation with Chief Deputy Gene Kusche. In that conversation, GK tells DJ that Sergeant Andy Colborn disclosed that Gregory Allen might be responsible for Avery's 1985 conviction, denoting that GK might have known Steven Avery wasn't guilty. 09/22/05 - MR, Manitowoc County District Attorney, is deposed and acknowledges communications with Sergeant AC and Lieutenant Jame Lenk regarding SA’s case. He states that he provided this information to the Attorney General's office, but no record exists of MR doing so. He also confirms that DJ spoke with GK regarding the 1995 phone call. 10/11/05 - Lieutenant JL is deposed and acknowledges the phone call from Brown County in 1995. 10/11/05 - Sandra Morris is deposed regarding her 1985 complaint against Steven Avery. 10/13/05 - Sheriff Ken Peterson is deposed and denies any knowledge of evidence that could have cleared Steven Avery of the 1985 conviction. 10/13/05 - Sergeant AC states under oath that he doesn't recall speaking with anyone else regarding SA case. 10/13/05 - Judy Dvorak is deposed and acknowledges that she suggested that SA looked like the description provided by Penny Beerntsen 10/26/05 - Chief Deputy of Manitowoc County, GK, provides deposition regarding why his sketch used in the 1985 PB case (supposedly drawn based on PB memory of her attacker) looks nearly identical to SA mug shot from January 1985. GK denies that he had access to the mug shot before making the sketch. GK framed the sketch and displayed it for nearly 20 years. GK also questions the validity of the DNA evidence in the SA case.
October 10, 2005 - was this the test run?
1. Warrant issued October 10, 2005 for Carmen Boutwell's arrest
https://wcca.wicourts.gov/caseDetails.do;jsessionid=1FB01A0C071E340DB6CD1315968E172E.render6?caseNo=2005CF000341&countyNo=36&cacheId=A5587DAFB43FFED9A7E1F5AE65F0597E&recordCount=6&offset=3&mode=details&submit=View+Case+Details
2. Warrant filed Oct 10, 2005 for Carmen Boutwell
Warrant served Oct 12, 2005
Bail/Bond Hearing Oct 13, 2005
Initial appearance Oct 17, 2005
Notice entered Oct 2005 - Review is set for Nov 3, 2005 @ 8:30 am
3. Teresa Halbach is scheduled with AutoTrader and has an appointment with SA at salvage yard.
4. Ryan Hillegas - speaks with TH over the phone for 17 minutes the evening of Oct 10, 2005: note he called or received calls from TH (If you look at the phone records of RH you will see a pattern Oct 10/11 & Oct 30/31
RH phone record call patterns do seem quite similar for both Monday the 10th and Monday the 31.
Monday October 10 2005 8:13 AM Voice
Monday October 10 2005 3:53 PM Incoming Mrc
Monday October 10 2005 5:45 PM 2 DM
Monday October 10 2005 6:20 PM Incoming 17 TH
Monday October 10 2005 6:46 PM MK
Tuesday October 11 2005 6:40 AM MK
Tuesday October 11 2005 7:56 AM Oshkosh
Tuesday October 11 2005 11:31 AM MK
Tuesday October 11 2005 11:43 AM Outgoing TH
The Fateful final 48 hours:
October 30 2005 1:26 PM 1 SB
October 30 2005 1:35 PM 2 SB
October 30 2005 3:30 PM 1 VIDEO
October 31 2005 9:10 AM Incoming 8 DM
October 31 2005 9:41 AM Incoming 2 Unknown
October 31 2005 3:48 PM 1 Voice
October 31 2005 3:50 PM CM
October 31 2005 6:01 PM Incoming 2 Unknown
October 31 2005 6:02 PM Incoming 23 Unknown
October 31 2005 6:25 PM 3 Unknown
October 31 2005 7:19 PM Incoming 3 Unknown
October 31 2005 7:36 PM 2 Unknown
October 31 2005 7:37 PM 2 SB
October 31 2005 7:47 PM Incoming 5 SB
What was Carmen Boutwell doing leading up to October 31, 2005?
Prior to October 31, 2005, CB had met with Law Enforcement days prior to her death. Her grandmother had driven her to an out of the place location where they met LE and CB sat in the back seat of LE’s car refusing to tell them what they wanted to hear. She was nervous and anxious about this meeting.
On the day of October 31, 2005, CB's family tells me that she was attending school in prep to attend college and had came home for lunch that day and spoke with her mom about what she was doing for Halloween. CB loved Halloween and she loved shelling out candy to the local kids. She told her mom that she was staying home that night and would look forward to her mom stopping by with her little brother in costume. Unfortunately she never spoke with her again and did not make it over that night to see her.
On the day of October 31, 2005, TH is working her Monday at AutoTrader and has an appointment at salvage yard with SA to take photo of his sister's van.
October 31 Timeline detailed on reddit (angieb15) with many great links as reference:
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/4kvwfc/october_31_2005_timeline/
November 3, 2005
On November 3, 2005, at approximately 8:30 am, CB is found dead. CB lived in an upstairs apartment and her grandmother lived downstairs. CB’s grandmother had gone upstairs and knocked on the door to wake CB and she did not answer. A few minutes later an unknown female alerted CB’s grandmother that CB may be dead. The grandmother went upstairs where she found CB sitting on the floor leaning against the stereo and unresponsive. MSCO was contacted and responded. Conversations between MCSO and CB’s family immediately ensued and her family was told she had OD’d. The family, of course, was devastated. MCSO immediately discussed that they would assist the family with her funeral arrangements. The family had paid for CB’s funeral, however. Even before CB's body was removed from her apartment MCSO told the family that they should have her cremated. They advised the family that an autopsy would be done immediately and that they would help with the arrangements for cremation. The autopsy was completed November 4th and CB’s funeral was November 8th. Her family remembers placing her in the back of the hurst shortly after 1 pm on November 8th, where she was taken to be cremated. It took 3 weeks for her cremains to be returned to the family. CB’s family questioned her death a few times to LE and were told that she was a drug addict and to get over it, and that finding her killer was virtually impossible. LE never investigated CB suspicious drug death! MSCO stated in the news article that the case was still open.
On November 3, 2005, at approximately 5:00 pm Teresa Halbach is reported missing.
Timeline detailed on reddit (angieb15) with many great links as reference:
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/4kwb3d/november_3_2005_timeline/
On November 3, 2005, no time listed on report for Teresa Halbach's RAV4. It is listed as in custody on November 3, 2005.
Source link page 3:
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/MTSO-Summary-Report-on-Homicide-Investigation.pdf
On November 3, 2005, at 6:34 pm, approximately 2 1/5 hours after TH missing person report was filed, SA was documented as TH murder suspect. NOVEMBER 3, 2005 @ 18:34 hours Global Subject Activity Report
On November 3, 2005, Dave Remiker - Report shows that he was not working on November 3, 2005:
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/CASO-Investigative-Report.pdf#page=1032
This is where I would love to see CB investigation paperwork as Dave Remiker says he was on this case but he seems to be MIA that day and then was recorded as being involved in SA case.
On November 3, 2005, at 10:00 pm the breaking news of TH missing, WBAY:
http://wbay.com/2016/01/07/video-nov-3-2005-teresa-halbach-is-missing/
November 4, 2005
On November 4, 2005, because MSCO had removed the same coroner that would be walled off from SA case, CB was driven 2 hours drive to Waukesha County Morgue. Her autopsy was done by DPK MD Forensic Pathologist & TH Forensic Autopsy Assistant. This autopsy was done Nov 4th, 2005. The autopsy report shows her organs were shown as normal. That is not condicative to someone who is a “druggie” along with the low numbers showing of methadone & alcohol. What is questionable is the mention of markings and their locations, and that she was more apt to have died from suffocation/strangulation rather then OD. During the autopsy, tissues and samples were taken and stored, and also there was a DNA card made for her. (NOTE: the coroner DK had contacted CB family daily, always saying how sorry she was her last day calling. She called 3 times, with the last conversation being that she was removed from the case; she stopped contacting the family.)
On November 4, 2005 at 10:00 am - Pam Sturm sees news featuring TH. Page 197:
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Jury-Trial-Transcript-Day-2-2007Feb13.pdf#page=197
On November 4, 2005, between 3:10 - 7:25 pm, Ryan Hillega speaks with LE 22 times. Page 54:
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Avery-8-26-16-Motion-for-Post-Conviction-Scientific-Testing.pdf#page=54
On November 4, 2005, at 4:00 pm, DB & SB arrive at salvage yard, speak with SA, leave a missing person flyer. Page 214:
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Jury-Trial-Transcript-Day-1-2007Feb12.pdf#page=214
On November 4, 2005, between 7:30 - 8:00 pm, SA's brother sees headlight near the quarry while leaving for Crivitz and calls SA. See report:
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Steven-Avery-Interview-Report-2005Nov05.pdf
Timeline of activity, Nov 4, 2005, TH missing person case:
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/4kwcwi/november_4_2005_timeline/
When you go back and look at CB court documents, the following stands out:
November 8, 2005 - Motion and order of dismissal ordering the action dismissed without prejudice because the defendant is deceased (that is 5 days after she died, that is the very day of her funeral, that is the very day the supposed bones were found on the salvage yard). In none of CB's other court documents is it logged that she was deceased until the following year, and 2 documents actually still don’t show her as deceased.
Have I gotten your attention yet?
[–]August141981[S]
Frightening isn't it...I've been deep deep down in the CB rabbit hole, all the fluff that KK made in regards to DNA and such is just that. This Information and more has been turned over to proper authority and I can't wait for that ship to sink and those responsible for this heinous crime are made accountable
They framed them, they shamed them and they stole their lives.
I was sickened by what they did to SA x2. I was horrified by what they did to BD. I'm frightened by what they did to CB. These are people who are supposed to be looking after "we the people" and for decades they've only been looking after themselves. it's disgusting
[–]angieb15
Can you say where you got all the details? Because some of this is previously unknown and fascinating...
[–]August141981[S]
Direct connections to CB, and it's both fascinating and frightening thru many months and tons of reading and telephone conversations. Working with some really great thinkers. I surely couldn't have gathered all on my own but was encouraged to post this here and hope to gather further thoughts and information.
[–]Redditidiot1
I am interested in her sitting in the car with LE and not telling them what they wanted to hear. What did they want to hear?
[–]August141981[S]
It is believed that DEA was there at the meeting as well. I am convinced that CB knew something or was being pressured for something and refused to play the game or was silenced.
I believe from my information gathered that this is a case of 1 dead, 1 missing, and 2 framed.
[–]Redditidiot1
Are you implying something with "one dead and one missing" rather than two dead?
[–]August141981[S]
One is dead and one is missing. I'm not implying anything. CB is confirmed and documented as deceased; TH is reported missing: there is no proof of rape/torture/mutilation or murder, no body fluid/blood, no damage to the bed where supposed rape took place. Heck car-char-ski the officer I refer as "dopey" sat on the very bed of the crime scene and took notes while the other 2 idiots packed up the evidence they just planted.
And it all started with a sweaty narcissistic story teller, and we're all still rooting, searching for the murderer that we were told about.
[–]August141981[S]
I don't live in USA but certainly hope to one day meet CB family; a bond is created now, and, no matter the outcome, her death needs to be investigated by trusted authorities.
[–]August141981[S]
The drug unit was aware of the candy man since 99. MSCO had no interest or want to investigate CB death. They are great at creating lots of noise and confusion. CB family was dismissed purposefully by MSCO.
[–]seekingtruthforgood
In the comments it discusses a reduced sentence handed down to the alleged boyfriend of CB. She was prohibited from having contact with him as part of her own criminal proceedings. Interesting is that he escaped out of jail just before her death. He was not picked up again until after her death. The comments question a prior reduced sentence given to him and whether that sentence was reduced in exchange for being an informant. If so, the poster is questioning whether CB's death was not investigated because their own informant, who escaped from jail, may have been the source of the drugs one that killed her. This theory makes a lot of sense to me in terms of LE wanting to avoid the bad press and liability associated with their own confidential informant. He, btw, is in more recent news and is going to prison for other offenses.
[–]August141981[S]
I assure you CB did not look like the photo in the news article. The photo her mom was holding was of her a few years younger. Yes, she resembled the photo somewhat but that was not her look when she died.
[–]foghaze
I can confirm this. I've seen the pic too. They looked nothing alike anymore and she could not have pulled off posing as Teresa. So I hope those who are leaning in this direction can see how that scenario would be impossible.
FYI the markings on her throat are a bit suspicious but, after further research, seem to be common. I really don't know what to think about her connection, if there is one, anymore. I'm leaning more to no connection TBH.
[–]stateurname
Did you have a previous post about a certain guy who had a court date schedule for a certain time? Can't recall, but CB's friend at the time?
[–]August141981[S]
If you are referring to first name rhymes with Mary you quite likely read my posts here:
https://m.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/53o8cu/them_dry_bones/?ref=search_posts
[–]foghaze
Yes his name was Gary Kreie. According to her family they weren't really friends. They didn't even know who he is but for some reason, MTSO ordered her to stay away from him.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/4lkfbv/the_curious_case_of_boutwell_kreie/
[–]stateurname
Out of all this mess, I hope the friends around CB have been able to get clean and out of the area.
[–]August141981[S]
I believe we will see change; this is a lot for many of them. Some have, some are and hope others will find the strength to direct themselves in positive ways.
[–]August141981[S]
Thank you fog and I appreciate your input as always.
[–]foghaze
Thank you fog and I appreciate your input as always.
Your welcome. One thing I do find strange is how she was taken to the coroner in Waukesha and how they made her get an autopsy when none was needed. It's odd how they immediately called it an overdose when they couldn't have actually known this. The coroner she was taken to was connected with another corrupt cop case that had recently happened as well in another county but he testified for the defense. It's pretty interesting because a cop shot this guy in the head and some of the cranial pieces were missing according to him. They were apparently on the ground but he claims he never got them. Crazy huh? You can kinda see where I might be going with that. I will get that info to you when I have the chance.
Also when I look at the very little amount of drugs in her system compared to the BAC level I cannot see how she died but I think it's possible had she never taken methadone before. I'm no expert at all but the levels of methadone in her system appear very low. However, if this is coupled with alcohol it does make a difference. I do suspect that it's possible she got it from LE.
The deeper I dig the more it looks like the entire state is corrupt.
[–]August141981[S]
mb jr is who you are referring?
yes another interesting case
[–]foghaze
mb jr is who you are referring?
I can't remember the names or details. It was a while back when I researched all this but it was a corrupt cop case where he pulled a guy over who was supposed to be in court testifying against him in a few hours. Something like that. The cop straight up killed him for no reason at all at close range. He was unarmed.
[–]solunaView
Have you found any maternal relatives that could link CB and TH? Even distantly?
[–]ControlOptional
I looked back all the way to ancestors several generations and found nothing.
[–]solunaView
Still not discounting this. The other thing is with only 7 loci matching, the odds in the regular population are much better like in the hundreds possibly.
The other thing is, we don't know if LE would out and out fake the mtDNA testing. SC has spit on her hands already how much of a leap would it be to just fake a test or three?
[–]dark-dare
It's called dry labbing and it is more common than you think in state run labs.
[–]August141981[S]
I use to work with a retired forensic guy who had a routine. One day I mentioned his habits to him and that is when I found out his previous work was. In the 5 or so years I worked with him NOT ONCE did he cough in his hands.
SC was a nervous nitty for a reason.
[–]August141981[S]
Yes maternal, yes related and distant on father's side (CB father related to TH father).
[–]no_idea_4_names
So that wouldn't count towards mtdna then would it? Thought that was all through the mother's side?
[–]August141981[S]
mtdna means nothing! just more fluff on the prosecution side of things.
The reality is that there is plenty of lies and deceit that was created and executed by the prosecution and the thugs.
[–]August141981[S]
There was an unknown/unnamed female there when CB was found but there were others that left in the night.
[–]NewbieDoobieDoo7
Several have asked and you are not answering other than very vague non-answers. Where are you getting this information. 'A lot of research' is not an acceptable answer. Many of us have dug around with nothing close to these details so please provide more information as to your sources, even if you can't name names you should be able to give more info than that.
[–]August141981[S]
I'd love to sing to the world about a girl named CB, but if my information seems vague, then I apologize and you are free to ask anything further. Should I be able to further indulge in answering I will. However, the people I've spoken with I earned their respect and trust and I would not intentionally jeopardize the bond of friendship we have created over these past few months. Sometimes things just can't be said for good reason. CB death has never been investigated, if you catch my drift.
[–]August141981[S]
Spoke personally, yes, as have others & they have been vetted.
Just to be clear, I'm not a lone wolf, and I'm not a "you heard it hear first kind of person."
Foghaze is one of a small group of people who has been introduced to some of the sources.
It's going to go down like domino's.
[–]NewbieDoobieDoo7
So people close to the CB case think that there is a link between her and THs death?
[–]August141981[S]
All who have directly connected ourselves to CB and those who knew her say this. "If CB is not connected to this, Her death requires a complete and trustworthy investigation"
We will all support it and demand it.
[–]NewbieDoobieDoo7
And I would say either way, she needs a complete and trustworthy investigation.
But I'm sure that's what you mean :)
[–]August141981[S]
absolutely! :)
[–]covertoperations911
This is a fantastic post - such incredibly important information. I can't thank you enough for sharing all of it with us and for giving the Boutwell family a voice. The revelations about the autopsy and the cremation are astounding.
Boutwell wasn't simply being processed through the courts, she was on the radar of the federal security services - and for reasons that remain unknown even today.
According to the information you've gathered, a number of people were present in and around Boutwell's residence on Nov. 2 and Nov. 3. There were the unidentified persons who "left in the night" on Nov. 2. The following day, Kreis or an alleged associate is seen outside her home. Later, Boutwell's grandmother is told that she "may be dead" by an unidentified female. What was going on at her house that night?
I'm absolutely floored. Something evil was happening in this county in October-November 2005.
[–]August141981[S]
Something evil has been happening there for decades.
She was a young girl who had friends over: that is not out of the ordinary, but what happened to her and what led up to her death is not ordinary and should absolutely be investigated.
If we allow fear of speaking up and speaking out prevent us from exposing truth!
Then evil wins
[–]lilypadbitch
Evil shall not win if those who know the truth come forward and stop the cycle of corruption. It is like a family with a hidden secret and no one wants to expose it because then everyone will know the sins of the family.
I think there are more secrets that the state of WI does not want the rest of the country to know about but I bet we are all guilty of the same corruption.
Sad to say but this goes all the way to the top of our leadership here in the US.
[–]August141981[S]
your absolutely correct from what I've seen, and it isn't just this case; there are many others of the like. This doesn't happen unless you have higher ups either covering or involved...when it comes down to it if they have kept these secrets this long they are responsible.
[–]lilypadbitch
What was CB doing leading up to October 31, 2005 Prior to October 31/05 - CB had met with LE days prior to her death. Her grandmother had driven her to an out of the place location where they met LE and CB sat in the back seat of LE’s car refusing to tell them what they wanted to hear. She was nervous and anxious about this meeting. August141981
What LE was involved in meeting with her? What was the reason for her to meet with them?
If we knew more about what CB and TH where doing months before Oct. 31st it could tell a lot about what happened to both of them. What was going on in their life prior to Oct 31?
Thank you for posting August141981. I have been waiting to see your insight to the CB connection.
There is some disturbing stuff going on in the shadows of this investigation. This is no coincidence to the connections of events. I believe there is some deep organized criminal activity going on in WI that they are desperately trying to keep hidden.
[–]August141981[S]
Thanks for letting me high jack your thread awhile back. I've dipped my toes in this CB conversation or at least attempted since late Jan, early Feb and, well, conversations never ended nicely or no one was just open to discuss. I was thankful for the open conversation.
We can't be 100% certain. So open conversation is really helpful to us all. Fact finding and then creating our own understanding of the case.
[–]Redditidiot1
Did you have a different name then? I was mmh150 or cremation of sam mcgee and I believe I was one of the first, if not the first, to bring up CB's coincidental death mid Jan. (I'm not bragging, it's just that people shot me down very quickly and I can't recall your involvement in the discussions, for some reason). Your filling in the blanks of this story is fascinating to me. I have always believed in justice for CB as well as others caught up in this mess.
[–]August141981[S]
yes I used a different name. To be honest I didn't even use reddit in the beginning. I used fb and other venues. I was horrified when I seen previous posts in here from a while back where people were disrespecting my personal space and bombarding comments with my personal full name, who I was, who I associate with. All eager to negatively bash me and discredit the information found. So I stepped away and have recently returned because those I trust encouraged me to do so.
[–]Redditidiot1
If what you say is true then they destroyed her reputation in many different ways and that is horrific to me.
[–]August141981[S]
There is a long list of destruction, there is a long list of those they have pushed around for decades. It's chilling!
[–]Redditidiot1
Does Gary Kreie have a resemblance to anybody? Like GA did to SA? Just curious more than anything.
[–]August141981[S]
his fb page is open, pic's, friends list and posts
[–]skippymofo
Sorry about your experiences on Reddit. But these guys knew you are on the right scent.
[–]August141981[S]
it's sad the world we live in, surrounded by so much hate.
The length people go, and the noise they make, only shows the need for change in our world.
[–]August141981[S]
11 years ago today CB family laid her to rest, amongst all the noise and utter chaos that was thrown into their world. They were kept in a state that they were unable to see everything that was going on outside of their devastation and loss.
[–]August141981[S]
CB was found dead the morning of Nov 3rd. It's listed on her autopsy report as is the date of her autopsy being Nov 4. It's been confirmed and report has been turned over to team Zellner months ago
[–]ahhhreallynow
Any known connections between SB or RH or TH on a social level?
[–]August141981[S]
You mean with CB? No one I spoke with was able to connect any of those 3 with CB.
Making a Murderer: Steven Avery freedom battle boosted by claims FBI evidence 'doesn't prove bones were Teresa Halbach's'
By Siobhan McFadyen
March 11, 2016
Spoiler Alert: Steven Avery's lawyer Kathleen Zellner has been sent new bombshell claims that completely counteract the state's case giving fresh hopes for appeal.
The allegations contained in court transcripts and evidence logs purport to show that Wisconsin state DNA expert Sherry Culhane - sent only "charred material."
On January 20 2006, Calumet County Sheriff Jerry Pagel released a statement to the media insisting the FBI had confirmed the bones were matched to Teresa's.
While on February 7, shamed prosecutor Ken Kratz sent an email to Culhane - who was responsible for analyzing the bones locally - reiterating that statement.
Instead it was a general mitochondrial DNA match connected to a relative of Miss Halbach's mother, Karen Sekorski Halbach.
According to campaigners none of the protocols were followed and the 'bones' found were not logged properly, meaning evidence could easily have been tampered with.
Blogger Amberlea1879 has pored over evidence on the Reddit forum which she says suggests collusion was going on between Ken Kratz and Sherry Culhane.
And she's sent her research to lawyer Kathleen Zellner - who apparently confirmed receipt and is looking into the claims as part of her evidence gathering process.
Meanwhile in another startling piece of research which gives a blow by blow account of the breaches of protocol in the case - another compelling insight shows how the whole thing could now be turned on its head.
"Obviously it appears to be very incriminating, but what is going on with this evidence?
"Why weren’t protocols followed?
"No coroner, forensic anthropologist, arson investigator or photographer was called to the scene when the evidence was discovered.
"They had all of these high paid experts at their disposal and didn’t call on them until after the evidence had been shoveled up and taken to the sheriff’s office.
"The DNA evidence described above is not conclusive.
"How is it even possible for tissue to survive a fire that disintegrated 60% of the bone mass?
"The teeth, which are commonly used to identify a body because they outlast bone, didn’t even survive the fire.
According to Lynne, lab analyst Sherry Culhane issued a report on December 2005 stating that a partial profile was obtained from a charred piece of tissue and that seven of sixteen markers matched Teresa’s standard profile.
She added: "The absence of a chain of custody of the bones is critical because it could very well have rendered it inadmissible. What happened?
"Since the scene wasn’t documented, there is no proof that any bones were ever on the Avery property.
"As well, the Manitowoc County coroner was forbidden from entering the scene and none of the forensic experts were summoned until after the bones had been removed.
"We are to simply accept the word of the state witnesses who claimed to see the bones."
The bones at the Quarry
submitted Dec 29, 2015 by snarf5000
In the Dassey trial transcripts, forensic anthropologist Leslie Eisenberg testifies about the bone evidence. There is no mention of the quarry burn location in that trial.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/3y6jzw/brendan_dassey_trial_transcripts/
(Day 4 page 49)
However the subject does come up in the Avery trial. In episode 6 at about 35min Dr. Eisenberg says that she "suspected" that a couple of bone fragments from the quarry site "appeared to be" from a human pelvis.
Here's what she says in the documentary:
[Eisenberg] There were no entire bones that were found, but at least a fragment or more of almost every bone below the neck was recovered in that burn pit.
[Q] Did you find evidence of any human bone identified as being collected from a site other than the burn pit behind the defendant's garage?
[Eisenberg] Human bone also was collected from what was designated "burn barrel number two."
[Q] Now, you did offer an opinion that you believe the location for the primary burning episode was the burn pit behind the defendant's garage, is that correct?
[Eisenberg] That is correct.
[Q] There was a third site, was there not?
[Eisenberg] Yes.
And this would be the quarry pile.
[Eisenberg] Yes, sir.
You found in the material from the quarry pile two fragments that appeared to you to be pelvic bone.
[Eisenberg] That's correct.
You suspected them of being human pelvic bone.
[Eisenberg] That's correct.
[Q] The charring and calcined condition that you saw was essentially consistent with the charring and the calcined condition in the Janda burn barrel and behind Steven Avery's garage.
[Eisenberg] That is correct, sir.
[Q] Nowhere did you find evidence that you were looking at bone fragments from more than one body.
[Eisenberg] That is correct, sir.
[Q] So what you conclude is that by human agency, bone fragments here were moved.
[Q] Some bone fragments identified as human had been moved.
[Eisenberg] That's correct.
[Q] On this page:
http://www.convolutedbrian.com/testimony-notes-1-march-2007.html
we hear that her testimony also included this:
"She said that the bones recovered in the gravel pit were mostly animal bones. There were some that were inconclusive."
Here is an image of the location taken from the documentary:
https://i.imgur.com/yyUuhNU.jpg
Estimating with Google Earth, the quarry burn location is about 2,900ft or 885 meters (as the crow flies) from the firepit behind Avery's garage. It's about 2400ft or 730 meters from where they found the RAV4.
I might hazard a guess that there was a burn site already in the quarry for animal bones, possibly for deer carcasses/remains. Two small bone fragments may or may not have been positively identified as from a human pelvis. They certainly weren't positively identified as Teresa Halbach's. Dr. Eisenberg seems completely qualified, but is it possible that neither of those bone fragments were actually human bones?
Perhaps this area was previously known to the killer(s) as a burn site. Was anyone known to have burnt bones there before? How big is the pile of bones in the quarry? Are there any exhibits from the Avery trial, possibly pictures of the site?
Would the killers have burnt animal bones along with the human remains in an attempt to camoflauge them? If they later moved the human bones, how did they prevent the animal bones from getting into the Avery firepit?
If the prosecution's theory is that the firepit behind Avery's garage was the one and only burn location, how do they explain human remains at the quarry? Have they opened an investigation?
Did Brendan actually "confess" that Steven took a bucket of bones (two bone fragments) and drove them half a mile away and dumped them in the quarry on top of a bunch of burnt animal bones?
I think only the Avery trial transcripts and exhibit info would be able to shed more light on this. What was Eisenberg's confidence in identifying those bones as human?
[–][deleted]
I read the Dassey transcripts. There were two broken pieces of one tooth that the forensic dentist pieced together, but he could not definitively say for certain that it was TH's tooth.
https://imgur.com/a/SL4Hh?fbclid=IwAR3HtrS7W_y_Xqp77YJVadIlcbIBMniJbsuZk4BwffzBVKUrUYez_c2LVB0
[–]snarf5000[S]
Just to expand on this mention of the dental records:
The forensic dentist Donald Smiley glued two pieces of a molar root together, and matched it up with Teresa's X-rays. There was no other evidence he could really check. He said it was consistent, a probable match, but stayed short of a making a full positive ID.
Complete Dassey Trial Transcript - 9 Days
https://www.dropbox.com/s/6pjd6kpq5o5mx40/Dassey%20Trial%20Transcript.pdf?dl=0
Donald Smiley (forensic dentist)
Pg 216 (744)
Um, there were, I believe, 24, uh, dental structures, root fragments, um, crown fragments. There was not one whole tooth that I was able to examine.
~~
There were two root fragments that I was able to fracture match back together.
Pg 231 (759)
Fallon: ... based on your analysis of Tooth No. 31, the one that you were able to fracture match back together, do you have an opinion on whether the root and bone fragments from Tooth 31 recovered, uh, from the burn pit, are consistent with the dental x-rays of Teresa Halbach that you obtained from Dr. Krupka?
A Yes, I do.
Q And what is that opinion?
A In my opinion, they were very consistent.
~~
A To me, very consistent means that it's a probable identification.
~~
Q ~ How close are -- were you to making a positive identification here?
A I was very close. I mean, it was right there, and --and probably the only thing holding me back is that I'm, again, ultra-conservative in my opinion.
[–]nexttime_lasttime
The only thing I can think is that a cadaver dog lead them to the quarry site. After finding the car at the far end of the lot, they may have starting looking for a body by expanding their radius from the Rav4. From the Rav4 to the quarry is not very far.
[–]snarf5000[S]
I think the Arson Investigator estimated that it could take hours to get the bones in that condition by burning in a bonfire, depending on conditions (fuel/dismemberment/etc).
Rodney Pevytoe Dassy trial transcripts 4/19/07
[–]WiretapStudios
Remember, they used tires on the fire too, which are accelerants because they are basically oil / petroleum in solid form.
[–]snarf5000[S]
I've expanded a bit on the use of tires in this post:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/40p459/burning_a_body_with_tires_check_my_math/
SA and BD could both get off on technicalities. The fact that you can't reconcile tag numbers with crime lab IDs, FBI IDs, and exhibits is a problem. We don't know where crime lab items were taken from etc.
submitted Mar 9, 2016 by Amberlea1879
A massive reconciliation needs to take place. Which tag number is BZ, where did it come from, where did it go after. Eisenburg also sent it to the FBI on 11/16. It's FBI Id number is q1 and q2. It's also exhibit 385 and in the DNA PowerPoint.
[–]dorothydunnit
Except I wouldn't call it a "technicality" because "technicality implies a trivial lapse in paperwork.
This is not a technical glitch. It is a huge substantive discrepancy that renders the evidence invalid.
[–]Amberlea1879[S]
You are correct
[–]dorothydunnit
Okay. I was concerned I might sound critical but I just don't want anyone underestimating the importance.
Is there a way you can summarize the implications? I don't know the evidence and get confused easily. If not, that's fine. I would rather you spend your time on the sleuthing!
[–]Amberlea1879[S]
I have it all ready. I had to do it in word because it was too much work on reddit. I will take a picture and post
[–]dorothydunnit
Okay, you're already working so hard on this, don't rush to explain it. Thanks!!
[–]ahhhreallynow
I believe BV is the bone fragment with muscle tissue
Exhibit 312: State lab report dated dec 5/05: Two pieces of apparent charred material. "Human deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) was isolated from the apparent charred remains (item BZ)
Exhibit 385 is listed as: Photo of bone fragment and muscle tissue. Not sure if thats what you are looking for.
[–]Amberlea1879[S]
Yes. I have spent a stupid amount of time on item BZ and exhibit 385. They are infact the same item. I was able to confirm it in the dassey trial. In Dassey they both testify its exhibit 150. Kratz prepared the DNA slides and used Eisneburgs picture (exh 385). Eisenburg testifies that she sent it to FBI in Nov 2005. FBI report says received 11/16. Culhane testifies she got it on 11/11/05. From a pre-trial motion I discovered that FBI items q1 and q2 (also exhibit 385) were tag numbers 7926 and 7927. Now I only need to confirm those are not the tag numbers for item BZ and you have conclusively proven prosecutor misconduct and falsified evidence. However, I can't figure out tag number to BZ.
[–]djfo77
Can you ELI5? You kind of lost me. What exactly would prove prosecutor misconduct?
[–]ahhhreallynow
I'll keep an eye out. Good luck!
[–]Jmystery1
Hi I am looking for info and came across this on BZ you may have already
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5Ae0TE6AP9GZnNzQjRKajFiUTQ/view?usp=docslist_api
[–]Amberlea1879[S]
I did see that and it was a breakthrough for me. Because they both confirm Eisneburgs picture (exhibit 150) was the same thing. This item was with the FBI on 11/16. Culhane never had this item. Zellner just liked my reply to her tweet to check tag to BZ. She know exactly what I am talking about. I Had also got a email response from her when I sent it to her.
[–]foghaze
Culhane never had this item.
Wow. So she is blatantly lying. Maybe this is just one of the few people who KZ is referring to when she says they were lying under oath?
Very nice work.
[–]Amberlea1879[S]
Eisenburg knows the truth. She could expose culhane. I emailed Eisenburg to tell the truth. Hahaha
[–]Jmystery1
Awesomeness!!! Good for you!! I found this also you may have already it my screen shot notes from Transcript. I didn't know bone with flesh was found in pit thought only pelvic or might be pelvic? I learned something again.
http://i.imgur.com/Q80dvZK.png
[–]truthseeker2016
Amber, I read in the transcript that Pevytoe also "found" a golf ball sized piece of charred tissue while rooting through the ash at the sheriff's department on I believe it was the 10th of Nov. I wondered if that was the tissue sent to Culhane. Again, no photo was taken to document it as far as I can tell.
[–]momofdjb
in Culhane's testimony, a picture of the charred remains is introduced as exhibit 338. Page 162/163 https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1nzus-fCQcodmdtUTFUdS1ESG8/view?pref=2&pli=1
It was identified as item BZ on page 158.
How BZ could prove falsified evidence and prosecutor misconduct.
submitted Mar 9, 2016 by Amberlea1879
I put it in word and then took pictures. There are 10 pictures in order. I had emailed Zellner like a week ago about this and got a reply. Additionally she did like the tweet. I also sent the information to Brendan's attorneys. I was lead to this because I hated the fact that we don't see any pictures that Sherry took in the DNA slides and Kratz did the PowerPoint. That was very suspicious to start with.
http://imgur.com/a/APbCX
Eisenberg sends the bone-with-tissue sample to the FBI and explicitly states it never went to the crime lab (Sherry). This bone-with-tissue sample was labeled "exhibit 385" in SA's trial and "150" in BD's trial.
KK presents and Sherry testifies saying she tested that bone-with-tissue sample, referring to it as item "BZ". The evidence log, however, shows that "BZ" is simply "charred material." Also, the photo of item "BZ" in SA's trial is a zoomed in/cropped/rotated image of "Exhibit 385" (AKA, 150).
What this suggests...
Sherry never tested the bone with tissue. (Eisenburg said it went straight to FBI)
KK and Sherry misrepresent the bone with tissue as item "BZ" in SA's trial
Even if Sherry tested this same example, she definitively ID's TH while the FBI (FBI!!!) could only make a general mitochondrial DNA match connected the bones to a relative of TH's mother.
TLDR: KK and Sherry lied about the bone-with-tissue sample being tested, which would suggest they lied about knowing who the bones belonged to. Or SC actually DID test the same sample and came up with a definitive result that even the FBI couldn't manage.
[–]truthseeker2016
I wondered about the bone/tissue exhibit as well. What I think happened is that the tissue referred to as BZ was actually from another specimen.
Pevytoe testified about finding things while sifting through the burn pit material that had been transferred to the Calumet Sheriff's Office. This would have been on November 10.
"Well, I encountered numerous items that I suspected were bone fragmentation. I also recovered something I believed was part of a tooth. And then a couple other items that were a darkened mass roughly the size of, let's say, a golf ball, maybe a little larger, that I felt was charred muscle tissue."
I believe this is what was sent to the crime lab. However, Amber has provided irrefutable evidence that the state elicited false testimony from Culhane about the tissue having originated from the exhibit photo with the shin bone.
Honestly, everything about the bone evidence is so unreliable that it simply can not be trusted as any match to anyone.
[–]truthseeker2016
Well at that point he is only making visual observations. Again though - there is no photo documenting the discovery of the golf ball. We really do not know what became of it. Is it item BZ? As Amber pointed out, it is all very difficult to trace the evidence. There is no chain of custody for item BZ. I think they tricked the jury.
[–]OliviaD2
This is great, thanks for putting this together. I will have to read it about 6 times to get all the letters straight :)
This has been driving me crazy.. and I'm not sure we will ever know... what was actually "tested" in these "tests". And then reading the FBI report... then only testing one piece.. but how the hell one can know exactly what that was??
What a mess of documentation......
Oh, I just realized it's you... amberlea.. hi, that's great you sent this.. I have been working on an email about the DNA related to this and I will refer to this.. because it is related....
Beyond this, and if this is not misconduct, I don't know what is, putting together (prosecutorial and beyond).. putting together Culhane's STR analysis, the death certificate, the FBI report, the press conference, the Kratz to Culhane email, the Avery trial testimony (and ppt).. and the Dassey trial testimony...
the death certificate was fraud, that is definite. There was no body officially ID's. I believe they "thought" there would be, but Klaeser was a bit too quick with the pen before learning Sherry's results were not quite good enough.
Then the DNA.. :P a. The FBI test was actually good. In mtDNA language "not excluded" would kind of be considered a "match". For context, there was another case at the same time, in the state; the pregnant lady and fetus), they discussed the bones (well they were wrong in this case :P) However if they "matched the mother "(they were going to FBI for mtDNA testing) that would be confirmation, as as would be expected that was usual at that time. . It is typically considered a "confirmation" in missing persons cases. However, there is not usually all the collateral business to be dealt with. As there his here.
b. Sheriff Pagel ( directed by whom ?? :)) called the news station and arranged this big show.. a week after receiving the FBI report... WHY? The information given the news station was very accurate... but it was a 'hybrid" between the fbi reports and Sherry's... (well her stat wasn't accurate, but it is what she is going to use in court). Anyway, trying to be brief and summarize). The reporters would not know to say the "right things" They said "remains confirmed to be Halbach correct. "matched her mother" correct. But then, there is that infamous 1 in a billion that get thrown in... This was not on the FBI report, has nothing to do with the mtDNA (which isn't a population thing like the nuclear DNA, it isn't about the probability of finding another "profile" in the population, it is about how close the match is to family (it's kind of the reverse logic). For STR analysis, you don't need a family member, for mtDNA, that is how you are going to assess your results..
Mike Halbach thanks the "state lab" etc. etc., because as you can almost see in the transcripts you copied; there is going to be confusion between 'state lab" and fbi" . The public is not going to necessarily catch that they are 2 different things. They aren't going to know about mtDNA and what that is. They are going to remember "confirmed" and 1 in a billion.
b. I don't think this was a "mistake". I believe Kratz planned this for 2 reasons 1. it covered their 'arses with the death certificate. The date of death was the same as Sherry's report. No one is going to question it now, b/c it body is now "confirmed" to the public and probably a lot of officials, etc. b/c they don't know that it is not Culhane doing the "confirming".. and for whatever reason,, he is going to use Sherry's results.. again with that one in a billion... and some vague language (basically lying but not outright that the remains are those of TH (although per lab protocol she cannot say that). The jurors, who all heard that press conference,,, just remember "confirmed.. one in a billion... The FBI report was never mentioned......??
Kratz "jokes" (speculation - but that is the "tone" I got) about how they fooled the public in his email
In the Dassey trial, when it isn't as critical, b/c the "murderer" have already been convicted, hence there was a 'murder" legally.; she tells the truth. When asked by attorney Gahn if she could ID the remains, she answers "NO".
There is a lot of sleaziness going on here,, and put that together with that menagerie of "remains" you illustrated.....this is one big mess.
I agree, (assuming you are implying that :) ) there were no photos in the DNA slides because I don't even know what they tested.. or if they know.. :).. I need to go back, but also, I am not sure the date when Sherry actually did the testing... she has like 40 things on one page.. there is a report date,, but did she test this bone piece before it went to the FBI,?
It does make sense that she took the tissue near the bone, which was likely tendon/cartilage/muscle perhaps. I don't know how much bone grinding Sherry does .. I don't know what goes on in that lab. That means that that "bone" was not burned as badly burnt, as it still had some tissue left on it. Supposedly BZ came from just outside of the pit... where they had planted flags (that the news reporter was standing in)...
I think she called it "charred' remains because that was what she actually tested, the tissue; not the bone.
I personally don't think there ever were bones in the Avery burn pit, so I don't know where BZ came from.
I wish I had nice photos like do to easily show this,, I don't know how to use that Image app (is that what it is, an app ?) I am technology 'retarded'. :) Anyway, I am back to study your 'exhibits' and see what if anything I can figure out ... :P
And now of course, we have the CB to the puzzle. I would love to see her DNA... and it could be possible that her mother has some somewhere. I read about a case where they found material to test from a person who had been dead for 30 years.... (something with DNA on it in their house). Anyway I'm digressing a bit here.....
But suspicious... is putting in mildly... this was a mess, and I think Kratz wanted people intentionally confused...
He did a good job.. I know either Kratz or Buting said at one point they were having trouble making sense of the "cryptic lab reports' A good description...
[–]cgm901
If SC tested the charred material in Dec then how do we know it's not the same piece that was sent to the FBI?
I'm confused.
[–]truthseeker2016
She reported it in December. Eisenberg testified that the shin bone exhibit material was all sent to the FBI in November. Those results did not come back until January.
The deception here is that Kratz used the SAME exhibit for Eisenberg and Culhane testimonies and it is impossible that item BZ (reported by Culhane) was from the shin bone exhibit because it would have been sent to the FBI and NOT to Culhane.
[–][deleted]
Because Eisenberg testified that no material went to the crime lab and SC testified that she was working on it on Nov. 12.
Lab report states Item BZ was "two pieces of charred material" yet Culhane testifies she cut the tissue from the bone.
submitted Mar 2, 2016 by Amberlea1879
https://imgur.com/a/pWJp3#7Hmn4Zy
[–]CopperPipeDream
So, the bones shown in the photo were collected from the gravel mound, would that happen to be the same gravel mound that unknown male blood/dna was found? Item CX?
Then this:
Just finished commenting on the death certificate thread where it states,
under ‘Body Found,’ they have ‘No’ checked, but under ‘Autopsy Performed,’ they check ‘Yes.’ The immediate cause of death is listed as ‘undetermined,’ but that gets crossed out and under manner of death, ‘homicide’ is checked. The certificate was issued on November 10, 2005 even though the Calumet County coroner only received the bone fragments on the 9th. Same day that Kocourek was to be deposed.
They filled out their portion of the documents positively identifying the remains as Halbach’s on December 5, six weeks before the bones were positively identified on January 19. http://wbay.com/2016/01/15/video-jan-19-2006-teresa-halbachs-remains-confirmed/
I honestly wouldn't be at all surprised if the bones came back belonging to someone else.
I just can't with this case anymore. Insane.
[–]OliviaD2
I don't think there was much consistency in the terminology that was used for the "remains" evidence - bones, charred remains, charred bones... who knows... She did say she used tissue that was attached to the bone, which could have been cartilage, tendon, maybe muscle..? Supposedly this 'bone" was found outside of the Avery pit, at one of those red flags a reporter was standing on in a news cast ;P. Although there is no photo of the 'bone' there.
It doesn't really matter what the tissue was, the DNA would be the same. Her profile was not complete enough to make an official ID, however they used the press "leak" of the FBI results (why else?), knowing the public would not understand the difference between mtDNA, FBI/state lab, etc. etc.; and assume that Culhane's results were this "confirmation". Especially when Mike H is so thankful to the state lab for identifying his sister.
When the trial comes... all they need to do is put Sherry's results on a ppt slide... and with some vague language, imply that body is ID'd. Through in a one in a billion. No mention of the FBI report at all.
She does come clean in the Dassey trial, when directly asked if she could ID the body,; she says no.
[–]Amberlea1879[S]
No. The results page says DNA was taken from item bz. I think culhane is lying and never cut anything from a bone. A piece of unidentifiable material with a partial DNA match is completely different then a partial match cut from a bone
[–]justagirlinid
wow....why has this not been brought up/noticed?
[–]AlpineBlues
It seems like in Kratz email he tells Sherry that "we were careful not to say........" Something about the bones being a match or something. Sorry about the shoddy contribution. Got excited.
[–]justagirlinid
yes, I recall what you are talking about, the MtDNA....but this is different than that...what u/amberlea1879 is talking about is that the dna that was 'matched' or 'consistent with' didn't come from item BZ, because BZ wasn't the tissue item, BZ was charred remains, according to the report above.
[–]Amberlea1879[S]
Even more interesting is I think (but not certain) that the bone shown in the PowerPoint is also exhibit 385. Which was examined and then sent to the FBI by eisenburg. She sent it to FBI on 11/7. Culhane testified the bones in the picture were received on 11/11. Impossible.
[–]justagirlinid
who's really good with the details? u/skiptopp, u/OpenMind4u u/hos_gotta_eat_too u/LorenzoValla sorry to tag all of you, but looking for some assistance :)
[–]OliviaD2
I think the defense summed this up the best, and make me feel not so bad about not being able to track these 'remains"...'cryptic reports" is the best term I've seen to describe any of the lab reports regarding the ID of these remains. I don't know if it will ever be truly known what was tested and where it came from. There is NOT ONE photograph of any burned/charred or otherwise remain in the Avery burn pit. Item "BZ"..supposedly tested by Sherry, things were sent to the FBI, but exactly what, when, ??? They give everything a different code... The poor defense was trying to sort it all out.. Finally saying in this motion to exclude evidence: " It is unclear whether some, all, or none of the fragments had been previously determined by the state's forensic anthropologist to be human or not. In short, the defense has no way of knowing from this cryptic report what was sent to and examined by the FBI Lab"
I do not understand the legal going on here.. so if anyone can help me... I understand the DNA... but don't know what to make of it, because I can't know what was actually tested. The FBI received the "remains" that they were able to get a result from on Nov 23th. Sherry got results from her item BZ on Dec 5th. Were these from the same "bone", from the same location? Sherry took tissue that was near the bone.. probably muscle.. but the FBI...
I sure hope this is not typical. Because I would never believe such horrible lack of documentation and record keeping could occur....
and 'cryptic reports' says it all....
[–]justagirlinid
it can't really be something that obvious that was missed, can it?
[–]Amberlea1879[S]
Read question starting on line 25 first page. He asks if she sends it to crime lab. Eisenburg says no. This exact same "mistake" on questioning happens in Dassey trial. The bones would have never went to crime lab first, perhaps eisenburg to ID as human or coroner.
http://imgur.com/a/Lu4PG
[–]OliviaD2
What do you mean by "received" on 11/11? By the FBI? By her? There were bones,etc. sent to the FBI on various dates in November..
[–]AlpineBlues
Okay. I need to go back & look closer. So is AN the shin bone w/ tissue, or is it something else?
[–]justagirlinid
It looks like that, I'm not positive, but it says AN is possible tissue collected from gravel mound, while BZ is charred remains.
[–]AlpineBlues
Okay. I jumped the gun. I had that Kratz email lingering in my brain waiting to use it. Thank you.
[–]Amberlea1879[S]
Not to mention kratz put together the PowerPoint!
"THE BONES FOUND IN AVERY'S YARD MAY NOT HAVE BEEN TERESA HALBACH"
submitted Mar 15, 2016 by Lamarwpg
[–]applepeachpumpkinpie
It seems to me the easiest explanation would be--if it turned out they were not her bones, for the sake of argument--that no one knows what happened to her. They never found her body, so they substituted another to 'seal the deal' against Avery.
My gut instinct (and interpretation of the evidence) says that they're her bones, but if they turn out to not be, it doesn't seem likely that they substituted one set of bones for another and just tucked her away some place else. The only reason I can find as motivation for such a move is that it's hard to prosecute for a murder without a body.
[–]onepieceofgumleft
The remains found at the Quarry were most likely TH's "less" burned remains. Most likely discovered after LE implemented a plan to create their own "body" on the property in form of Carmen Boutwell's cremated remains. LE figured bones would be impossible to identify if burned to that extreme extent.
When TH's burned remains were discovered at Quarry , LE got everyone aware of the find to stay quiet , by using the "body on the property makes a stronger case" argument. Even the Halbach's bought in , because they were desperate for what they "thought" was justice. They didn't resist too much because it was LE themselves creating the "scheme".
[–]TheBarefootGnome
Did they document the bones found in the quarry while collecting them or was that collected in a box with the others from the burn pit?
[–]onepieceofgumleft
That's a great question. Best answer I can give is that I don't remember seeing any pictures of the quarry burn site , and there seemed to be no explanation given about how they stumbled onto to that site with all of the attention on SA's property , or who found the bones there.
There seemed to be a significant lack of information (or pictures) , and that's a major contributing factor to my theory , but there are "many" other factors that led me to that theory as well.
[–]TheBarefootGnome
[SPECULATION] If the bones were planted in order to frame Avery, was there even a need to take them to the quarry or even the burn pit? Not one photograph exists from the Avery property of TH bones. The coroner was not allowed to be there for the documentation and collection. The first picture of the bones is LE sorting through the boxes to 'find bones'. Perhaps this could explain why bones were found in three locations. The bones were never there. They were tossed into the boxes thinking all the boxes were from the same location. Seems easier to toss in a box than to sneak onto the property.
[–]onepieceofgumleft
[Speculation] - My theory is that they found the car on Nov 3 (as per Colborn's call to run the plate). But knew they had no "body". LE knew that car alone was a weak case.
I believe they stalled until Nov 5 to officially "find" the car by sending in Pam Sturm. I think they stalled until the 5th to produce their own "body" , thinking they wouldn't find TH on SA property.
MC only "accidental" drug overdose in all of 2005 happened on Nov 3. And was a 24 year old female ...??
http://www.htrnews.com/story/news/local/2014/06/08/drug-death-a-painful-memory/10177139/
Once they put this plan in place , I think they found something at the quarry that they weren't expecting to find ... TH badly burned (but not cremated) remains.
Recorded call to MCSD dispatch at 25:50 of these calls .... When officer is put on hold , someone says ,"That was at a burn pile , an entire bracelet ... sticking out the side". The very next call talks about a flurry of activity at "the pits" (quarry). Something major was found there for that type of activity. And there was no mention of a "bracelet" being found at SA pit , and nothing entered into evidence.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLPfZpP4Dpv_n0uIriIdu9h-dQQO7nevSk¶ms=OAFIAVgC&v=GrzJQq2EkO4&mode=NORMAL
No pictures of the quarry burn site , no police reports written (to my knowledge). I think TH remains were removed discreetly from the quarry , and everyone with knowledge (including the Halbachs) , bought into LE argument to remain silent , because a "body" on SA property made for a stronger case. Halbachs went along with the plan to ensure justice for their daughter , and LE went ahead with planting Carmen Boutwell's "cremated" remains in SA's pit once they commandeered the property on Nov 5.
No pictures of either site , no report written on quarry find , coroner banned from SA property after bone fragments found , and the fact that remains were in "cremated" condition ...? Paints an obvious picture , IMO.
[–]radarthreat
I can't imagine they'd be so stupid as to consider substituting a different body if they couldn't find Theresa's. What if a hunter or whoever found her body after the charges were laid? They'd have all kinds of egg on their face. Too risky. I wouldn't put "augmenting" the bones with those of another person past them, though.
[–]justagirlinid
The bracelet was the tire wire
[–]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.
[–]raptor9999
I always wondered why she would record herself saying some weird shit like that.
[–]nmrnmrnmr
Because her dad died when she was only 8, at age 31, I believe. The age she says in the video. And apparently the video was part of a school project. There's nothing particularly weird about the videos in context.
[–]virtualGeek01010101
First and foremost, prosecutors play an important ethical role during an investigation.
According to the ABA Prosecutorial Standards, Standard 1.5 (Contacts with the public during the investigative process) states: (b) Except as a proper part of a court proceeding and in accordance with applicable rules, the prosecutor should not publicly make the following types of statements or publicly disclose the following information about an investigation: (iv) admissions, confessions, or the contents of a statement or alibi attributable to a person or entity under investigation;
Furthermore, the ABA Standards on the Prosecution Function Standard 3-1.4 (Public Statements) states: (a) A prosecutor should not make or authorize the making of an extrajudicial statement that a reasonable person would expect to be disseminated by means of public communication if the prosecutor knows or reasonably should know that it will have a substantial likelihood of prejudicing a criminal proceeding.
The bottom line? Kratz needs to answer for it.
[–]k4aic
except prosecutors are exempt from "answering for it" and often cannot have charges pressed against them. They are basically 100% immune which is bullshit and something that the system needs to change.
[–]Mr_Precedent
Not if he participated in the investigation (and he WAS on the Avery property the day the RAV4 was found).
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/opinions/wp/2014/01/30/7th-circuit-pokes-a-hole-in-prosecutorial-immunity/
[–]Hurray0987
These are standards and not laws, so there's no real way to make Kratz pay except through the court of public opinion, and this has already happened. Kratz is probably one of the most hated men in America right now. He receives nothing but spite on all public fronts. Everyone knows he's a skeezy pervert. His career is ruined. Even he admits that the press conference was a bad idea. I mean, I think this battle (making Kratz pay) is already won.
Edit: thought you said "pay for it" instead of "answer for it" but eh, I'll just leave this here
[–]harmoni-pet
Thanks for the info. I wonder if the press conference falls into the applicable rules:
Except as a proper part of a court proceeding and in accordance with applicable rules
It is my understanding that the details of Brendan's interrogation would be made public regardless of Kratz's meddling. There's no doubt that the press conference added to local prejudice, but could they argue that that message would have gotten out anyway?
[–]virtualGeek01010101
Since the standard states "except as a proper part of a court proceeding and in accordance with applicable rules", both conditions would need to be met to comply, and that was not the case with the press conference.
Details of an interrogation or confession should never be disclosed by officials to the public until a case is closed. A defendant has a right to a fair trial, and disclosing such information will put a fair trial in jeopardy. The evidence, whether it is confession evidence or not, should be presented in court and evaluated only by a jury.
[–]harmoni-pet
Interesting. It's frustrating how vague yet precise legal speak can be.
I'm not saying the press conference was anything but terrible. Did they do nothing to Kratz for that? It seems like Strang and Buting would have made a bigger issue of the press conference if it was illegal.
[–]KennythePrize
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...
[–]harmoni-pet
Fuckwad behavior for sure
[–]KennythePrize
Totally agree.
[–]harmoni-pet
Yay! I know we argue lot, but I value all of it. Finding common ground is what I look forward to. Cheers :)
[–]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?
[–]virtualGeek01010101
The press conference was not illegal; it was unethical conduct according to the standards (the Wisconsin standards are modeled after the ABA standards). If a grievance was filed about the incident, then it would have been handled by the Office of Lawyer Regulation in Wisconsin. However, I would imagine we (the public) would have discovered the information by now if a grievance was filed.
[–]parminides
That's exactly what Kratz argued. He said that all the details were in the criminal complaint, so the media would get them anyway. His press conference was a way to "control" the volatile information.
Kratz himself claims he regrets the press conference and that he wishes he'd let the complaint speak for itself.
I think he knew what he was doing. I think he wanted to taint the jury pool, pure and simple. I find it nearly inconceivable that a DA wouldn't know about the ethics rules governing press conferences. I found his excuse that he wanted to control this volatile information less than convincing. [EDIT: or that he wanted to control it to affect public opinion.]
I don't know the exact rules for WI, but in my state an allowed exception for lawyer press conferences is if it serves the public good in some way. For example, if someone confessed to a murder and named his accomplice who was still at large. Or someone admitted to poisoning the water supply. Something like that.
Clearly nothing like that was at play here, as SA had already been locked up for months.
[–]disguisedeyes
Kratz had a limited window to act.
That is, he had to have already known that the confession, as stated, was extremely 'unlikely' due to the lack of visible blood evidence in the trailer/garage. However, even though he 'knew' this in a general way, he had a day or two before police could 'investigate' the claims made in the confession and rule them out.
His decision to immediately make the claims known seems to me to be indication that he wanted to get that specific, horrific story out before anything might get in the way.
The only clear, obvious purpose of that conference was to prejudice the town and jury pool and snip the 'framing talk' in the bud. This worked.
It's supremely unethical. The prosecutor should be working to find the truth, not to secure a win.
[–]Tentapuss
I don't think I said that at all. I said that the ABA standards don't govern his conduct. The Wisconsin Rules of Professional Conduct do, and it if Wisconsin is like most other states, a violation of the RPC gives rise to a disciplinary proceeding, but not a civil suit.
Probably violative of the rules of professional conduct, and could result in discipline, from a reprimand to disbarment. Probably not a criminal action. Could have formed the basis for a libel suit, though the statute has almost certainly passed.
[–]Noonproductions
It seems to me, that given the amount of people in this town and the relative number of missing women in this area at this time, it still seems very likely that the bones are most likely those of Theresa Halbach. Even if the bones were from a crematorium and the bones were planted, the chances that they would find someone with that number of genes the same (the rest of the unmatching genes being destroyed by the fire) seem unlikely. That being said, I am basing my understanding of what the tests said based on articles presented here and my own understanding from college biology from 25 years ago, so I am no expert.
[–]OliviaD2
It's complicated. I would really need to see the raw data to know just how bad that profile is.... But.. there are more "missing" loci, than not. The "test" if you will. did not work because the sample was degraded..(you can tell this because the only the shortest loci got results, because the longer ones were broken up).. which means there could be problems with the amplification step, (when many copies are made of the DNA, there are factors that can mess this up)..
This test should have been reported as INCONCLUSIVE. Even the lab protocol did not allow results this poor to be called a "match" to anything.
You can not honestly say anything other than inconclusive. The mtDNA test is stronger, at least in links the purported remain to the mother., therefore , for a missing persons case, that would be considered a strong ID. FBI didn't confirm that Bone matched a standard from TH though, which bugs me, seems like you would check... damn government labs.....
What the family should do.. for peace.. if they want to know, is try to get whatever material they can, try to get someone to tell them the truth about what came from where, take it to a decent private lab and have it tested. There is more sensitive testing.
Or, if they are good with the results.... they are good. This case is actually an incredible (intellectually) ethical debate... perfect for an ethics committee.....
With the mt DNA supporting them Culhane's results, one can have more confidence. Without that... only inconclusive... It is not black and white..... one in a billion means nothing when you want to know if it is your daughter...
[–]ixid
You're assuming the test result was legitimate, unless the charred flesh item BZ can be tested again and shown to contain DNA that would seem questionable given the level of possible contamination and evidence planting as well as the broken chain of custody.
"The Box" - Part 1
submitted Jun 29, 2016 by foghaze
Given all the concerns I've laid out it is very rational and logical to assume that what we see in property tag 8318 most likely contains no human bones at all and is just a disastrous collection of fragments of rock, cement, possilbe animal bones and wood among other things you might find in a junkyard.
Under these strange and unusual circumstances how can anyone in their right mind possibly believe the state's ridiculous story that "this box" contains the majority of Teresa Halbach remains supposedly sifted and sorted from Steven Avery's pit on 11/8/05 with not one piece of photographic proof? If there is any conspiracy in this whole case it's to believe the state's narrative without skepticism of how TH fragemented bones were found in the dark in less than two hours in Avery's burn pit behind his garage on 11/8 while using flashlights with no forensic anthropologist or coroner in site. Only Pam Sturm of god would believe that ridiculous story.
NOTE: It appears the zip lock baggie inside "the box" would contain the "other questionable materials" that were collected. (metal grommets/zippers/etc).
For a visual, below is what a professionally cremated body looks like burned at almost 1500 degrees in hurricane speed winds in a controlled environment before being ground up. Next to it you will see the size of the box TH supposed "fragmented bones" were in. It's a small box as you can see and is nowhere near 40% even if "the box" contained just TH fragments.
http://i.imgur.com/aenMcFE.gif
Is it bone fragments?
[–]violet-sunshine
Dr. Simley’s testimony, Brendan Dassey trial
Q: Would you tell us or describe for us the condition of – – uh, these — the 24 tooth fragments and the three bone fragments that you examined?
A. They were all burned. They were all charred. Uh, they were very brittle. Um, again, they didn’t look like normal tooth like we would normally see, and essentially, the crowns were all gone. What we were looking at was just the root structure, which was, um, part of the tooth that’s buried in the bone. There was one portion of a crown, um, but that portion was from a — cuspid or an eyetooth and was not able to be identified.
You can even tell, just by reading it, how uh .. um how that testimony was .. umm .. not very.. um.. ya..
Further, crime lab analyst, Sherry Culhane testified that a partial DNA profile was obtained from a charred piece of tissue (item BZ) alleged to have been found in the burn pit ash, presumably collected by Rodney Pevytoe with the Wisconsin Department of Justice Criminal Investigations Unit, who arrived and, ignoring the material from the burn pit, began sifting through the burn barrel remains that had been transported to the Sheriff’s Department. Ahem... Luckily... he found the muscle tissue – used for the positive DNA determination.
Sherry testified that since the specimen was degraded (likely due to extreme heat) she only obtained peaks for seven markers of the fifteen plus the gender marker, so less than 50%. Yet the FBI CODIS database does not even record DNA profiles with less than nine identified markers. The partial profile matched Teresa's, but since it’s a partial profile it can’t be conclusively reported as matching only Teresa’s profile, an important distinction.
Culhane reported that the probability of a random unrelated person matching the same seven markers is 1 in a billion in the Caucasian population.
However, since the documentary has come out, others have chimed in and said this was bad science. Some experts assert even with 12 of 13 markers matching there would be an occurrence of 1 in 65,000 — much more common than 1 in a billion.
I also cannot accept Eisenberg's assertions that the skull remains, specifically the remains of the eye socket, would definitively be diagnostic of sex. IMO they desperately needed this opinion to be presented in court in order for them to explain how they knew the bones were human and female long before they were ever tested.
Further Eisenberg gave the opinion that the bones could not have been planted due to the condition of the bones. She said they did not show any signs of being moved. Unfortunately for her she neglected to take into account that before she had examined the bones they had been shoveled and sifted and sent in a box to her office ... again, all before her examination.
We have that email from Kratz to Culhane wherein he admits he knows the FBI never positively identified the remains, but that public perception of who those bones were would be enough for trial. That is evidence enough, IMO, that Avery needs, at the very least, a new trial.
As well, the Manitowoc County coroner was forbidden from entering the scene (due to the conflict of interest. I wonder if Lenk and Colburn called her and told her that from inside the trailer) and still Calumet coroner was not called to the scene during the excavation! Good God. None of the forensic experts were summoned until after the bones had been disturbed. This does not, IMO, excuse the complete lack of photographic evidence surrounding the many bone locations, it only intensifies the speculation and possibility of serious misconduct being uncovered.
We know that bone fragments from all over TH skeleton were found in the Janda burn barrel. They included a diagram of the skeleton in the documentary. The fragments came from the shoulder, the toe, the leg, the arm — it was a complete mix. Setting aside the 'why?' for a moment, how could Avery have managed this if the movement of the bones was first from the fire pit and later moved to the barrel?
The evidence is more consistent with the reverse: the theory that the body was burned elsewhere, scooped up into the barrel, and dumped on Avery's property.
No photos of the burn pit, burn barrel or quarry prior to recovery, and no attempt to grid and examine the location. This, IMO, is not a case of mistake after mistake after mistake. This was deliberate, and indicative of an attempt to obscure what the evidence would show.
[–]gt5717b
I believe this picture of the bones includes one end of the box (possibly turned upside down). The edge of the ruler along the bottom of the photo is the metric side so I have drawn a green line along the width of the box and rotated that line on top of the ruler to get an approximate measurement. It appears to be 91 mm or 3.58 inches wide. Much smaller than I guessed in foghaze's other post. Of course this assumes it's the box in question. Regardless, it again illustrates just how tiny these bones/fragments are. For reference, my business card is 3.5" wide.
Picture of the bones:
http://imgur.com/yZongQJ
[–]gt5717b
I definitely think it's a box. It may not be the same evidence box the bones were photographed in, however. It does look like it might say "CALUMET" in red tape around the edges and the bone box clearly has red tape on it. But, foghaze did some rough estimates on that box's size from the other picture that are bigger than what I calculated.
The box in my photo appears to be something along the lines of what I've found here; 5 1/4" x 3 3/4" x 7/8".
edit: as I mentioned above, the relevant point is that these bones are extremely small and for most of us they are smaller than we previously were led to believe.
[–]gt5717b
I think you're right it's an evidence tag (possibly on a box?). 7430 is listed as 'bone fragments'.
[–]Strikeout21
Great post FogH. After your post last night, I couldn't wait to see what your brain was cooking up. I don't think I'm the only one who thought those bones (and the box) were MUCH larger than what they are. I have no doubt that the intention of LE was to fool the public into believing they had close to a whole skeleton, when in fact.. they had less than 4 measuring cups. This is why there are no pictures. They wouldn't have been as dramatic when shown being held up by a pair of tweezers as they are in (what looks like) a big huge box. This whole thing is just so damn unreal.
[–]7-pairs-of-panties
If they only had a couple of measuring cups full of bones it shows a few things
1) TH was not burned there 2) Its very possible that those bones aren't TH's. 3) If it is TH it shows the framing. They would have had to have know who killed and burned her and where, than moved them or some where they wanted them 4) Halbach family was given bones back to them by Weigert. Since they had so little does that mean there is nothing left in evidence to test? Maybe we'll find some rocks there? 5) Holy crap! I can't believe there is still so much to discover w/ the case!
[–]foghaze[S]
Since they had so little does that mean there is nothing left in evidence to test? Maybe we'll find some rocks there? 5) Holy crap! I can't believe there is still so much to discover w/ the case!
There was nothing left to really test anyway. It would have been nice if KZ could actually see the "bones". She could have got another opinion on if they were human. With fragments it's very easy to get them mixed up with certain bones from animals. It can be much easier than we all think.
I belive the box we see is a collection of rocks, bark, twigs, animal bones, minerals and trash.
[–]21Minutes
fool the public into believing they had close to a whole skeleton
It's just that I started comping a list of names and titles awhile back.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/40pibn/is_this_the_complete_list_of_people_involved_in/?ref=share&ref_source=link
I thought maybe you had new names to add.
[–]dillstar
I just dug up the pretrial testimony, and from the pretrial testimony, her coworker signed for the box and left it on her desk in her locked office overnight from Nov 9 to Nov 10.
I haven't checked the actual trial testimony yet, but are you thinking of the brief visit the bones had to Dr. Kenneth Bennett? (Where he identified that one of the bones in the box was an ilum and was able to make a determination of female gender of the bones.) Eisenberg mentions it (and references the bag) on page 117:
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Preliminary-Examination-2005Dec06.pdf#page=117
Edited for formatting, and because I misread a thing about count of bones in the bag as bones in the box.
[–]Canuck64
Yes that is the one, thanks. He is again mentioned on Day 13 of the Avery trial page 190.
[–]foghaze[S]
So first, yes, I was referring to the criminal complaint and to Eisenberg's testimony that Dr Bennett had a hand in her box (before she did) with identifying the ilum and bagging some pieces.
Well technically we don't even know if this is even the box he was given. He identified an ilum bone. There is nothing in the box that looks like an ilum. She also never identifies any bones as part of the pelvis much less an ilum bone. So if she's so darn good at identifying bones more so than someone who had been doing it for years longer where is the ilum bone and where did it come from? I think whatever was at the quarry was sent to Bennet. JMO though.
EDIT: Also remember Bennet was retired so he wasn't working for anyone. If they took any bone to him it would have been to his home. Not at the crime lab. Nothing makes sense with all this.
[–]dillstar
To make this less confusing, let's ignore the ilum altogether, just for now. Eisenberg specifically says this box that was sealed and waiting for her on her desk was in his hands at one point. From page 117 pretrial:
Within the box there was one plastic bag into which several bone fragments had been placed by another forensic anthropologist, Dr. Kenneth Bennett, to whom the box was initially brought, for a brief examination, to determine whether the fragments in the box were of human origin.
As you've brought up, it's not possible if the box went from pit to Command Center to CASO locker for overnight storage (end of the 8th) to crime lab on the 9th. I had assumed somewhere before CASO storage they took it to Bennett's house, and maybe that could have happened. We just don't know, or at least I just don't know. :(
Here's another question: the whole item BZ chain-of-custody-photoshop-powerpoint thing hinges on the box of bones going from pit to Eisenberg to FBI without stopping anywhere where Sherry Culhane can cut off her sample. So a specific question here is, did Joy take the box to Crime Lab, or to Eisenberg's office? They aren't the same place, right? If they went to the Crime Lab, then Culhane could have had an opportunity to cut off a piece before Eisenberg. Of course, now like Bennett, this is all just speculation.
I am concerned with the number of times that this box appears to have been unsealed and resealed.
[–]foghaze[S]
and maybe that could have happened. We just don't know, or at least I just don't know. :(
Well I think the correct thing to say is no one knows. Not just you. If that box moved anywhere on 11/8 there should have been a report on it and there isn't. So if it's not there then we can assume it stayed at Calumet until the 9th.
So a specific question here is, did Joy take the box to Crime Lab, or to Eisenberg's office? They aren't the same place,
Correct they are not in the same place. In Eisenbergs testimony she said she received them at her "office" and then TOOK them to the coroner's office where she does her work. I have also been trying to figure this one out as well. She also says the box was TAPED. That tells me it had not been opened by anyone. At least that is how she makes it sound. I belive the narrative is Joy takes it to the crime lab to Eisenbergs Office and then she transports them to the Coroners office herself before opening. She makes it sound like no one else had opened it from transport from Calumet until the moment she opened it at the coroner's office. She never says Bennett opened it at crime lab. I think she is saying he did it the day before it went to crime lab.??
Definitely an issue with the chain of custody on this. It's very very suspicious to me. I want to know what exactly is in that ziplock bag and WHERE did it come from? You know what I mean?
[–]chromeomykiss
I believe they are referring to the burn barrel trailer which also had to make an unexpected stop at an on ramp to I-43. It is somewhere in the CASO Report.
Edit: pg 117 in Oosterhouse Supplemental Report (M.Oost is CASO Dispatcher who also took 11/5 call from POG to Pagel)
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/CASO-Investigative-Report.pdf#page=117
Upon arrival at the CALUMET CO. SHERIFF'S DEPT., I met with Deputy JEREMY HAWKINS of the CALUMET CO. SHERIFF'S DEPT. We arrived at the CALUMET CO. SHERIFF'S DEPT. at approximately 1224hours. At approximately 1245 hours, I did sign the secured trailer and its contents over to Deputy HAWKINS. It should be noted that at approximately 1138 hours while we were en route with the trailer, we did stop on the southbound off ramp of I-43 off of STH 147 to check on the trailer because it was pulling very rough. At approximately 1139 hours we were again en route to the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPT.
But you are correct about Joy transporting bones and the Rav4 transport also taking a long time due to trailer isuues. Just add the burn barrels trailer stop being mentioned as more WTF? and "CYA".
[–]Chesa007
Page 101, CASO report;D. Kucharski collected 4 burn barrels, loaded them onto a covered trailer and custody handed over to Marie Oosterhouse, Calumet Radio Operator (why is she even there?),this is at 9:47am. AT 11:30am she and Gary Tackes "Manitowoc Deputy" depart the Avery property. Marie notes that they had to stop due to the vehicle not driving properly while on the way to CC (pg 117). Sometime after 11:11 am, he only reports his arrival time at work - no specific time for the trailer arrival, Deputy Hawkins has the Manitowoc Deputy park the trailer behind CC Sheriff's Department and takes possession (pg 116)...
[–]foghaze[S]
When do we get to see a skeleton reconstruction like this: sample Forensic Anthropologist photo
She didn't do one. She was supposed to nomatter how little she had to work with. I think the amount was literally so startlingly small that the state didn't even want to use the photo. They deliberately tried to make it sound like they found a lot more of her remains than they really had.
[–]Canuck64
Most of the fragments were no bigger than a fingernail. The largest was 2.5 inches. I think a lot of people believe an actual skeleton was found, when it was only a small portion of fragments. And she made the determination just through a visual examination. She used no references to compare the fragments to a skeleton in order to say this came from there etc.
Pictures would gave certainly cleared this area up.
[–]foghaze[S]
Pictures would gave certainly cleared this area up.
Agreed. She did use a rendering of a skeleton and had arrows pointing to the area on the skeleton where the fragments came from. This is not acceptable either. Unbelievable how the state manipulated all the evidence.
[–]MMonroe54
You know, if that little of the entire skeleton was found, I think it calls into question whether the remainder burned to ashes or was somewhere else. Maybe someone did dump bones into Lake Michigan or bury them somewhere. Or if the body was burned elsewhere, maybe the majority are there. Was the Zander Road location ever really examined? Where the neighbor saw the smoke/explosion/smell/whatever scared his cows?
[–]Lolabird61
I think THIS has convinced me that there's no way in hell the remains could be identified as those of TH.
[–]SilkyBeesKnees
I agree. And where is the one bone that supposedly had some tissue on it that was used to prove it was Teresa? Have we ever seen it? Did the jury see it? And how the hell did that tissue even survive a fire that supposedly reduced an adult women's remains down to 2 cups (less than one cup if they'd been ground in cremation).
[–]Canuck64
On November 10th Agent Pevytoe finds a mostly unburned bone with some tissue on it. He thinks it's a steak bone but decides to send it in for testing anyways.
On November 11th Culhane received a mostly unburned bone with some tissue on it. This would now be referred to as item BZ.
Coincidence?
[–]Account1117
It's the one on the left here. Exhibit 385 in the Avery trial, exhibit 150 in the Dassey trial, also known as Item BZ.
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/exhibit-bones-1.jpg
[–]SilkyBeesKnees
She wouldn't have had enough bones to even pretend it was an entire hand let alone a complete body!!! It would have been quite dramatic to see these wee "bones" sprinkled over a full size autopsy table.
[–]SilkyBeesKnees
Are you saying the jury only saw the photo? They didn't see the actual wee "bones?"
[–]foghaze[S]
Are you saying the jury only saw the photo? They didn't see the actual wee "bones?"
No he had photos only. I'm pretty sure of it because when Eisenberg is on the stand they never bring any exhibit out for the jury to look at. He shows all his exhibits up on the screen (Elmo). So no they actually did not see the entire collection of the bones in person. Just photos. Good question and I never even thought of this. They should have seen them personally yet they didn't. That is also very telling if you ask me.
[–]Account1117
It's quite not what you asked, but there is this.
Found in the burn pit: http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Exhibit-400-Graphic-Showing-Bones-Found-in-Burn-Pit.jpg
Q And with respect to Exhibit 400, is this, um, representative of the variety of human bone that you found in this area?
A Yes, sir.
Q So you have some rib bone, some hand, some legs, clavicle --
A There is --
Q -- or shoulder bones?
A Yes. Um, obviously, no entire bone, but, uh, enough, um, of a bone or bones -- uh, enough of the anatomical landmark that I can say this is part of the spine, or this is part, uh, of a rib, or this is part of a -- a collarbone. Yes, I can.
Found in the Janda barrel: http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Trial-Exhibit-401-Eisenberg-Pics-of-Cut-Marks-on-Halbach-Remains.pdf
Q Okay. Um, scapula --you identified part of a human scapula --
A Yes, sir.
Q -- in that burn barrel? Or the shoulder blade, as you said?
A A portion of the shoulder blade.
Q Okay. You identified one or more portions of, uh, the spinal column or the vertebrae?
A Fragments from the spinal column, yes.
Q More than one?
A I believe there were.
Q Okay. Uh, identified one or more bones from the hand? Metacarpals?
A At -- at least one.
Q And more than one fragment of long bones?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, these fragments of long bones were small enough that you weren't able to decide which of the long bones in the human body they came from?
A That's correct. Q Or even whether they all came from the same long bone in the human body? A That's correct.
[–]Rayxor
Why is it that the report lists them as possible human bones but the testimony seems to be certain of their origin? Whoever wrote that up obviously was not certain of their origin.
The 40% of a 2 liter bottle in volume is about the size of a housebrick, or if you still get them, a checkbook refill box of checks. That is shocking.
But when you have fragments this small, http://imgur.com/yZongQJ , it's quite possible, when you remove the animal bones and non-bone material (note the chicken bones in the photo).
[–]foghaze[S]
The 40% of a 2 liter bottle in volume is about the size of a housebrick, or if you still get them, a checkbook refill box of checks. That is shocking.
Are you measuring ashes or actual bone fragment volume? See this is where she is getting sneaky. She's not saying the fragments GROUND into ashes fills the bottle 40%. She's saying the actual fragments themselves fills the bottle 2/5ths. It's absurd and misleading because ashes and bone fragments have entirely different volume.
I'm with you on the fragments, not ashes.
I was trying to come up with a US understood equivalent volume. We have 1 liter boxes of milk, so I have an idea of what that looks like. Some are like elongated bricks, some more like a chocolate box. In between I came up with 'brick'.
She did write a 344 page report because pages of it were entered into evidence. Trial exh 401.
Would this be accessible under FOIA, /u/skipptopp ?
[–]makingameow
She did testify that there were avian bones mixed in. That lil factoid drives me nuts. Avian bones would not survive a fire that distroyed large human bones.
[–]e-gregious
Avian bones seems pretty generic.
Are they from a bucket of KFC?
A wild turkey? (I used to seem them in SE Michigan)
Which bones are avian?
Any thing from a finch to a goose?
Certainly any kind of avian bones would not survive an incineration that calcined human bones and reduced them pretty much to ash.
[–]SilkyBeesKnees
Right. Good point.
Look at the ones in the middle of the picture. Looks like a chicken bone to me, part of a wing.
[–]SilkyBeesKnees
Good Lord!!!! I see what you mean.
[–]foghaze[S]
Look at the ones in the middle of the picture. Looks like a chicken bone to me, part of a wing.
I've been looking at this bone for several days and comparing it to the diagram exhibit 400 which is a list of all the bone fragments she found in the box. There are only 17 areas listed. This bone that looks like a chicken Ulna (wing bone) does not match any of the bones she has listed. Out of everything she has listed I narrowed it down to a possible metacarpal or metatarsal. However I do not even believe it's either one of these simply because the bone is way too curved to be either one of these bones. I'm pretty convinced at this point it's an old worn Avian ulna bone. Probably from a chicken. From what I can tell it would even be the same size. This page shows every single bone of a chicken. It's interesting.
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/1911_Encyclop%C3%A6dia_Britannica/Bird
[–]MMonroe54
the box the pistol is in, which you provide for comparison, looks like it's made of wood. The box the bones were in was cardboard and, I believe, considerably larger. May I ask where you determined the size of the box holding the bones in the photo?
[–]foghaze[S]
the box the pistol is in, which you provide for comparison, looks like it's made of wood.
No it's cardboard and no I measured it. http://www.uline.com/Product/Detail/S-20042/Special-Use-Boxes/13-x-8-x-2-Evidence-Box-Handgun?pricode=WY797&gadtype=pla&id=S-20042&gclid=Cj0KEQjwncO7BRC06snzrdSJyKEBEiQAsUaRjKkgsLKTtVwvj1KuUVqQdcr2ypliv3C2Zjs8KMoFPZIaAim48P8HAQ&gclsrc=aw.ds
Here is how I figured out the size. It was completely ghetto but I got close enough to figure it out.
http://i.imgur.com/tZriOMF.png
[–]MMonroe54
Sorry, but I still don't understand. What made you think it was the size of the pistol box you reference? And where did you get the dot grid? Is that supposed to be the bottom of the box the bones are photographed in?
[–]foghaze[S]
I'm using the dots on the paper the evidence is lying on. For every 8 dots you get 1cm approx. I zoomed in on the box and counted 8 dots and I used that as my reference 1cm scale. I then used red and green lines (alternating) to represent and mark 1cm from one end to the other of the box. Once I was finished I counted approx 30 cm. I realize this could be off an inch or two but it gives us an idea the size of the box as opposed to just seeing a box and not knowing anything because we have no reference. So my rough estimate was 12 inches. The Gun box is 13 inches.
[–]MMonroe54
I couldn't see the paper or anything beneath the bones, so weren't sure where you got your sample. The box in the photo looks like a larger shallow box to me, but apparently the size of it was never mentioned. I'd estimate at least 12 inches and possible more. But without a ruler or something to compare, I agree we don't know.
[–]foghaze[S]
I'd estimate at least 12 inches and possible more.
The box is 13 inches long
[–]Chevron07
Doing some math, if the box is about half full, then that's about 1.5 liters of bone by volume.
KZ should buy one of these and send it through a wood chipper:
https://www.amazon.com/Disarticulated-Skeleton-Medical-Quality-Height/dp/B00RLTL2HI/ref=pd_sim_sbs_328_6ie=UTF8&dpID=41ClkYhukIL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR160%2C160_&refRID=W42CVVJDNDSXZ88VYRQH
Product Dimensions: 17 x 18 x 14 inches
[–]foghaze[S]
Doing some math, if the box is about half full, then that's about 1.5 liters of bone by volume.
But this is the box that was given to Eisenberg before she went though it. She verifies it in testimony. Says there was a ziplock bag as well. Plus you can tell they have not been cleaned. That would be the first things she does. So this box has all kinds of black charred material in it. One of the points of the post was to show this. They didn't know what was bone and what was not. So everything was thrown in this box that was questionable. What you see in the box is: Questionable charred material behind Avery's pit sorted and sifted. NOT Human bone fragments from Avery's pit.
The box is 13 x 8 x 2.
[–]Chevron07
Yeah, if every piece of unknown charred material was TH bone, that's still a very tiny portion of skeleton. That would easily fit in a 2 liter soda bottle, where a mock skeleton is shipped in a box that's 70 liters in volume.
13x8x2 = 33cm x 20.3cm x 5.1cm = 3408cm3, or 3.4 liters. Looks like the box is half full, so 1.7 liters.
17x18x14 box is 70,202cm3
[–]foghaze[S]
That would easily fit in a 2 liter soda bottle, where a mock skeleton is shipped in a box that's 70 liters in volume.
Also not sure if you caught this but when Eisenberg was doing her calculations for 2.2 liters it was if her remains had been ground down into "ashes". Which they had not been. She didn't grind down the actual bone fragments so her analogy is completely wrong to begin with. Had she ground them down into the powder substance it would have filled probably only 5-10% which would be the correct answer. she was literally putting the bone fragments into the bottle. Misleading isn't it?
[–]lrbinfrisco
I've read more believable stories about Elvis still being alive and hanging out with Big Foot than the prosecution's account of the bones. Seriously whoever wrote this script should be fired. The writers of Sharknado could have done a more believable job.
[–]Redditidiot1
Eisenberg actually says this:
Q "Okay. Fair enough. Um, so something, perhaps -- and this is all very rough -- uh, but perhaps two- to three-fifths, 40 to 60 percent of what might be a -- a complete skeleton --
A Correct.
Q -- in total?
A Um, no, that's -- I'm sorry. That's -- That's not what I said. In terms of expected volume from, uh, human remains of the stated weight for Ms. Halbach.
Q Yes.
A I believe if -- if you filled or put those fragments into a two-liter bottle, about 40 to -- 40 percent of that bottle would be filled"
Hmmm. "If you put those fragments into a 2 liter bottle, then 40 percent of the bottle would be filled." Its just basically a little bit of nonsense. Edit: clarity
[–]foghaze[S]
She was literally saying to put the actual fragments in the bottle. Not the ground fragments. Pretty shady huh?
[–]katekennedy
That's what a got hung up on. I asked that exact question on SAIG; were they talking about the actual bones put into a 2 liter bottle or were they saying that IF everything was ground up it would fit in that bottle?
I couldn't imagine they meant the actual bones in the bottle so I assumed it was after they were ground.
[–]foghaze[S]
I couldn't imagine they meant the actual bones in the bottle so I assumed it was after they were ground.
IMO there are several reasons we can be confident she means the actual fragments in the bottle. For one cremation to an Anthropologist does not mean modern cremation where bones are ground down. When we as layman think of cremation we think of the fine powder. To her any human body that has been burned to that level is considered cremation. The whole grinding is simply another step completely independent of cremation. Also if you pay attention to her wording carefully she means the actual fragments.
Here is her correcting Buting when he states about 40% of a human skeleton was found. She immediately says no and gives the analogy again but makes it more clear. . She is very careful not to say ANY percentage of TH at all. She is careful to always refer to the percentage of the BOTTLE.
"A. I believe if -- if you filled or put those fragments into a two-liter bottle, about 40 to -- 40 percent of that bottle would be filled" Notice she says "if you put THOSE fragments into a 2 liter".
That right there pretty much proved she was talking about bone frags and not "ashes". She is very careful about her wording and does not say 2/5 - 3/5 of TH remains were found. I believe it was deliberate because technically if she put the frags in the bottle it would fill 2/5ths so she's not really lying but she is being extremely misleading because the actual calculation she was using was if they were ground. Teresa's urn would have needed to be 2.2 liters based on her weight. 135 pounds. She did not grind them up so we know she could not possibly even know or guess what percentage those bones ground up would fill.
[–]Redditidiot1
Agreed; I brought up the crematorium estimates below. Thanks for also bringing up that the 40% was just an estimate and not actually measured. :)
[–]MMonroe54
It is unclear -- and puzzling -- why she would not have weighed the bones, each container separately, as in those in the box, and then those found in the barrel, which were apparently in some Tupperware container, and those found at the quarry (not sure how they were brought to her). Why wouldn't she want some measurement of just how many there were? I'd bet no one even did a count of bones/bone fragments. So, all they knew really was there was "a bunch of bones"....whatever "a bunch" constitutes.
[–]MMonroe54
I copied and pasted, too, and this is what I have: "And, um, as I did my -- my quick calculations, um, if Ms. Halbach's weight was as it was stated on the missing person's poster, as 135 pounds, then in terms of volume, um, what would have been expected if we were able to identify every fragment as human and group them all together, um, the volume of -- of her remains after the burning incident -- incident, after cremation of sorts, if you will, would be a little larger than a two-liter bottle of soda. And I say that with all due respect."
This is from Day 14, under Cross by Dean Strang. So what you quote is from the day before, apparently under Direct examination. I'll look for it. Thanks.
[–]foghaze[S]
"And, um, as I did my -- my quick calculations, um, if Ms. Halbach's weight was as it was stated on the missing person's poster, as 135 pounds, then in terms of volume, um, what would have been expected if we were able to identify every fragment as human and group them all together, um, the volume of -- of her remains after the burning incident -- incident, after cremation of sorts, if you will, would be a little larger than a two-liter bottle of soda. And I say that with all due respect."
Right 2.2 liters is how large her urn should be AFTER they are ground. She is not factoring in the grinding process. If you go to any cremation website they have information on what size urn you would need. It's 1 cubic inch per pound. We know crematories do not give you bone fragments. You get the "ashes". So her urn would need to be 135 cubic inches. She weighed 135 pounds.
Cremation to an anthropologist does not mean Modern cremation where the grinding is done. To them cremation is just burning a body to that extent. The grinding process is not cremation.
In reality the fragments from a cremated human (done professionally in a controlled environment) would have filled most likely 4-5 liters. That would be a complete human skeleton. If what she had only filled 2/5ths of 4-5 liters less than 10% of TH's remains were found. She purposely made this whole analogy confusing and made it sound like more fragments were found than actual was. It's short of flat out lying. IMO.
[–]MMonroe54
I've seen ashes and urns (boxes) of cremated friends. None are larger than, say, about a shoebox if it were squared instead of rectangular. None that would fill a gallon milk jug, for instance, and 4 liters = 1.056 gallon. Two were ashes of men, each of whom weighed more than 135 lbs. I think the 2 liter number (about 1/2 gal) seems about right.
[–]foghaze[S]
I've seen ashes and urns (boxes) of cremated friends. None are larger than, say, about a shoebox if it were squared instead of rectangular. None that would fill a gallon milk jug, for instance, and 4 liters = 1.056 gallon. Two were ashes of men, each of whom weighed more than 135 lbs. I think the 2 liter number (about 1/2 gal) seems about right.
You are correct and I'm not saying Ashes would fill 4 liters. I'm saying the actual fragments before being ground would. The fragments before being ground would fill about 4-5 liters.. The volume for fragments are not the same as ashes. Fragment volume is much greater. She is deliberately mixing these 2 together when she should not be. Her ASHES would be 2.2 liters yet Eisenberg says the actual FRAGMENTS would fill the bottle only 2/5ths not her ashes. She should be using the same unit of measure she is using to measure the ashes but she does not do this. It's misleading and completely messed up. Do you get it?
Evidence shared with media
submitted Jul 14, 2016 by Canuck64
Even long before the March 1st press conference, Steven Avery’s right to due process and presumption of innocence had been permanently removed.
Compare what Brendan was prompted to say to what was already widely known through the media.
Ken Kratz had both Steven and Brendan tried and convicted in the court of public opinion long before the evidence could be tested in a court of law. The trials themselves were just a formality.
I am sure this is just a sample of what was being discussed by all the media state wide, newspapers, radio, television.
WBAY News http://wbay.com/category/steven-avery-case-videos/
Nov 4
Teresa was on property taking pictures
Nov 5
RAV4 found at salvage yard.
Nov 9
Evidence human in nature found. 22 semi-automatic rifle, and 50 calibre muzzle loader.
Last seen wearing a button down shirt, blue jeans and a summer jacket. Light brown hair and brown eyes.
Nov 10
Blood, pieces of bone and teeth found on property. Bone and teeth found near residence.
Crime tape around tarp covering burn pit.
Attempt to dispose of a body by incendiary means.
Bone found of an adult female.
Inside trailer the key was found in Avery’s bedroom.
Blood found in vehicle and buildings.
Coverage of flags in gravel pit.
Nov 11
Avery’s DNA found on Teresa’s key.
Avery blood found in four places in SUV.
License plates hidden.
Cell phone and camera found in burn barrel near Avery house.
Handcuffs and leg irons,
cutting instruments, claw and rubber hammer, charred clothing found in burn barrels, ashes and much more.
Blood found in 7 locations on garage floor.
Blood found on wood trim and side door of Avery residence in close proximity to a bedroom which contained identifiers for Steven Avery.
Blood found in bathroom, on floor in front of washer and dryer.
Steve Avery has cut on right hand.
Nov 12
Interior of vehicle was not accessible to law enforcement .
Small cuts visible on Avery’s arms.
Nov 14
Cadaver dogs hit on three additional cars, one covered with a tarp, one with blood on a rag and a third with blood in the front and back seats.
Burned clothing, Partially burned shovel, barrel and steel belts coming from six tires.
A number of five gallon type buckets have been located near the Avery compound property which appear to have been utilized to distribute the burned remains.
Investigators believe Teresa was not just the victim of a homicide but also false imprisonment and sexual assault.
Divers search six area ponds.
Police said blood, bone fragments, teeth and other evidence from the search of homes, buildings and the 40-acre salvage yard determined Halbach was slain and dismembered by Steven Avery, who allegedly attempted to burn her body and other evidence. Kratz said he and Pagel called in Milwaukee Police Department officers who were involved in the Jeffrey Dahmer case, since those officers also had to work with body parts in their investigation. Dahmer, of Milwaukee, was convicted in 1992 of killing and dismembering 15 men.
Jan 19
Remains found in burn barrel positively identified a belonging to Teresa.
State lab tests were inconclusive.
Remains sent to FBI. FBI told sheriff remains are positively Teresa Halbach’s.
Candy Avery thinks Steve is guilty.
February 4
Avery investigated for 2004 sexual assault.
December 6, 2005 preliminary hearing broadcast Live http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Preliminary-Examination-2005Dec06.pdf
The RAV4 was found in the southeast corner of the salvage yard camouflaged with a hood from another car and branches. It was missing its license plates and all its doors were locked.
Fassbender The license plates were found in a vehicle on the south side of the entry road leading to Avery's residence. They were folded up.
Teresa was there to take pictures of a plymouth Voyager. Steve admitted that she took pictures on October 31st.
Steve was arrested for felon in possession of a firearm.
Steve had a substantial scabbed over cut on his middle finger on his right hand.
Steve stated that Teresa took the picture and vin number, and he paid her outside by the vehicle $40 in cash. She gave him a copy of the Auto Trader, he returned home and she left. She was not seen alive again.
Steve said that he used the burn pit on October 30th.The burn barrel about a week before the 31st.
Human remains were found in a burn area behind the garage.
Charred bones, human bones, some tissue and teeth.
Kucharski
Many of the residences, outbuildings and office were searched.
Two rifles, some bedding and a vacuum were collected for Avery residence.
Ten empty .22 shell casings were found in the garage.
Pornographic material was found.
Ammunition was found in the bedroom.
A Toyota key was found in the bedroom.
Sturdivant
Bone matter was found concentrated in the center of the burn area behind the garage.
Bones matter was intertwined with the steel belt wires.
There was a hacksaw, shovel.
Another tire that had not been burned.
A burned and rusted van seat. Also found a zipper and grommets.
Burn area looked new, not used often.
Crime lab started sifting the material but did not have to dig down. The ground was hard so they only had to scrap the surface.
The material that was collected, bones, teeth, a zipper and some metal grommets were all placed in one double bagged black garbage bag which was tied up and placed in the evidence van.
Search was completed in two and a half hours.
No processing of the scene took place the next day, it resumed on Thursday.
Eisenberg
Dr. Eisenberg received a message that remains were dropped off in a box at her office while she was out of town.
When she returned she removed the nonhuman remains from the human remains as well as other items.
They were all bagged separately.
There were many fragments smaller than a nickel and some perhaps as long as 4 to 5 inches.
None represented an entire bone, but came from almost every segment of the human skeleton.
They had gone through considerable heat and burning.
She determined the bones to come from a female.
She sorted through the bone fragments without consulting or referring to any reference materials.
Strictly a visual examination. She did not feel she was required to confirm her visual examination.
Dr. Eisenberg determined the bones came from a female based on the shape of fragments she believes are from the brow ridge above the eye socket.
Also a part of a lower arm bone and radius head was very small meaning it has to be a female.
There have been studies on it but does not know the name of the article.
She completed no chemical analysis on the bones, only visual.
Defense counsel asked if she was told through there message that the bones were human, prosection objected, sustained.
Culhane
Collected blood from the back of the RAV4 and near the ignition.
The key found in Steve's room opened the RAV4 door and turned the ignition.
DNA found on the key and blood stains near the ignition belonged to Steve Avery.
The Blood in the cargo area belonged to Teresa.
Ms. Culhane was able to develop a partial DNA profile from the charred bones and tissue consistent with Teresa.
The FBI requires 13 "core" loci matches and they provide two extra loci. Because the DNA sample was so degraded they were able to only get 7 loci matches.
She states that one person out of a billion would be consistent with Teresa.
She swabbed 10 stains found in the RAV4 but only did DNA testing on four of them.
One of the swabs she collected was from the plastic strip where the carpet meets the plactic at the cargo door. She does not recall how big this stain was and it was not one she analysed. Judge ruled that it was not relevant for the hearing.
All the discarded presumptive test swabs were tossed in an open hazardous waste can on the 2 by 3 table.
Her scissors were on that table, and all her DNA swabs which are sealed in paper envelopes were on that table as well.
She than reopens all the envelopes at her desk to allow them to dry.
The next day the key found in Avery's trailer was brought to her to the garage at the same small table she used the previous day.
Multiple people use the small table in the garage so each person cleans it with bleach before doing it.
She swabbed only the black part of it before using it to turn the ignition.
She then also laid out the swab to dry on her temporary table in the garage.
That temporary work table in the garage is used by multiple people but they each wipe it down with bleach before using it.
She than puts it back in the paper container and retains custody of it.
Kratz
Introduces the last piece of evidence by stipulation (agreement between the prosecution and defense) the certificate copy of a death certificate filed that day December 6, 2005, that designates cause of death by homicide.
[–]ajpavvo
Teeth, why were the teeth not more important and the "tissue" as well? Why did the defense not demand dentist and if there is tissue but bones burnt to such small pieces where or how does any "tissue" survive and then not tested.
[–]Canuck64[S]
Dr. Simley testified that none of the crowns survived. All he could do was clue two pieces of roots together.
And the tissue was tested as item BZ. Culhane was only able to extract a partial profile using amplified testing, while the FBI conducted mitochondrial DNA testing which could not exclude Teresa.
Avian carpometacarpus (chicken wing) bone found in photo of Teresa Halbach's remains - Non human
submitted Aug 4, 2016 by foghaze
http://i.imgur.com/GyaN4nZ.png
[–]DrCarlSpackler
The presence of a chicken bone taken from the burn area tends to preclude the theory of the intense fire claimed to cremate a body.
A fire that powerful, enough to denature a human, would destroy an unprotected, fragile chicken wing.
Errors, typos, coincidences, breaks of protocol in Avery reports and case.
submitted August 22, 2016 by Theslayerofvampires
So I thought it might be helpful to compile a list of all of the "typos", coincidences and breaks of protocol in the case. I think once you look at them all together it becomes clear they were the result of trying to make Avery look guilty. It seems unlikely all these things were just coincidences or incompetence. Here are the ones I know about. I cited all that I could find on relevant subs and from transcripts and documents. Please add any I missed in comments.
TH Rav4 found days before TK and DV are scheduled to be deposed in Avery civil suit. 11/05/05: Rav4 found 11/09/05 : Steven arrested 11/10/05: Kocourek Deposition 11/15/05: Vogel Deposition
POG finds TH rav4 and is the ONLY searcher given a camera.
TH death certificate issued 11/10/2005 bones not identified as TH till 1/19/2006
Rav4 listed as seized on 11/3/2005 http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/MTSO-Summary-Report-on-Homicide-Investigation.pdf
Magically changing evidence numbers. https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/4erlqd/sloppy_reporting_of_the_evidence_or_police_fuck/
Retired MTSO deputy Bushman lead the search that found the cell phone barrel. https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/4ktalm/retired_dep_bushman_was_group_leader_of_the_mtso/
Manitowoc coroner banned from site of TH's bones because of conflict of interest, no coroner called to the scene https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/4pdywi/coroner_debra_kakatsch_barred_from_the_crime/
Burn barrel number 4 taken into evidence then brought back to Averys, then taken back into evidence. https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/4ojvax/issues_with_burn_barrels_and_bones_found_in_pit/
New protocol invented and not validated by peer review for EDTA testing.
JB: All right. Your protocol, then, that was developed on February -- or issued on February 15th of 2007, for this case only, it's important that whoever do the test, follow the protocol as written, correct?
No forensic expert called to scene of the bones till days later, no pictures taken.
Culhane contaminated control samples with her own DNA when testing item FL (the bullet) which should invalidate the test but because she used up all the DNA in that test still accepted the contaminated test result.
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/jury-trial-index/ day 10 pg. 166 trial transcripts
No evidence of peer review of the test firing comparison of bullet.
[–]smash-_-
Typos you say?
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/4erlqd/sloppy_reporting_of_the_evidence_or_police_fuck/
[–]JBamers
TH's body is burned down to tiny bone fragments, her teeth are destroyed yet one piece of charred flesh is found. How is this even possible!
[–]MrDoradus
bones not identified as TH till 1/19/2006
What happened on this date? Afaik no one can really say when SC actually did the test that resulted in the partial match, all we know for sure is that she issued the report on it on Dec. 5th, 2005 (though it was likely done on the same day).
The profile previously developed from the apparent charred material (item BZ) is listed in the following- table (See Laboratory Report No. M05-2467 issued December 5, 2005 by this analyst)
But we can all agree on the fact that it certainly wasn't done before the death certificate was issued. Burying the official report and the actual date of when the partial match was made under plenty of layers of BS can be viewed as a break in protocol in itself.
But all in all, it's easier to ask yourself which piece of evidence was actually collected by the book. If MTSO didn't play part in collecting the evidence then a breach occurred when dealing with logistics, chain of custody or proper tagging, reporting and handling of evidence.
[–]dark-dare
I think the bones are the most fabricated evidence in the case. Everyone, even the defense, refers to them as TH bones, remains ect. There is only ONE piece of bone that was tested, ONE. BZ and it gave a partial profile from SC's swab. The rest of the bones have NEVER been determined to be from anyone. BZ could have been dry labbing or contamination, inadvertent or on purpose, by SC. Why was BZ not sent to the FBI, surely if there is flesh attached, the bone was not cremated, as were the rest of them, so it would stand to reason that it would be possible to get DNA from the bone itself. (Hope KZ tests this piece of bone) Does it have ANY relationship to the other bone fragments found, NO. So ONE piece of bone (BZ) has been partially identified,not enough to confirm identity. THAT'S IT. So why does everyone refer to the bone fragments as TH's.
[–]SBRH33
Totally agree.
I think I refer to them as TH's out of not sounding completely irrational. A form of respect I suppose.
But I very much agree that those bones are not Halbach. Where did item (BZ) get to anyway?
I've wondered if (BZ) was part of the remains CASO gave back to the Halbach's for burial.
[–]dark-dare
I hope not, I think BZ may be pivitol to KZ's experts.
[–]SBRH33
In CASO near the very end bones are given back to the family for burial.
If BZ is included in that what a clever way of keeping it out of the way for possible future DNA testing.
Exumation orders are extremely difficult to obtain.
Perhaps why the Halbachs hired the LA muscle to handle the shit storm about to open up on the shore of Lake Superior.
[–]dark-dare
Yes I saw where they gave some back in 2010, but they should have kept specific evidence until all appeals were exhausted.
[–]SBRH33
CASO definately kept some of the cremains. Probably of the most useless value. Science has evolved to the degree that something may be gleaned from the available cremains though.
[–]Theslayerofvampires[S]
Totally agree as well. If I could have anything definitively answered it would be the bones. They bug me so much.
[–]JJacks61
Culhanes deviation was NOT signed off by her supervisor. She FORGOT.
I hope Zellner has affidavits from both people saying they didn't know anything about it. No peer review on the bullet. No I was never asked to sign a deviation for a screwed up dna test.
[–]SBRH33
Are you serious? WTF? How did I miss that?!
Damn thats twice for one single piece of evidence.... the piece that
puts Halbach in the garage
[–]SBRH33
I wish I didn't need signatures for my certifications! LMAO!
[–]Theslayerofvampires[S]
Is that testimony? Is it when she's being cross examined?
[–]JJacks61
Is that testimony? Is it when she's being cross examined?
Yes, it's in her cross exam testimony.
Related:
- Making a Murderer's Steven Avery named as 'killer' just 154 minutes
- Making a Murderer: Teresa Halbach's death certificate slammed
- 21 Root Fragments, 2 Bone Fragments and 1 Bone Fragment with Root Structure
[–]7-pairs-of-panties
ReplyDeleteIn the CASO reports MW goes to the Halbach home and speaks w/ the mother questioning on female relatives, other children, relations that had died. If those bones aren't TH's, then maybe this avenue. I don't wanna think they'd dig someone up to do this....but this case gets more strange every day so....
[–]Bloody-User-Name
I think that is one of the strangest things I've seen in CASO page 420 inquiring about dead female relatives. So weird and the day of wake & before TH funeral? What kind of LE ask stuff like that?
[–]NAmember81
They even asked the H's where dead female relatives were buried.
[–]HuNuWutWen 9 points 3 months ago
ReplyDeleteThe relative proximity of these remaining facial bone fragments to the jawbone and teeth certainly raises the question, where are the teeth ?...
...the question DEMANDS a reasonable answer...KZ is not going to just gloss over these matters...these are the nitty-gritty issues... Dean and Jerry simply didn't have the luxury of time, to drill down on these particulars...KZ has time, and a team...
...the skull would most likely have been intact from the onset of cremation, meaning that the bone fragments pictured would have been subjected to heat/flame very similar to that which the jawbone and teeth would endure...
...yet the much more heat resistant enamel teeth are MISSING ?...
...this does not make sciency-sense...
...and Eisenberg states for the record, her scientific opinion that these "bones" were NOT moved to SA firepit, from an original burn site...WTF ?
...the CRACK-TEAM of intrepid crime scene tech wizards scooped up Steven's back yard with a BOBCAT front-loader ...delicate, respectful, Standard Operating Procedures ?...these bastards are EVIL...
...they unceremoniously dumped all the material on tarps which were laid out on the adjacent ground...
...and then these fucking idiots started sifting...like pre-schoolers in a sandbox...no grid, no photos, no contam path, no controls whatsoever...
...this is SO WRONG, on so many levels, words escape me...
...they didn't allow the LEGALLY REQUIRED CORONER to attend the scene...nor was this idiot Eisenberg on site...
...but on Nov 5th, there's a newly ordained Special Prosecutor standing on the judge's front lawn, waiting for Pam of God to call...yeah, search warrant in less than 45 minutes...for a "missing, endangered" person, right ?... YEAH BABY ! WE BE PROSECUTIN'...such an obvious frame-job...
...regardless, the likelihood of ALL THE TEETH escaping this excavation and archaeological GONG SHOW ?...NOT BLOODY LIKELY
................................................................................................
...Eisenberg is not even sure of her own testimony...
... nor has she actually tested these particular bone fragments to determine with any degree of scientific certitude, to whom or what these fragments belong...there's actually chicken wing bone entered along with these exhibits...CHICKEN BONE...
...there does exist DNA evidence to strongly indicate that Teresa Halbach was a victim of violence...the source(s) of that evidence are definitely NOT these particular bone fragments...
...is she really a "Doctor" ?...who knows ?...
...she found a box of "charred material" on her desk...a cardboard box...with absolutely NO CHAIN OF CUSTODY documentation...
...I cannot fathom how Willis allowed any of this bullshit in his courtroom...but he did...
..."Doctor" Eisenberg cannot testify as to the location of collection for these alleged "bone fragments"...nor that they are the remains of Teresa Halbach...yet she did testify...
...just more leaks in the sinking dinghy of the State's case...
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/6iqfw2/additional_bones/
[–]HuNuWutWen 33 points 8 months ago
ReplyDelete"IF" Avery was guilty he would absolutely do whatever he could to save his own skin...the most basic element of Human Nature...SURVIVAL...self-preservation, it's what we do...
...that's why I know, in my logical mind, that Avery did not kill Teresa Halbach...and I don't give a fuck what anyone says to the contrary...they are wrong...imo, of course...ha!
...Avery was warned 3 times within a 24 hour period...
once by AC on the 3rd...he had the rest of the afternoon and evening to ponder whether or not LE might be onto him...
...and what?...Avery doesn't lift a finger to conceal his heinous crimes?...oh, but wait, there's more...
...Avery has a morning meet'n'greet with Lenk and Remiker...
...let's them search his trailer?...keep in mind, if this a guilty Avery...
...Avery would absolutely know the three of them were standing amidst the bones, bullets, plates, phone, PDA, camera, key and gun, and the fucking 3000lb. blood soaked Rav4 was sitting yonder...
...and what?...Avery doesn't lift a finger to conceal his heinous crimes...nor does he twig to the notion that LE might maybe sorta kinda be onto him...
...but wait, there's more...yeah, I know, it's insulting to your intelligence, but this shit actually happened...
...TV News crew shows up on the 4th, couple hours after the cops...
...yeah, a TV News crew...asking Avery "if the cops asked him to take a polygraph"...What the fuck?...Teresa is a "missing" person, what the fuck is this reporter talking about?...
...if Avery was guilty, and the reporter asked him about lie-detectors?...
...then what?...Avery takes them on a guided tour of ASY...
...and then what?...
...does Avery finally clue in?...does he realize that the cops are onto him?...NOPE !!...
...It is the next sequence of behaviors that convince me that Avery had no idea whatsoever what had happened to TH, nor did he have any clue as to the lengths that DV and TK were about to go...
...Avery leaves all of this "evidence", childishly "hidden", and the Rav4?...are you fucking kidding me?...remember now, we are hypothesizing about a "guilty" Avery...a murderer...he knows where all these items are, and the Rav4?...c'mon...please...
...after 3 warning visits, and a cursory search, Avery does nothing to protect himself?...and the car lights that night, down in the pit?...
...it is blatantly obvious, at this point in time, that Avery has no idea what may have happened to Teresa Halbach, and how would Avery have any way of knowing what LE was about to do to him?...is he supposed to guess?...
...this is especially telling, given the nature of Avery's relationship with MTSO...if Steven was guilty...
...these people fucked Steven out of 18 years of his freedom, these are the last people who Steven would knowingly leave himself vulnerable to...he simply didn't know what was going on, other than the fact that he himself had done nothing wrong, so he had nothing to hide... what does Steven then do?...
...Yup, Steve goes to the cabin, for the weekend, CUZ that's what murderers do, they leave numerous pieces of easy-to-find undeniable evidence of their own guilt, all over their property...and then go away for some R'n'R...
...who in their right mind believes this fucking bullshit?...certainly nobody at TTM...
...The fact that 2 men are doing LIFE as a result of this travesty makes me physically ill...
...But KZ is the best in her business, and I think she will spring Steven, even if on procedural grounds, ...
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/5nyopg/why_would_steven_avery_put_every_penny_he_and_his/
Perhaps the most egregious ruling Judge Willis made in SA's case..... (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeleteby MMonroe54
was barring the defense from calling Manitowoc County Coroner Debra Kakatsch to testify about how she was barred from the burn pit scene by first Wiegert and later her own County Executive and Corporate Counsel.
Willis' appears to struggle, himself, to justify his ruling, especially because the conflict of interest claim by the prosecution was patently ridiculous in that Manitowoc County officers had been all over the investigation. Willis actually says that "this witness has nothing to do with the Sheriff's Department." And says this: "What -- what would be her competence to perform this duty considering the other plain state people that we've heard from?" Never mind that her position as the County Coroner implies, indeed, justifies, her competence, as well as her duty. Or that this is still a county matter, not just a state matter. He seems to think that because there were state investigators on the scene, that was enough.....even though there was no coroner, no one to actually perform the duty that a coroner normally does at a death....a death that the state itself argued the bones proved.
He also goes as far as to say that the claim of bias is limited to Colborn and Lenk, since they were deposed in the civil suit. And he falls back on what is probative and his oft used concern about confusing the jury.
That Wisconsin law actually dictates that the County Coroner be called to the scene in such a case seems to escape him.....or he ignores it. This must have been a blow to the defense. Strang argues well, but is overruled in what doesn't even seem a close call. Willis keeps talking about what is probative without once considering that what was done where Kakatsch was concerned could be probative in the defense's claim of bias.
We have to wonder how the jury would have received Kakatch's testimony in that there was really no excuse for her being walled off. None. I'd think they would have asked themselves why those in charge were so determined that she not be admitted to the scene. Was it because she would stop their hurried excavation of the burn site -- which she almost certainly would have in that she and her deputies had already contacted both a forensic pathologist and forensic anthropologist. And if that was not the reason, that she would have delayed the excavation, what possible (justifiable) reason could they have? The "conflict of interest" argument is the weakest the state makes, and would be laughable under other circumstances.
The barring of Kakatsch, by Wiegert et al, was, imo, the most blatant disregard for transparency in the investigation of a case that seemed to have more than its share.
It's at http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Jury-Trial-Transcript-Day-19-2007Mar08.pdf#page=197. Kakatch's testimony begins on page 197.
CONTINUED...
[–]Casablank10
ReplyDeleteDK had previously shown great integrity to her position as coroner. She chose integrity over playing along with the old-boys network. They knew she could not be trusted to cooperate with the framing of Steven Avery, so she had to be barred.
[–]7926BZQ1
Yeah that really stands out as absurdly inconsistent responses by Willis with a seemingly preordained outcome.
Did the state ever even have to explain why the Calumet ME wasn't even called out instead? I mean according to official records anyway he wasn't there until the 10th and even then only over at the quarry. I personally believe he was probably at the ASY on earlier days but noticed nothing unusual about the burn pit, as neither did the fire remains investigators.
[–]7926BZQ1
The only time he's reported by Calumet sheriffs records as being out there yeah. Isn't there a log of people accessing the ASY...I checked but can only see Nov 5th, (and then March 2006), is that the only day we have, why?
[–]Tiger_Town_Dream
Here's a link to a post where the logs for each day have been put into a searchable spreadsheet.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/50jrvy/crime_scene_sign_inout_links/
[–]7926BZQ1
Ah thanks, so Klaeser did only log in to the ASY on the 10th in the afternoon. Leaves after less than an hour, apparently Pagel, Fassbender & Wiegert are accompanying him to the quarry; then less than half an hour later he leaves again.
[–]MMonroe54[S]
I think there is no "good" explanation, which makes me wonder why they were so adamant about keeping her out. It's possible they didn't want her there because they knew she'd stop what they were doing, or they didn't want her in particular (MCSO, anyway) because they had a history with her. Or, there was something about the bones they didn't want her to see. Whatever their reasons, they were not justifiable.
[–]heelspider
Especially when you also consider that the cops were interested enough in the fire pit they asked both SA and BD about it on the 6th, yet simultaneously were so disinterested in it that they never even bothered to walk over and look at it for another two days... allegedly.
[–]idunno_why
In addition, JR mentioned seeing a fire and LE had him write/sign a statement at the crime scene on the afternoon of the 5th. And we now know, per his recent affidavit, that they pressured him to "embellish" that statement.
[–]MMonroe54[S]
Exactly. When he reported a fire, you'd think they would immediately begin examining burn barrels and that burn pit. And yet they didn't for 3 days.
[–]7926BZQ1
They don't admit they did for 3 days. They surely did, repeatedly, and probably disturbed the pit in doing so after those photos were taken on the 6th maybe. But then they had to explain why no one noticed anything unusual and then why they excavated suddenly on the 8th.
CONTINUED...
[–]MMonroe54[S]
ReplyDeleteYes, it seems apparent they were breaking laws by shutting her out. Or, if conflict of interest was their excuse -- which it was -- by not calling the Calumet County coroner BEFORE they began excavating that burn site. Because the law said that some coroner was supposed to be called to the scene. Actually, no one even considered it, apparently. Sturdivant just ordered the sifting equipment brought round and the digging began.....according to Ertl's testimony.
Willis seemed to think that the Manitowoc County coroner being walled out had no bearing on anything; that it was just something that happened, with the conflict of interest as the reason, and that Kakatsch's testimony would be prejudicial instead of probative. He didn't seem to think the jury needed to hear that she been forbidden to do the job she took an oath and was elected to do. If it was all so innocent -- that she was told not to come only because of a conflict of interest -- then the prosecution could have explained that on Cross. Except they couldn't.....because other Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department officers were on site...and had been since the first day.
[–]Tiger_Town_Dream
Right. Conflict of interest was not the reason because they didn't contact any coroner. That's just the excuse they came up with after the fact for why they didn't. It is laughable that it didn't occur to any person from either sheriff's department and the crime lab to follow standard lawful procedures and contact a coroner.
Willis seemed to think that the Manitowoc County coroner being walled out had no bearing on anything; that it was just something that happened
Which is quite simply ridiculous. How could he think that the jury didn't need to hear her testimony? How would that be prejudicial to the jury when it supported the defense is claim of bias? It wouldn't, and Willis knew that which is why he wouldn't allow her to continue her testimony. Because it would demonstrate how ridiculous their entire argument about conflict of interest was and directly contradict the prosecution's argument of why MTSO officers were allowed to search Steven Avery's bedroom.
[–]Bubba2016
Guess LE didn’t want to coroner to discover that the bones were never there
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/7vofk3/perhaps_the_most_egregious_ruling_judge_willis/
[–]OzTm
With the combination of testimony about: 1. The burn pit not being photographed because it had been altered; and 2. The coroner being denied access to the site
This confirms in my mind that the bones were never in the pit.
In both cases above, the testimony was simple ass covering to explain why they didn't do their jobs. And in both cases, this is because there was no job to be done - they just couldn't admit that in the stand!
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/7u4tmy/burn_pit_photo_exhibit_50/
[–]OliviaD2 16 points 21 hours ago
ReplyDeleteWow. Some actual accurate reporting. Pagel told them the truth. It is no revelation if one looks at the data and understands it. Unfortunately the public listened to a press conference on 1/19/2006.. where (intentional ?? or not) - it was announcing the FBI mtDNA results (which could be significant if they could be trusted) HOWEVER.. used the language from SC's inconclusive (the correct terminology :) ) report.. i.e. 'one in a billion"..
Then Mike Halbach came on, thanking the State Crime Lab... And they 'knew it was her". The public doesn't know the difference between the FBI lab and the State Crime Lab or mtDNA vs swiss cheese.. and the prosecution made damn sure they were not educated.
Per the State Crime Lab Protocol...the profile SC obtained on BZ was not sufficient for 'source attribution'.. i.e. it could not be an ID. Damn, I hate that reddit doesn't allow me to attach things.. I have an article re: this.. I'm cussing 'cuz I have to use this imgur thing to show my article inserts,which is a pain in the 'arse
http://imgur.com/a/qkYu7
This from the QA/QC manual (above). SC WAS NOT showing all that information (the specific alleles), the stats to be thorough. it was because she HAD TO. SHE DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH LOCI to attribute a source (i.e. ID), therefore she had to show how the results. She (or they no doubt, with KK).. then did the statistics thing to convince people her profile was good enough, I mean what are the odds...?? (well, I will have more to say about that, lol.. I believe this warrants a post .. )
Of course, barring that, she can do pretty much whatever she wants.. as the "protocol" for interpreting STR results is up to her "professional interpretation".. because well, in the crime lab.. there are no real guidelines...
http://imgur.com/a/8mjJg
so she can use a little of her "professional judgment" in using the word 'source' in her 12/5/05 report - HOWEVER - notice for SA (where full profiles are obtained), she doesn't have to give any explanation, just can say he is the "source". For BZ, however, since she can't really do that, she goes on with her "statistics".
http://imgur.com/a/fYTqY
However, during the trial.. so as to not perjure herself.. she is honest.. that she cannot claim TH is the "source"
http://imgur.com/a/qG8du
Although.. according to her "scientific certainty".. she says so right there in black and white in her report.
That they were able to pull this off makes my head spin...because what is SO frustrating .. is that it wasn't even hidden!! Apparently the power of belief is so strong it was more important than facts...
And I guess it's okay to write a little "untruth" in an official lab report.. what the hell..
Amazingly, Pagel is spot on!! The WI State Crime Lab could not ID the remains, SC testified to that in court, so this is no shock. It didn't matter.. because people believed what they wanted. He is even right about fire destroying DNA... in fact.. DNA, even mtDNA is obtained from remains burned as badly as these. Which is what the FBI found when they tested all the 30 some bone fragments (second report, different analyst).
Yet, a piece of "tissue" (understand -- bone is much more resistant.... ) gave a perfectly usable profile (this is one of my concerns w/ FBI report.. will go into that more). The tissue was clearly degraded.. however, an "unburned bone".. as Eisenberg testified would be a beautiful source, your best shot, at getting good mtDNA. But they didn't use it.
Once again.. a press conference sealed the deal. I have a link to that somewhere.. I'll try to find it.
CONTINUED...
[–]OpenMind4U 6 points 20 hours ago*
ReplyDeleteThank you Olivia! Every your word breaths love of science! You're absolutely correct and I wish one day you'll keep your word and make the separate post on MtDNA explaining con's and pro's of such test.
In regards of OP and what Fog is making the point of, is the date of the article! On 11/18/05, SC didn't have her BZ test result yet...her crazy BZ result was ready in December 2005 with full confirmation in March 2006 report!...meaning, NOTHING was known about BZ or FBI Q1 MtDNA result in November 18/05!!!
So, if nothing was available to Pagel yet on 11/18/05 then how could he state that he satisfied and TH parents satisfied???? Based on what he and TH parents have satisfaction???
You see where I'm going?
[–]7-pairs-of-panties 13 points 22 hours ago
Pagle was the one to tell the public that the FBI called it a match. SC and KK were "careful not to say that, but w/perceptionions are as they are."...........
[–]iolouthief 6 points 22 hours ago
by this time SC should have already tested the "tibia" with tissue on it to ID her. BZ or BS?
[–]foghaze[S] 16 points 22 hours ago
No that's what's interesting. They find the tissue later. Funny how when something doesn't go in their favor more evidence pops up. This went on for 6 months after the discovery of TH RAV. (The hood latch. The Bullet. The Tissue. Don't forget Dassey's confession). Kratz knew they couldn't convince a jury with just a key, plates, handcuffs and the RAV.
[–]iolouthief 14 points 22 hours ago
Remember SC testified at trial she cut a little piece of tissue away from BZ to DNA test on 11/11/05 this was a day after LeE said she already sent BZ to the FBI. In dec she reports the partial match. FBI says they can only do the mitochondria dna test to narrow it down to a female relative. KK prides himself in an email on letting the public perception be that it's a match. This was how twisted and convoluted things were. But here we have JP stating before the State Crime Lab report is out that she couldn't match the remains to TH and so it's going to the FBI. How did he already know SC couldn't match it? I think because even her partial match is BS.
[–]OpenMind4U 8 points 22 hours ago*
Absolutely NOT!!!!!! SC has BZ test result in March 2006!!!
So, we have only two options here: OP article is from 11/18/06 or Pagel shoot (whole investigation and HIMSELF) in the foot, deadly, SOB!!
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Steven-Avery-Trial-Exhibit-312.pdf
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Steven-Avery-Trial-Exhibit-313.pdf
[–]foghaze[S] 9 points 22 hours ago
Well, they find the tissue later. Conveniently after they say they couldn't identity the remains. Kinda like all the other stuff found months AFTER their 7 day search. It's ridiculous.
[–]OpenMind4U 13 points 22 hours ago
Correct!...issue with this freaking BZ tissue is another disgusting 'story'....but if your OP article is from 11/18/05 (not 06) then Pagel's statement is more than BIAS ooops...his statement is huge proof that this case is ILLUSION, planted in advance.
[–]7-pairs-of-panties 9 points 22 hours ago
I believe the article was from 05. In the article it says that the family was preparing for a visitation memorial that night. It has to have been in 05.
[–]OpenMind4U 16 points 22 hours ago
I know, I know....!!!! I simply want people to THINK and realize that in 11/18/05 Pagel and TH parents have absolutely NOTHING to be 'satisfied it's her'!...
no bones/tissue identification yet!;
no FBI MtDNA confirmation yet!;
no conversation with KH about her maternal line yet!;
no tooth identification yet!;
no scalp's fragments x-ray identification yet!;
no bullet yet!......
NOTHING, except TH RAV4 with her blood DNA in cargo.
[–]foghaze[S] 2 points 10 hours ago
ReplyDeleteYou say they completed their report Jan 2006 but it was actually a year later in 2007. Just before trial. That's a huge deal.
[–]Canuck64 1 point 7 hours ago
The report for the mtDNA testing on the charred tissue which was sent in by Culhane is dated January 17, 2006.
The report for the bones fragments which were sent in by Dr. Eisenberg on November 2, November 7 and December 19 of 2006 is dated January 12, 2007.
[–]foghaze[S] 1 point 6 hours ago
Culhane didn't do an MtDNA test though. This is a confusing mess.
[–]Canuck64 1 point 6 hours ago
No she did not, which is why she sent the sample to the FBI.
[–]foghaze[S] 1 point 4 hours ago*
Ok, so the FBI report on DNA is dated Jan 2007 for the bones.
https://stopwrongfulconvictions.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/fbi-dna-results1.pdf#page=3
Where is the report from FBI on this tissue in 06? Why would they send in the bones later if they got a match from tissue? It's not adding up at all.
[–]Canuck64 1 point 4 hours ago
I had the link included in my post above. Here it is again. It is also located at stevenaverycase.org but I also have trouble finding it again.
FBI DNA Results on BZ https://imgur.com/a/kRHJY
I suppose they sent the bones to cover all bases. Only the cranial bones were confirmed human. All other bones were "suspected" or "possible" human.
Based on the evidence, all I can say is that they definitely found the remains of a human head and part of a neck. However the facial bones which were recovered are very fragile and normally do not survive a fire hot enough to destroy the large leg, arm and pelvic bones.
FBI bone fragments https://imgur.com/gallery/MxCNR
[–]foghaze[S] 1 point 4 hours ago*
Ok I sorta see it now but there is no conclusion on the tissue submitted and received 11/23/05. ???? Is this missing from your SS?
Why would they send bones a year later when the tissue cleared it up? Makes no sense.
Note the results say TH cannot be excluded. This is science mumbo jumbo for we cannot conclude it's TH but we cannot exclude. This is why the FBI didn't testify. It proved nothing. Which answers my question about why they sent in the bones a year later.
[–]Canuck64 1 point 4 hours ago
There is more information in the motion for exculpatory information and the Feb 2nd 2007 pretrial hearing. It's around page 80 upwards. I'm at work right now and don't have time to collect all the information.
The FBI did not testify because Buting had their witnesses and evidence blocked because the prosecution did not submit their names before the December 15, 2006 deadline. They were Carl Adrian (FBI), Eric Smith (FBI), and Robin Cotton.
[–]foghaze[S] 1 point 10 hours ago
It says TH cannot be excluded. That does not mean a match. FYI
[–]Canuck64 1 point 6 hours ago
There is no such thing as a match, a "match" is always described as cannot be excluded. FYI
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/61bd02/harold_times_reports_crime_lab_unable_to_identify/
Examining the suspicious manner in which Ken Kratz tried to manipulate the Court into prematurely ruling on the admissibility of Teresa Halbach’s death certificate by Temptedious in TickTockManitowoc
ReplyDelete[–]foghaze 4 points 5 hours ago*
So my question is while searching all this did you find the chain of custody where Eisenberg sent the fragments to the Coroner on the 10th? My concern is Leslie was inspecting the fragments on the 10th herself and the frags had also presumably been in the possession of the crime lab since Nov 9th. When and where exactly did the coroner inspect these fragments to even make the decision about Teresa's death on the 10th? Is there any documentation showing the corner went to Eisenbirgs office to examine the frags? Unfortunately I'm pretty sure I already know the answer.
There is no chain of custody showing Eisenberg sent the frags to the corner and there is no documentation showing the coroner went to the crime lab to inspect the fragments. So the question is how could he possibly have made a decision by Nov 10, 2005 the frags belonged to Teresa? The answer is he clearly couldn't and my guess is no coroner ever examined the fragments and the Death Cert was filled out by an unauthorized person. This is why the Calumet Coroner was never called and why he wasn't called to the stand. Furthermore, I believe no pics of the pit exist because nothing in those pics proved human remains were ever there. I also believe the pit showed no signs that a gruesome murder ever took place. It would have been underwhelming and unconvincing to the jury and Kratz full well knew it. This is why all the coroners were banned from the scene. So Kratz decides instead of actually offering pics of the murder scene (gruesome pics that would support Hayze vs State.). He pulled this Death Cert BS out of his ass. I'm convinced LE fabricated the crime scene and disseminated it to the media in an effort to engrain this false narrative into the minds of the community. I believe you're theory is correct but not only was the manner of death crossed out by someone else, I believe the whole DC was filled out by an unauthorized person. Meaning it was fabricated too. Just like everything else.
So let me get this straight.. they call in over 200 LEO and other support to search the salvage yard, yet animal control is a step they are unwilling to take. They let a dog guard the fire pit for 4 days until his leash got tangled. Since they were so afraid of the dog I am assuming no one fed or watered him...
[–]MMonroe54 3 points 8 hours ago
If there was a crust over the top of the burn area, from the recent rain, how and why were two bones lying directly on the top? The rain washed the ash off? This sounds suspiciously, though probably unintentionally, as if the bones were "placed" there.
[–]AVERYMANOR 1 point 7 hours ago
I agree, this makes me believe the bones arrived after the hard rain. Late Sunday night/wee hours of Monday AM.
[–]bluecardinal14 2 points 10 hours ago*
We don't know for sure when the pic with Bear was taken but the top pic after excavating the top portion of the pit and sifting in it has no leaves.
Before any excavation there were leaves in it. http://imgur.com/a/viiK5
[–]SBRH33 3 points 6 hours ago
What is absolutely fantastically unbelievable is that any of those large stones located in the fire pit would be coated with all kinds of fats from the body burning. In fact the pit itself would stink to high heaven of rot from the degrading fats from the body that oozed into the soil.
They are so full of shit.
It is for these reasons the pit was ordered destroyed in the days before it was handed back over to the Avery's..... To absolutely destroy the evidence that a body was never cremated in that pit.
CONTINUED...
[–]bluecardinal14 2 points 5 hours ago
ReplyDeleteYou bring up excellent points. I've always believed the cremation happened at another site and the pit has been talked about everywhere ad nauseam. The answer doesn't lie in undated photos and leaves.
[–]tricanuck 2 points 8 hours ago
Your top picture appears to me that it was dug out by the loader and then was staged with rake. Bottom picture has no rake and black charcoal remains on top. So to me your bottom pic is prior to excavation.JMO
http://i.imgur.com/Rn8AuRq.png
[–]Raycorg100x 1 point 4 hours ago
Are those leaves from the same trees on his property or near the fire pit? Where they the same size, could it had come from the pit trees did they match the leaves from Stevens tree,were they tested.
[–]dogiggy 2 points 12 hours ago
Leaves came from the quarry, no doubt, if they were all dead on the yard.
Do you realize that without 100% tooth confirmation and without 100% BZ/Q1 confirmation (charred bone tissue) we have ZERO proof that TH is dead? (Her blood in RAV4 can point to injury. Not necessarily death).
ReplyDeleteWe really don't have PROOF of a death at all. Hell, we don't even have her real keys!
[–]s_wardy_s 5 points 1 day ago
I'd be sure there's a lot of people who think the same and are reluctant to admit it. How on earth did human tissue survive when over 60% of the bones were disintegrated and the teeth didn't even survive? And that BZ match wasn't even a full match to her own pap smear DNA, in fact, less than a 50% match, only 7 pairs matched, when the FBI database won't accept less than 9 pairs. Culhane said there wasn't enough mtDNA to test, though if it's true that the sample was some tissue left on a shin bone, then wouldn't the shin bone contain lots of bone marrow, a great source of human DNA, surely if some flesh on the bone survived, then the bone itself would have protected the marrow inside?
[–]OpenMind4U 6 points 1 day ago
Culhane said there wasn't enough mtDNA to test, though if it's true that the sample was some tissue left on a shin bone, then wouldn't the shin bone contain lots of bone marrow, a great source of human DNA, surely if some flesh on the bone survived, then the bone itself would have protected the marrow inside?
Couple issues here. MtDNA test was performed by FBI with 'certain' result of match with KH maternity line. So, MtDNA was done. but not by SC.
In regards of bone marrow, it depends on intense of bone cremation and specific bone. Marrow could be lost but... how in hell the tissue can survive outside for 8 days with grass around??? this is a huge question, for me for sure....
[–]mickeytrtan 3 points 16 hours ago
Feels good to embrace that fact does it not? #Facade by those in the know of making the SA guilty campaign a reality.... JP states it was worst crime scene in his 30yrs in LE lol, before they found anything relevant pointing to a crime which didn't happen. #RueTheDayTheySay Was KP being away his oppty to remote control the plays from the press box b4 returning just in time to watch chaos unfold and announce he was staying out of it all. lol Holy Sheep Shit did these bastids pull a fast one on the public. The very scope of this whole debacle is so #Bigly the people of Manitowoc, Wisconsin & the entire country quite frankly will be so outraged & this will go down in history as the most egregious crime by LE&Politicians vs a United States Citizen, (TWICE) of an INNOCENT.
The teeth, or lack thereof, is a critical piece of evidence. (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeleteby deanty1205
Being a tooth-obsessed dentist I have of course found the dental identification of TH’s cremains very “interesting”. I’ve done quite a lot of reading now about burned remains and dental identification and that together with my general dental knowledge have come up with some ideas based on this…..
Some facts I have confirmed…..
Teeth DO survive professional cremation. They are very weakened but they survive. They are destroyed through grinding process after cremation. Forensic odontologists have actually been called in to situations where cremains have been co-mingled accidentally and have been able to determine who’s remains are present.
Professional cremation is usually at 1800degF (982degC) and takes 2-3 hours.
Images I have seen of the dental fragments recovered from SA’s burnpit appear to have been heated to somewhere near 1000degC.
https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/teeth-in-fire--morphologic-and-radiographic-alterations-an-in-vitro-study-2157-7145-1000277.php?aid=40978
We must bear in mind that the images of the teeth in this article were heated without any surrounding body so heating a tooth within a skull with associated soft tissues would have required this high temperature for much longer.
I’ve been through some scenarios in my mind several times. One basic question is…. if LE planted TH’s remains, would they not want them to be easily ID’d? Of course they would, no question. I believe it is fairly common knowledge that in many fire-related deaths, dental ID is required as DNA is very readily destroyed by heat. LE would have known this for sure. Dr Simley was able to recover 25 fragments of teeth – no whole teeth. So where are the teeth? What does this mean? I believe the dental tissues were removed so as NOT to be able to identify the owner of the cremains. Why? Because I do not believe the cremains found in SA’s burnpit belonged to TH.
Let’s go through 3 scenarios:
CONTINUED...
1) SA BURNED TH’S BODY IN THE BURNPIT
ReplyDeleteIf this was the case then ALL of her dental tissues should have been present. If pieces of skull were recovered then it stands to reason that the head was burned in that location along with the teeth within it. Without professional grinding/processing of the cremains (even if the fire reached professional cremation temperatures which is EXTREMELY UNLIKELY) the teeth would have been weakened but all present and in tact. Teeth to not vaporize. I guess SA could have carefully removed the teeth to avoid ID?...... Another example of our idiot genius?!? Lol.... I don't think so.
2) LE PLANTED TH’S CREMAINS IN THE BURNPIT
As I discussed above, had LE planted TH’s cremains then they would have wanted an easy ID. ALL TH’S dental tissues should have been present. Dental ID is commonly needed in fire-related deaths. Would LE have removed her teeth to make ID difficult? It doesn’t make sense. Even if LE had hired a hitman to do their dirty work, they would not have wanted the body to be unidentifiable.... it was needed for a frame up.
3) LE PLANTED CREMAINS NOT BELONGING TO TH IN THE BURNPIT
IF the cremains did not belong to TH then LE would have had to make sure that the cremains could not exclude TH as the owner. Dental identification occurs through both inclusive identifying features and also excluding – eg. finding a premolar with a gold crown on it when the victim did not have any gold crowns would exclude them as the source of the remains. What would be the best way for LE to ensure TH would not be excluded? Remove the teeth! That way they were left with remains of an anonymous 25-35 year old female. I think the 25 dental fragments were accidentally left in the cremains. Dr Simley says himself that it can be very hard to distinguish these fragments from wood. Once the forensic anthropologist and forensic dentist were involved I believe they were told to make it work, that the cremains belonged to TH. Dr Simley glued together 2 pieces of tooth root and likely look MANY x-rays until he achieved one that fitted best to TH’s x-rays. As we’ve all observed… it doesn’t match that well…… (Dental exhibits can be found on stevenaverycase.org)
After considering the above 3 scenarios, I believe that the cremains found in the burnpit do NOT belong to TH. For me, nothing else makes sense.
Here’s what I think happened……
TH’s burned body was discovered at Kuss Rd on 11/07. The body had not been sufficiently burned to disguise cause of death and perhaps LE were concerned that the killer(s) DNA may still be present. LE were running out of time on the search! They did not have time to burn the body further and plant it effectively. I believe they decided to plant an anonymous young female's cremains in SA’s burnpit – remains that had been professionally cremated. They removed what they believed was all the remaining dental and any other identifying tissues to avoid ID. They placed a piece of TH’s actual shin bone with attached tissue in the burn barrel. The shin bone would not give away cause of death and was unlikely to contain the killer’s DNA. I believe they assumed that with the attached tissue that a positive DNA match would not be a problem. When this didn’t happen and the mtDNA match was questionable, KK decided that this perhaps was not convincing enough so brought in Dr Simley. I believe Dr Simley was told from the outset that the cremains belonged to TH and that he needed to make a match to one of her x-rays. A bit akin to “put her in the garage”. I think LE discovering TH’s body already burned would explain why they did not have access to her hair, blood and fingerprints for planting.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/7ykpom/the_teeth_or_lack_thereof_is_a_critical_piece_of/
[–]rachabe 15 points 2 months ago*
ReplyDeleteCB's death and the timing have never set well with me. Also, I never understood how the same LE at the same time of the Huge SA/TH "story" found it in their hearts to assist with CB's funeral arrangements. Something is definitely "off" in this situation. Edited: changed "expenses" to "arrangements".
[–]August141981 14 points 2 months ago
That’s a rumour in regards to LE assistance with expenses, they did however offer to assist with arrangements for cremation. That conversation started before her body even removed from her apartment
[–]rachabe 10 points 2 months ago
Thanks for the heads up. I will edit my response. To me, just helping with arrangements sounds fishy... LE doesn't exactly come across as the most compassionate /morally ethical group of people...
[–][deleted] 4 points 2 months ago
I don’t understand why on earth they would have ANYTHING at all to do with some random persons cremation unless she were somehow working for them. If she were employed by them and killed on the job maybe or if they caused her death by accident... to me, there should be no reason for LE to cover the cremation/arrangements ever. If the family weren’t able to afford the cost, isn’t there some type of system that can help them? Medicaid or even a funeral home financial plan? It’s strange!
[–][deleted] 8 points 2 months ago
Is it true though a comment I saw from a while ago, maybe even by yourself, that CB's family witnessed the coffin being put in a hearse early afternoon on the 8th, prior to funeral services and cremation?
And at the SA burn pit the burned fragments on top were first initially 'found' early afternoon on the 8th? But not with anthropologist Bennett until the 9th I think and not seen by Eisenberg until the 10th, and the crucial fragments not identified until the 11th...
Any theory on how it might all tie together? I gather the CB family didn't get the ashes back until 3 weeks later but when and where did the cremation happen?
[–]7-pairs-of-panties 12 points 2 months ago
3 weeks to get cremains back is a very long time. In my recent experience we got the cremains back the very next morning after the funeral/ family viewing of body. The funeral ended at noon and we got the cremains back to bury the next morning by 7:30 am. I'll repeat 3 weeks is a very long time if that is what her family waited to get them back.
[–][deleted] 3 points 2 months ago
Absolutely, same here, with my experience it was the next day. 3wks is odd.
CONTINUED...
[–]August141981 8 points 2 months ago
ReplyDeleteThe family placed her coffin into the back of the hurst immediately after her open casket funeral with the understanding she was being taken away for cremation and it was weeks later before family received her cremains back
[–][deleted] 4 points 2 months ago
I can't imagine them not knowing where the body was being taken for cremation? And did they not get any documentation? (maybe not if MCSO arranged it?)
[–]foghaze 6 points 2 months ago
I've never heard of cremation after the funeral. If someone is cremated it's before the funeral. The funeral ceremony is with the cremains. Something is very odd about how she was cremated. Furthermore you don't spend thousands on a casket when someone is cremated.
[–]August141981 6 points 2 months ago
Ive only attended 1 funeral in my 54years where someone had an open casket service and was then taken to be cremated, any other the cremation took place before the service.
[–][deleted] 1 point 2 months ago*
Ok that crematorium, wife of MBu, I assume, same retired MTSO deputy who led the team that suddenly 'found' the burned electronics in the barrel on the 7th?
Creeeeepy.
Based on times for travelling and cremation [and cooling?] and further travelling, what's the earliest that some cremains could have got to the ASY on the 8th, theoretically, I assume it's been worked out?
[–]August141981 2 points 2 months ago
IMO said bones never made it to ASY however travel time to and from and cremation would take approx 5 hours guesstimate
[–]August141981 11 points 2 months ago
The ME who did CB autopsy was done in another county and apparently that county doesn’t have any record of said autopsy nor do they have her Biological matter, DNA card and so on. So who holds this?
[–]August141981 10 points 2 months ago
CB lived in the upstairs apartment and her gma lived downstairs. Grandmother was alerted by a female who had slept the night in CB apartment that something was wrong with CB. This female (initials JM) is also mentioned in SA documents she gave a statement to LE regarding SA during the investigation of TH. CB mother was not able to see her daughter LE had control of CB/her apartment/her belongings. The family was tossed into a vortex of confusion
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/7hmoh4/im_truly_believing_that_manitowoccalumet_are/
[–]JJacks61 7 points 7 months ago
I still cannot understand why LE paid for anything regarding CB's funeral? Why would they do that unless there was some connection?
[–]August141981 6 points 7 months ago
CB grandfather had political history n was active in community. The family wasn't rich by any means. I flat out asked "didn't they find it strange that LE was speaking funeral arrangements n cremation n cause of death prior to even CB autopsy" response was at the time and given the situation they hadn't thought of it seeming anything but helpful. However LE also insisted to family after them requesting her death be investigated that family just needs to get over it and her death would never be solved. Not a mention of CB death in news articles until August 2014 when Netflix took on MAM then CB mom was approached by Manitown and told perhaps her article would help in finding answers
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/6otyty/repost_dead_missing_framed/dklr5ts/?context=1
'...this complaint to be TRUE and CORRECT' - November 15, 2005, signed by Kenneth R. Kratz (CCDA/MCSP) (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeletesubmitted 9 months ago * by OpenMind4U
...just killing time, 'killing' the TRUE and CORRECT, from bottom-up....Ohhh well...:(
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Criminal-Complaint.pdf
'On November 15, 2005, in a preliminary report, Culhane indicated to your complainant that the partial DNA profile developed from the charred remains is consistent with the female DNA profile developed from the human blood stain in Teresa Halbach's vehicle, as well as the "Wild Cherry Pepsi" can also located in Teresa Halbach's vehicle.
Did you see what just happened above?
SC report in regards of Item BZ was completed not in November 15, 2005 but in December 5, 2005, three weeks later...so, how KK knew about 'charred tissue bone' result on November 15?! Which document is falsification: Criminal Complaint document or SC document or BOTH???
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Steven-Avery-Trial-Exhibit-312.pdf
2. 'On November 14, 2005, Leslie Eisenberg, Forensic Anthropologist, described the bone fragments as the obvious result of mutilation of a corpse. Eisenberg stated that almost every bone in the body or body area is present and has been recovered from the scene.'
No kidding, right?...When box of bones arrived to her office? When she had chance to look it over and to be sure about 'almost every bone of the body is present'???!!!....no 'extra' pelvic's bone (tag 8675)?!:)...
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Trial-Exhibit-402-Diagram-of-Avery-Salvage-Yard.pdf
....right, she must be done by November 14...LIARS!!!!
3. 'Complainant is informed that on November 5, 2005, officers located a burn barrel near the residence of Steven Avery located at 12932 Avery Road, in the Town of Gibson, County of Manitowoc, Wisconsin. In that burn barrel, officers located burned clothing and a partially burned shovel.'
lol....Poor Barb:)...underwear, chicken bones...and barrel Number 'XYZ':).
4. 'On November 5, 2005 a search warrant was obtained and executed for Avery Auto Salvage, which included the residences, outbuildings, vehicles and property. During the execution of the search warrant, Teresa Halbach's 1999 Toyota Rav 4, VIN #JT3HP10V5X7113044, was found partially concealed'
Oh God!!!...'During the execution of the search warrant'...Hey, PoG, show me the search warrant with timestamp! And make sure this timestamp is PRIOR your 'God intervention'.
Ok guys and girls. All of the above are the 'PROBABLE CAUSE'. God helps us all!
EDIT: to add reference to 'extra bone', tag #8675:)
[–]slow_barry 16 points 9 months ago
More sleight of hand from the complaint:
Bennett also determined that based on the characteristics of the ilium bone, the bones are from an adult human female.
Hey Kratz! Just wondering where you guys got those conveniently identifiable "human female" bones from?
officers located bone fragments and teeth in a fire pit area located approximately 20 yards south of a detached garage that is located next to the residence of Steven Avery...The bone fragments located were transported by Dorinda Freymiller, a special agent with the Division of Criminal Investigations, to Ken Bennett
Naw. Those bones didn't come from there, man. I can understand why you would really want them to, though. Probably enough to, perhaps even, maybe, possibly, make pretend they did? This shit has some sweaty fingerprints all over it.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/69bkhf/this_complaint_to_be_true_and_correct_november_15/
[–]Moby24x15 12 points 9 months ago
ReplyDeleteHere's another one.
SC states that the charred remains match the blood in the back and the wild cherry Pepsi bottle found in the RAV4. At that time ( Nov 15 ) they are arresting SA for the murder of TH, but IF the above matches are accurate they still have not been matched to TH. If the criminal complaint had stated the items match the charred remains and the identity of the victim is unknown at this time it would be more plausible. But every document had TH as the victim even before it was " confirmed " to be her.
[–]Moonborne11 12 points 9 months ago
I just caught this! It does not say these samples matched the PAP, only that they matched each other and were in Teresa's vehicle. Sleight of hand, huh?
[–]OpenMind4U[S] 6 points 9 months ago*
I just caught this! It does not say these samples matched the PAP, only that they matched each other and were in Teresa's vehicle. Sleight of hand, huh?
You got it!!! It means only one thing: no positive identification of victim = TH!!!!...meaning, NO PROBABLE CAUSE...
...but hey, it could also mean 'Wild Cherry Pepsi" can has been used by the same person who's blood was found in cargo...now, you made me wonder: maybe 'Wild Cherry Pepsi" can has poison inside which cause heavy bleeding?!!!.....LOL...thank you!!!!!!
[–]August141981 9 points 9 months ago
or the "Wild Cherry Pepsi" can belonged to someone else that they had access to her possessions, body, blood, pap, dna, cremains!
Great post!!
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/69bkhf/this_complaint_to_be_true_and_correct_november_15/
[–]August141981 1 point 10 months ago
CB was found by her grandmother, who lived in the bottom half of the home, on November 3 around 8-9am. her autopsy was preformed Nov 4 9am.
AC interview report said he worked nov3 but was off Nov4 and couldn't recall what he did on his day off
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/669xj8/was_nov_3_the_original_date_this_was_meant_to_go/
[–]magilla39 6 points 7 months ago
The other girl that died that week was an overdose, wasn't it?
[–]dark-dare 7 points 7 months ago
Doesn't explain why she had bruises around her neck and other injuries! Or why she had a meeting with LE prior to er death! Or why LE insisted on paying for her cremation! Or why her grandma heard a thump and passed some strange woman on the stairs leading to her apartment upstairs! Or all the other strange circumstances reportedly surrounding her death. There was an enlightened posting on here several months ago by supposed family of CB.
[–]magilla39 3 points 7 months ago
We also know that KK was abusing Xanax and Vicodin contemporaneously. This puts the prescription drug ring inside the Avery investigation.
[–]August141981 1 point 7 months ago
Autopsy report shows bruises on the neck, same coroner walled off ASY was also removed from CB case (she called CB mom daily saying things like how sorry she was) Grandmother actually had gone upstairs to wake CB because she had a court appearance that day. The girl you refer too went downstairs to grandmother apartment after grandmas knock didn't wake CB and told gma that she thought CB was dead. This same girl made a statement in SA case. When you look at CB court documents you will see it posted Nov 8th the day of her funeral "case dismissed due to death" that is 5 days after her appearance date and the day of her funeral. There are many weird coincidences
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/6oaa1g/prescription_drugs_are_big_in_and_around/
[–]MsMinxster 11 points 1 year ago
ReplyDeleteInteresting that the key witness in CB's death also happened to know Jodi and was questioned by Dedes in SA's case (CASO, p. 300).
Jessica A Miller
Flaws with conspiracy: There's no apparent credibility to suggest that Boutwell was murdered or that the Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department managed to sneak some of Boutwell's bones out of the Pfeffer Funeral Home and Crematory in Manitowoc as part of an elaborate and deliberate plan to frame Avery for the missing photographer's disappearance. Moreover, Boutwell's overdose death was investigated by the Manitowoc Police Department, not the Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department. The city's 38-page investigative file, obtained by USA TODAY NETWORK through a public records request, makes no mention of any sheriff's deputies probing Boutwell's case or responding to the scene. Boutwell's body was found by one of her friends, Jessica A. Miller, then 28, on the living room floor of Boutwell's apartment. Miller told detectives that she had stayed the night at Boutwell's apartment after the two friends frequented at least four local bars with other women in their group. Based on statements from these witnesses, city police learned Boutwell "had been popping pills" prior to her death and that during her night of heavy drinking, one of her friends saw her "eyes rolling towards the top of her head ... this had happened approximately three to four times ... and the longest time lasting at least 10 seconds."
https://www.postcrescent.com/story/news/local/steven-avery/2016/11/27/top-conspiracies-since-making-murderer/94214282/
[–]thed0ngs0ng 8 points 1 year ago
It is also interesting Ferak says it wasn't MTSO investigating CB's death. I seem to recall Remiker quoted in a previous article saying it would be impossible to track down the source of the methodone that she OD'd on.
[–]MsMinxster 9 points 1 year ago
Remiker was part of the Manitowoc County Metro Drug Unit and was quoted as saying that finding those responsible for CB's death would be like "finding a needle in a haystack" (TK's quote about Ricky's hit and run). I just tweeted Ferak about that!
[–]August141981 4 points 1 year ago
Manitowoc County SD was in fact the office who contacted CB mother to do the news article in 2014. They felt it good to use her in the article after all there has been so many drug related deaths and CB's was after all like "finding a needle in a haystack" seems to be the choice of explanations POG found that RAV as stated like "finding a needle in a haystack" LE is full of poo just saying!
[–]MsMinxster 9 points 1 year ago
Until Ferak's article yesterday, Jessica Miller was only identified as "the unknown female" who alerted CB’s grandmother that CB may be dead. Now we know she was incarcerated with Jodi beginning of 2005 and not only did they still keep in touch, they were friends. She was questioned by CASO 26 days after she reported CB's death. Very interesting indeed. [But no conspiracy here...none at all!]
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/5f8bbr/article_on_the_conspiracy_theories/
[–]freddiethelegend
ReplyDeleteHuh? It wasn't evident the pit contained human remains until they started to sift through it?
Thats a load of codswallop! Whatshisname (insert name of deputy here) saw what appeared to be a bone by the burnpit, no sifting involved at that point mate.
Truth is there is no excuse for not taking those photographs.
[–]J4_C4
(insert name of deputy here)
Sgt. Jason Jost
[–]bashdotexe
DCI agent Sturdivant testified as finding the bones first. He was a "narcotics" (i.e. illegals drugs, not actual narcotics) cop. He wasn't a homicide or missing persons expert.
[–]J4_C4
Sorry but Sturdivant only testified to being present when the first bones were found. Jost discovers what they believe is a vertebrae. Sturdivant then finds a piece of skull.
Q (By Attorney Fallon). After Deputy Jost do -- drew your attention to this particular, um, matter, um, first of all, could you describe a little more fully what you and he were looking at at that point? A Excuse me. Deputy Jost was standing in front of what appeared to be, in my opinion, a piece of bone fragment. It was approximately one inch in length. And, um, my opinion was, and I think we kind of agreed, that it was a, uh -- a -- a piece of bone fragment. And after looking at that, I looked at this so-called burn pit at the end of that pile of gravel and also noticed other -- what in my opinion were bone fragments, um, that were obvious, uh, around that, uh, pile of debris.
Q. All right. Very well. Um -- All right. Let's talk, uh, again, about what you did after you and Deputy Jost examined this particular, um, um, bone fragment? What did you do? A After looking at the bone fragment, I then walked towards this burn pit. So I walked from the bone -- from the, uh -- the piece of bone fragment out here to the burn pit. I looked at the burn pit. I observed what I thought were other bone fragments in and around that burn pit. I picked up a twig. I moved some leaves and other things, and I could see other bone fragments within that -- within the charred debris. Um, I noticed what I believed to be, uh, skull fragments, uh, in that debris and intertwined within the steel-belted tires. Um, aside from that, I didn't do much with that burn pit. Um, at that point we were trying to, uh, uh, get in contact with the, uh -- the, uh, folks from the Crime Lab, as well as some of our arson folks.
[–]ThorsClawHammer
Sturdivant only testified to being present when the first bones were found
He wasn't there when they were first found. Only Jost and Sippel were. Sturdivant came later to check it out. Which makes the bones the only piece of major evidence where the person(s) who initially found it didn't testify to it.
[–]J4_C4
Sorry I see it now. Jost found what he thought was a vertebrae in Sippel's presence. They informed Sturdivant and his female partner who had come over and with a twig he moved the bone and it still appeared to be a vertebrae and then shortly after he spotted the pieces of the skull. Actually I have read all three of there accounts and there are are major inconsistencies in them as well. This is the first time I have noticed this. Brutal. Only Sturdivant testified and therefore, these inconsistencies were never brought to light.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/a9rpvf/can_anyone_who_claims_this_was_an_honest_and_fair/
[–]djacks731
ReplyDeleteChristine Rudy, 21, Clark County, WI...murdered in early November 2005, LE found pieces of bones burned in a burn pit...with cut marks on them.
Dr Simley is the forensic dentist, Kevin Heimerl is one the agents that find the burn pit, Dr Eisenberg is the forensic anthropologist, she is sorting & identifying these burned bones the week of December 4th, 2005.
TH's death certificate is signed December 6, 2005.
That same day, Dec. 6th, Dr. E testifies that she is "still sorting" TH's burned bones. How's that for coincidence?
Not to mention, Dr E also misidentified the fetus...
[–]SBRH33
In the Rudy report she makes the correct analyzation of the pit.
In the Avery assessment she veers wildly off track and claims an impossible scenario given the fact that the pit was... shoveled, sifted, boxed then transported and left at her office.
The mere fact that cremains were found in two completely separate and distanced sites flies in the face of her assessment.
To put a fine point on it she could identify bone fragments with accuracy that were no larger than a fingernail..... but she couldn't for the life of her identify the articulated pelvic bones found in the Manitowoc County Municipal Burn Pile located in the far South West reaches of the Randant Gravel Pits. (A very desolate location)
If I am not mistaken was it not the FBI search team that had located those pelvic cremains.... and Ertl was sent there to sift through the burn pile when he was called off to the Avery burn pit.
[–]missingtruth
Look closely at the document you linked. Do we write this off as just a TYPO too? Look at this bullet point: Met with S/A B and DNA analyst MV at the Wisconsin Crime Laboratory on November 5, 2005 where I briefly examined cranial fragments (still within sealed plastic bags) that I identified as human. WHAT? On November 5th, 2005?
I'm also confused, I think. Wasn't Christine found dismembered on a river bank, not burned? If she wasn't burned, are these burned bones even human? If so, who do they belong to? Or were they used to be TH's alleged bones? Way too many similarities to TH case: tibia, cranial bone, cut marks, 2nd location, tissue found, confirmed by pap and a shot gun slug.
[–][deleted]
Ah you're right, it should say December 5th. In fact that still wouldn't quite work because the DoJ exhibit has her meeting Boswell at the Dane County Morgue on the 4th to ID the [EDIT: Correction: not the cranial fragments - the burn pit fragments], not at the state crime lab the next day with Boswell (though he says he went there with the cremains) and a DNA tech, right? 'Please see Dr. Eisenberg's report for details of her examination' - would like to but it appears to have vanished into thin air!
They did reportedly find the torso & jaw fragment washed up in ice on the riverbank miles away, end of March. They originally suspected [or decided to use] the burn pit because they'd heard they'd been burning some clothes and furniture in it. They'd also been told they (Heather T and Shaun R) had transported the body (minus part of the head apparently) in his car back to the shed where it was dismembered and put in a garbage can and taken in a van to the river. No forensic trace of any of that afaik. Here's an approximate map from prior OP
https://www.mapcustomizer.com/map/Rudys
[–]SBRH33
DeleteGreat OP!
What I find extremely interesting is the timing of Rudy's death and the players involved in making the determination of the deceased... Rudy.
Eisenberg botched her analysis of Rudy's fetus by millions of light years. There never was a fetus in the burn pit.... yet she put her name on that finding. Whoops!
Now to summarize some of the content I pulled from the Rudy criminal complaint..... a sickening feeling developed in the pit of my stomach.
Suppose if you will, that the WSCL and the prosecution had used some of Rudy's remains to frame Avery for the Halbach murder that could have or may not have ever happened?
The fact that there are similarly eerie resemblances to the evidence collected at the Gravel pits and the ASY.
Pink tissue found on one of the gravel piles.
Pelvic bones (articulated) found with cut marks visible on the bones.
Cranial pieces with radio opaque particles present (gun shot Halbach/ Rudy killed by suspected gun shot)
Rudy's macabre roadside demise fully documented photographically and properly processed... while not a scintilla of protocol was followed on the ASY.
The fact that the alleged Halbach evidence and the Rudy evidence was all neatly stored and scrutinized by the WSCL during the same exact timeframes.
The use of pap smears as an identifying markers for the deceased.
S/A DCI Heimerl was present at both the Rudy and Avery burn pits.
Final specimen radiograph is designated AK. This consists of a fragment of skull bone measuring 6.3 x 3.8 cm. Also present are some possible coniferous needles or similar type of plant debris. There does appear to be some soft tissue adherent to this portion of bone. It appears consistent with occipital bone however for definitive anatomical designation, refer to the forensic anthropoiogical report. Radiographic appearance of this Is also variable dense and without definitive fragments of bullet-.
The fact that keys, garnet zippers and clasps along with a burned cell phone were found in the Rudy burn pit.
Of course I am thinking out of the box here.... but it would be freaking amazing if we really did have it all completely wrong.
And this last gem from Eisenberg regarding the burn pit where bone fragments were located in the Rudy case:
Given the shallow depth of the burn pile and the meager representation of adult human bone from that context, I believe that another ( or other) dump/deposition locatiou(s) may yield additional adult human bone/human remains. I understand, based on a conversation with Lieutenant Jeff Parker of the Clark County Sheriff's Departlnent on January 5, 2006, that there may, in fact, be a second discovery location under investigation.
Now Eisenberg boldly stated that in Avery's case the bones were not moved from his pit, nor were they brought to his pit.. Yet the bones allegedly found in Avery's pit were said to have been found in a pile on top of the crusted earth in plain view.... and that other cremains were found in 2 other locations!... the gravel pit and Dassey's burn barrel>
How does she get away with this stuff?
Total nonsensicle quackery.....
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/6ub6p6/documents_from_the_20056_rudy_case_including/
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)
ReplyDeletesubmitted 1 month ago by Coriolana
I’ve check 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/
[–]7-pairs-of-panties 42 points 1 month ago
DeleteI've been saying this....The state does NOT have the bones the Halbachs do. The problem here is that it is now up to the state to admit they gave the halbachs bones (several of them) that they KNEW were not human and NOT hers OR they gave them bones back that they lied at trial that they were even human at all. The fact is. KZ has the state in a BIG LIE....Why would they go this far to lie about the identity of the bones? They really couldn't and wouldn't allow the jury to think that the body was burnt in the quarry. Probably cause of a WITNESS....or should I say WITNESSES??
[–]Wimpxcore 8 points 1 month ago
Totally, in MAM2 they mention that some of the bones in the gravel pit that were claimed to be "possibly human" at trial were found to be definitely human once KZ's team compared the bone inventories. So they don't even have that leg to stand on anymore. The "might be animal/what does possibly human mean" leg. So that combined with giving the bone evidence back to the halbachs for burial is proof LE knew they were indeed human, it's documented. And it's documented that they should have remained in evidence until Stevens sentence was up (however that may come about). And it's documented they released the human bones that they said weren't prolly human to the family despite the evidence integrity laws. So they're in a heap of ruh row atm.
[–]AgnesAgathaGermaine 8 points 1 month ago
Ken Kratz, in closing arguments "These bones in the quarry I'm gonna take about 20 seconds to talk about, because the best anybody can say is that they're possible human. What does 'possible human' mean? Well, it means we don't know what it is. Alright? The best anthropologists in the world don't know what these bones are, even though testing, what's called mitochondrial DNA testing, whether they're human or not could not, even by the FBI, be determined. So the bones in the quarry are really not evidence in this case. And so, Mr. Strang's made a big deal out of showing you maps and a little flag and things like that about possible bones. Again, speculation, conjecture, is not part of this case. Facts are gonna be what decides this case."
This is especially damning if they mischaracterized the forensic reports so emphatically.
[–]Blondieblueeyes 35 points 1 month ago
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 19 points 1 month ago
Agree. How can future DNA testing occur if the evidence is released and not preserved?
[–]katish 23 points 1 month ago
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 20 points 1 month ago
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 23 points 1 month ago
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] 20 points 1 month ago
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 12 points 1 month ago
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] 15 points 1 month ago
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 1 point 1 month ago
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] 8 points 1 month ago
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 2 points 1 month ago
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 6 points 1 month ago
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] 10 points 1 month ago
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 6 points 1 month ago
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] 11 points 1 month ago
Yes, the coordinates were noted and are attached in KZ’s latest motion. I’m yet to see how close they were though.
[–]79sunrise 2 points 1 month ago
I believe two piles were around 500 yards apart, and one was about100 yards from the other. Don't quote me.
[–]normab8tes 1 point 1 month ago
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] 1 point 1 month ago
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 1 point 1 month ago
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] 1 point 1 month ago
You may be right about the buried bones. I have no idea about that.
Relevant tweets from KZ:
DeleteQUESTION: why would this make a difference... you have other evidence that proved the body wasn't burnt in SA pit
ANSWER: This was evidence the State used to convict Steven Avery of the murder. The State defines what is relevant to the conviction and we attempt to refute it.
QUESTION: can you please help me understand why this would prove the murder happened at the gravel pit? Couldn't it be argued that Steven collected the bones after burning the body and thought he got them all to transfer to gravel pit?
ANSWER: It refutes the State's case that the murder occurred in the garage and the burning occurred in the burn pit. Our job is to deal with the evidence that was presented, not what somebody dreams up 13 years later.
Kathleen Zellner
ReplyDeleteVerified account
@ZellnerLaw
15h15 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
Boutwell died on Nov. 3, 2005, of a methadone overdose. Alcohol was contributing factor, according to the Manitowoc County Coroner’s office.
ReplyDeleteHer death was one of the first local cases of a young person overdosing on prescription drugs, the start of what grew to become a rash of area drug-related deaths, said Capt. Scott Luchterhand of the Manitowoc Police Department.
At the time of Boutwell's death, investigators found no evidence of who might have given her the prescription narcotic, used for pain relief and to wean addicts off of heroin, he said.
“The scary part of methadone is when you combine it with alcohol and/or benzodiazepines (a class of drugs often used to treat anxiety and insomnia),” said Lt. Dave Remiker of the Manitowoc County Metro Drug Unit. “It’s a deadly combination.”
Methadone winds up on the street when individuals who are prescribed the drug turn around and sell it, he said.
Boutwell “didn’t have a prescription (for methadone). Somebody provided those drugs to her,” Luchterhand said.
https://www.htrnews.com/story/news/local/2014/06/08/drug-death-a-painful-memory/10177139/
August141981 wrote:
ReplyDeleteThey also removed from WICCA CB's 10/10 charge where they had logged her case as closed because she was deceased. This was logged in WICCA on Nov 8th 2005, the day of her funeral and the day supposed bones of TH were reportedly found on ASY.
SS of this WICCA, her autopsy (which was done in Waukesha yet was the autopsy information was printed on Manitowoc County Coroner letterhead), along with a host of other info, was turned over to KZ in 2016.
Here's some other coincidences. CB's attorney for her drug charge was Manitowoc County Bar Association President for 2005 -- this attorney was also, years ago, the attorney for Fencl, who was charged with CB's relative murder (DS).
Also, the person CB was court ordered to stay away from on her 10/10 charge was being prosecuted by non other than KK. That guy had a huber and he skipped town in the time frame that CB was found dead and TH was reported missing.
I believe they decided to plant an anonymous young female's cremains – remains that had been professionally cremated. They removed what they believed was all the remaining dental and any other identifying tissues to avoid ID.
ReplyDeleteThey had an actual shin bone with attached tissue. The shin bone would not give away cause of death. I believe they assumed that with the attached tissue that a positive DNA match would not be a problem. When this didn’t happen and the mtDNA match was questionable, KK decided that this perhaps was not convincing enough so brought in Dr Simley.
I believe Dr Simley was told from the outset that the cremains belonged to TH and that he needed to make a match to one of her x-rays. A bit akin to “put her in the garage”.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/7ykpom/the_teeth_or_lack_thereof_is_a_critical_piece_of/
[–]PetrichorGirl
Do we know if S&B got any other dental expert to look at the evidence?
On cross-examination they focused instead on how the teeth became so damaged in the fire. Simley acknowledged these root fragments were as badly damaged as any he’d ever seen. They asked him about other cases he’d seen involving a fire with accelerants and it sounded like he did not have a huge range of cases to compare it to. He was also reluctant to estimate a temperature range for the fire that must have burned TH’s teeth.
It’d be interesting to hear other forensic dental experts’ opinions not just on how Simley tried to ID tooth #31 but also the fire conditions that would cause that damage.
[–]Cptndunsel
The cross was total garbage.
I'd be more interested in knowing how many cases he'd done with this degree of tooth damage, had he worked with fragments this small before, how many times he'd done fracture matching, how did he know the 2 pieces in question really fit together, etc.
I'd also want to know how accurate his match could have been given the xrays he got from Krupka were from 1997 when TH was 17 and the fact that teeth and roots alter shape over time due to aging process, how healthy the tooth and root were etc.
https://old.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/dg9rbz/dr_smiley_foid_report_part_2/
[–]pdent
ReplyDeleteIt is of my opinion this tooth is not Teresa's when all surrounding anatomical features are added to the tooth structures. HOWEVER It is ridiculous to make any confirmation or even suggest a match based on a single tooth, never mind 1 that has been exposed to high temps and also been glued together! I find this extremely unprofessional. Smiley attempted smoke and mirrors with the superimposition...infuriating!
I would be more comfortable to make a call if the tooth had a cementoma attached to it for example, this would be a distinguishing feature to a degree. Numerous teeth and structures would be required so I can see why Smiley wouldn't confirm and rightly so!!
The gold standard to make a confirmation would be to have identical replicated X-ray images ante and postmortem including a full set of teeth to give confirmation...this is the ideal which we don't have
The next thing I would be looking for would be restorations i.e. Crown and bridgework, fillings etc these are like a custom job for the patient and likely to provide confirmation.
To note I haven't read the Smiley testimony in a long time he may have added some of this info*
u/7-pairs-of-panties the Panorex has been labelled wrong, 100% correct they have the sides opposite to what they should be.
Smiley is making leaps even just by suggesting the tooth matches. A Jury would eat this up and it's almost criminal what he did, I am disgusted he could be a colleague.
It is my opinion, that this is not Teresa's tooth.
Unfortunately the postmortem xray is only a single tooth. It is open to a lot of scrutiny. No confirmation can be provided.
However I would state there are more differences pointing away from Teresa when comparing to the old films.
Unfortunately for comparison, different types of xray are available so it makes confirmation of my opinion almost impossible when related to a lone standing tooth.
I do question why Smiley would even take the stand, it must have been for financial gain. For him to suggest it was a match was Ludicrous.
A jury would eat this up. The evidence against Mr Avery was added to with this testimony. It was piling up and this presentation would have been powerful, especially with the attempted superimposing of images.
I would most definitely question his opinion on the stand and fully make sure the Jury would understand the situation with clarity.
[–]s_wardy_s
I did a very simple graphic here which shows the canals don't match up: http://imgur.com/a/SL4Hh
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/5xmson/smiley_presentation_my_thoughts/
Dr Smiley FOI'd report... Part 2 (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeletesubmitted by s_wardy_s
So yesterday I posted the following capture from the latest FOI'd DR Smiley report where he's suggesting no match to TH's dental records. Below is an old post where I took Teresa's xray and overlayed Smiley's xray.
https://i.redd.it/zz862vw16ur31.png
Here's a simple overlay of #31 ante and post mortem: http://imgur.com/a/SL4Hh
Looks like they don't even match up. Look at the length of the root I colored in yellow. It's way longer than the red one.
Questions:
How was this even allowed to be shown in court? I'm sure there is absolutely no way on earth that someone can be identified through the shape of teeth roots, and one tooth root at that.
The postmortem x-ray looks like the tooth is set in a mandible, as you can clearly see bone or gum in the x-ray. I thought there were two little pieces of a tooth found and they simply glued them together, so where did the bone or gums come from?
At what stage between the above comment highlighted in yellow does it go from no match, the saying it's similar... See the attached image link, it is no way similar.
How was this not argued in court by Buting and Strang?
PS... "Dear Dr Smiley, we need to place the tooth in Teresa's mouth!"
[–]sweatfetish
so... the tooth they claim was TH's had a longer root after her death? hmmm
[–]s_wardy_s[S]
Exactly! It makes me so friggin mad that this should have been picked up and analysed by the defence, then used in court to show an obvious difference. Didn't they have these Xrays at the time? Can someone ask Buting on twitter?
[–]Tris-Von-Q
This is quite great work. I actually spoke out loud while concentrating on the specific root features between both X-Rays and as I sat here with my eyes squinted and phone pressed against my face in deep, deep concentration:
“Those roots aren’t Teresa’s! There’s no fucking way those are her root fragments.”
Unfortunately I’m no forensic analyst or professional. I could be completely wrong on this.
https://old.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/dg9rbz/dr_smiley_foid_report_part_2/