Brendan Dassey's Court-Appointed Attorneys Were Working for the Prosecution, Not His Defense

Emails between Kachinsky, O'Kelly, Krantz, and Wiegert that prove without a doubt MOK and Len were actively working with prosecution to convict Brendan.

"Steve Avery needs to be removed from society."

"Brendan needs to be alone. When he sees me this Friday I will be a source of relief. He and I can begin to bond. He needs to trust me and the direction that I steer him into."

First three documents under the "Brendan Dassey" section of this page:

http://stevenaverycase.com/source-documents/






Source:

http://static1.squarespace.com/static/5691be1b25981daa98f417c8/t/569739261115e0cae7fe2fdb/1452751142676/20312830370+brendan+dassey+meetin+on+may+12.pdfThe_crazy_bird_lady

A few things that Brendan Dassey admitted to in the confession that put him behind bars self.MakingaMurderer

submitted by meermortal

I went through the 152-page Brendan Dassey March 1 confession and picked out some of the choicer parts. This is what was played in front of the jury, and was used to convict him.

• Steven called Brendan to ask his help fixing a car. Brendan went to Steven's garage and saw a dead, clothed Halbach in the back of her jeep, which had been backed into the garage. She had a stab wound in her stomach and was tied up. She had a blanked over her. Steven told him that he had stripped her and raped her, and showed Brendan the knife and rope. There were drips of blood on the garage floor.
• Actually he came over to get Brendan.
• Actually Brendan knew to come over, because they had planned the entire episode out a few days in advance.
• Actually Brendan was riding his bike to get the mail. One piece had Steven's name on it so he started up that way and knocked, delivered the mail and left.
• Actually he went inside and, from the living room, saw Halbach chained to the bed. He knew she was alive because she was moving around. And screaming for help.
• Actually on his way there he heard someone screaming "help me."
• Actually he couldn't make out what she was saying.
• Actually he could make out what she was saying.
• (By the way, Brendan's brother Bryan was at their garage working on cars, but his music was too loud to hear the screams.)
• Anyway, a sweaty Steven answers the door and offers Brendan a soda. He mentions to Brendan that he had Halbach in his bedroom (Brendan couldn't see her) because he had wanted to "get some pussy" and "fuck her so hard." Then he asks Brendan if he wanted to get some pussy. But he said it couldn't happen right then.
• Actually they went immediately to the bedroom despite Brendan's protests that he was under age. A naked Halbach was chained up with regualr silver handcuff and leg cuffs [note: never does he mention pink fuzzy handcuffs despite the detectives asking over and over again the color of the handcuffs]. Halbach asked Steven why he would do something like that, but didn't say anything to Brendan. Brendan didn't rape her.
• Actually he took off all his clothes and did "screw" her, for five minutes. Halbach asked him not to do it and to do the right thing. And to tell Steven to knock it off. And she was crying. Then Brendan put his clothes back on and Steven closed the door, they went to the living room, and watched TV. Steven said "that's how you do it," asked if it felt good, and said he was going to burn the body.
• Actually later he said that burning the body was a last-minute decision after Steven put her in the jeep, only to reconsider because he didn't think dumping her in the pond by the car pit would dispose of the evidence.
• Anyway, then Steven went back and stabbed her once in the stomach. Then Steven got on top of her and choked her into unconsciousness. Then Steven tied her up.
• Oh wait, in the hallway on the way to the bedroom, Steven told Brendan he was going to tie Halbach up, stab her, then choke her.
• Anyway, Brendan helped tie her up before Steven stabbed her or choked her. She was telling Steven to stop what he was doing but he said he wouldn't. Specifically, he told her to shut her mouth, and that he was going to kill her. Then they both tie her legs up ["Otherwise, she's going to kick," mentions Det. Wiegert, helpfully.] Then Steven told Halbach he was going to kill her by stabbing her and not letting her go, then Steven stabbed her in the stomach. Well, sort of in the ribs. With a knife from the kitchen. Then Steven cut off her hair. She was dead at that point. Then Steven punched her. It was unclear to Brendan if she was still dead at this point. Then Steven instructed Brendan to slit her throat, which he did.
• The throat slitting happened after Steven choked her. As the detectives mentioned, he must have gotten a lot of blood on her. Which he then washed off in his bathroom.
• Actually Brendan slit her throat after Steven choked her. Then Steven shot her. Brendan didn't mention that before because he "couldn't think of it." Twice. They did this outside the garage, on their way to the fire. Brendan wasn't sure if she was alive prior to the shooting. Then they carry her to the fire. Steven said they had to hurry up because people were coming over for the bombfire. The fire had been going before Brendan got to the house.
• Actually Steven shot her three times.
• Actually about 10 times, and it was in the garage. Specifically, in her truck.
• Actually she was on the garage floor. ["Now we believe you," says a detective.]
• Oh and the knife was from the kitchen.
• Actually it was from the garage.
• Actually, Steven had it in his pocket the whole time.
• They carried her by hand to the fire.
• Actually they used a creeper.
• It took less than an hour for Halbach to be mostly bones. Steven then chopped up the bones with a shovel, put some in a bucket, and tossed them off a steep hill in the back of the yard. (Randandt's pit.)

EDIT: Forgot that Steven buried most of the bones in a hole he dug 2-3 feet away from the fire pit.

• Brendan went home at 9:30 after all this (also a bunch of stuff involving moving the truck to the car pit -- at some point, Steven moves the body from the car pit back to his fire pit with a sled used for fishing) and didn't come back.
• Steven doesn't talk on the phone this whole time.
• Actually he talks to Jodi at 5:30 and then again 10 minutes later.

At some point Brendan sees Steven hide the key in his dresser.

Please keep in mind that this is just from ONE of his confessions. A large part of it is contradicted by his statements the day before, where he only sees parts of Halbach's body in the fire, which Steven notices and then confesses to everything. And of course, it varies widely from his additional confessions two months later.

But there you have it! Guilty! HOW COULD HE NOT HAVE COMMITTED THIS RAPE AND MURDER?

Brendan Dassey interview with police at a lodge
submitted by HowardFanForever

Referenced here:

http://stevenaverycase.com/brendan-dasseys-involvement/#sthash.NR87X4Ww.dpbs


"That night, police visited Brendan and his mother at a lodge they had been sent to for protection. The discussions had that night are unrecorded."

Did this actually happen? Was it brought up at Brendan's trial? I can't find mention of this interview anywhere except the above website. Thanks for the help.

[–]Pantherpad 11 points 1 day ago

For their protection, interesting... Odd how some events in this case are so "well handled" and "all precautions taken" and then others are like "Oops, did we forget to check the ex and roommates alibis?". Or "Wait, nobody took pics of the human remains we found before we dumped them all in boxes?", "Manitowoc was not supposed to be involved? Yeah we heard something like that but didn't understand what they meant, but at least we saved the day finding all that evidence, so what's the big?" They did however do an excellent job of detailing the chain of custody for master keys and locks that they purchased to secure said evidence. There's that.

[–]MrDoradus 6 points 1 day ago*

I've checked the new reports, nothing was mentioned about this. If it happened, which I don't doubt, it was done off the record apparently.

Seeing how he was arrested after the interrogation, this "unrecorded" interview at the lodge was done the day before his full "confession". Mighty convenient if that's the case.

Edit: it is in the reports, just a day earlier, p. 513, still remains mighty convenient and a blatant "confession building exercise". This rabbit hole never ends.

[–]ApocalypticCynic 1 point 1 day ago

The amount of shenanigans conducted "off the record" in this case is unfathomable.

[–]dillstar 6 points 1 day ago

Convoluted Brian also has a timeline for these interviews. The Fox Hills interview is mentioned in the March 1 interview as the time that the bleached jeans were first mentioned. I don't know if there is an earlier reference to bleached jeans that happened at the school or at Two Rivers.

http://www.convolutedbrian.com/dassey_confessions_links.html

[–]sophiegirl14 5 points 1 day ago

I heard that there was an interview done off the record with Brendan and they got in his face and really went after him. In one of the other interviews they apologized for doing it and said it wouldn't happen again. Apparently this is when the coercision began if you ask me. This is when they started scaring the kid into a confession.

[–]Classic_Griswald 3 points 1 day ago

First interview at the school. In his appeals papers too it says they were speaking to him in the car unrecorded. "About girls and stuff"

I just can't picture them apologizing for 'getting in his face' without it being for a good reason. they also state, 'we're gonna let you talk this time instead'

That was letting him talk. If that was letting him talk, then holy shit, they must think they're ventriloquists or something.

[–]Canuck64 2 points 1 day ago*

I believe it was Sgt Tyson who went and spoke to Brendan and Barb that night at around 11:30 pm. It was during that interview that the bleach on the jeans came up.

(edit) It's not mentioned in the report below, but it was referred to during the March 1 interrogation.

[–]Canuck64 3 points 1 day ago*

February 27, 2006

    "Arrangements were ultimately made for BARBARA JANDA and her son, BRENDAN DASSEY, to go to FOX HILLS RESORT for the evening. Inv. WIEGERT did transport BARBARA and her son. BRENDAN. to the FOX HILLS RESORT and I did follow. A room was secured at the FOX HILLS RESORT for BARBARA and BRENDAN until interviews could be completed by the investigators. Inv. DEDERING did telephone me and did request that I ask BRENDAN if he observed STEVEN AVERY's burn barrel burning on Halloween night in 2005. Inv. DEDERING also requested that I ask BRENDAN if he saw STEVEN with an edged weapon or if he had seen him shoot a .22 caliber gun.

    Upon speaking with BRENDAN, I asked him if he observed STEVEN's burn barrel buming on Halloween night or the next day and BRENDAN informed me he did not recall that. BARBARA also informed me she could not recall if the burn barrel was burning on Halloween night or the next day. I asked BRENDAN if had seen STEVEN with an edged weapon on that evening and BRENDAN told me he did not. I asked BRENDAN if he had ever seen STEVEN shoot a .22 caliber gun and BRENDAN told me he did not recall at any time seeing STEVEN shoot a firearm. "

[–]richard-kimble 2 points 1 day ago

    until interviews could be completed by the investigators

I get the impression that Sgt Tyson's questions were in addition to the "investigators" interview, but I don't know.

    I don't know how to do the quote thing on Reddit.

Use the "greater than" symbol at the start of the quoted text (that's the arrow tip pointing to the right).

[–]Canuck64 1 point 1 day ago

Thanks!

[–]ahhhreallynow 2 points 1 day ago

Weigert statement: After finishing the interview with BRENDAN, we did take BRENDAN back to the MISHICOT FIRE STATION where we met with several other detectives. We did make arrangements for BARBARA and BRENDAN to stay at FOX HILLS RESORT on the night of 02/27/06 for their safety"

Tyson statement: "Arrangements were ultimately made for BARBARA JANDA and her son, BRENDAN DASSEY, to go to FOX HILLS RESORT for the evening. Inv. WIEGERT did transport BARBARA and her son. BRENDAN. to the FOX HILLS RESORT and I did follow. A room was secured at the FOX HILLS RESORT for BARBARA and BRENDAN until interviews could be completed by the investigators. Inv. DEDERING did telephone me and did request that I ask BRENDAN if he observed STEVEN AVERY's burn barrel burning on Halloween night in 2005. Inv. DEDERING also requested that I ask BRENDAN if he saw STEVEN with an edged weapon or if he had seen him shoot a .22 caliber gun. Upon speaking with BRENDAN, I asked him if he observed STEVEN's burn barrel burning on Halloween night or the next day and BRENDAN informed me he did not recall that. BARBARA also informed me she could not recall if the bum barrel was buming on Halloween night or the next day. I asked BRENDAN if had seen STEVEN with an edged weapon on that evening and BRENDAN told me he did not. I asked BRENDAN if he had ever seen STEVEN shoot a .22 caliber gun and BRENDAN told me he did not recall at any time seeing STEVEN shoot a firearm."

[–]CuriousMeeee 2 points 1 day ago

I think its beyond strange when Steven Avery was arrested he was transferred to a meeting place that was a hotel to be picked up by another department. His stay was probably 20 minutes. Did Avery have to go sit in a room and wait for his transfer to the jail. If so, how come? Was that hotel used as a frequent check in for anyone, any department, or etc.

Is the itemized expense report for the entire investigation available to the public?

[–]dark-dare 2 points 1 day ago

Protection from who, someone was after them, one night?

[–]NewsCamera 2 points 1 day ago*

Here's a concise list of known Brendan Dassey interviews:

[11/06/2005] Intv. with Brendan alone in unmarked police vehicle by Skorlinksi/Baldwin (no recording available).
[11/10/2005] Intv. with Brendan alone in Crivitz by Skorlinksi/Baldwin (no recordings made).
[02/27/2006] Intv. with Brendan alone at Mishcot High School (audio recording).
[02/27/2006] Intv. with Brendan alone at Two Rivers Police Dept. (videotaped).
[02/27/2006] Intv. with Brendan, with Barbara Janda present, at Mishcot Fire Hall (no recordings made).
[02/27/2006] Intv. with Brendan, with Barbara Janda present, at Fox Hills Resort (no recordings made).
[03/01/2006] Intv. with Brendan alone in police vehicle (audio recording).
[03/01/2006] Intv. with Brendan alone by investigators Fassbender/Wiegert (four-hours, videotaped).
[05/13/2006] Intv. with Brendan alone by investigators Fassbender/Wiegert (videotaped).

Note: Got this figured out thanks to dillstar's link to "convolutedbrian.com" website, and others who contributed to this sub. Thank you! Any errors or omissions are welcomed! Also, I just found angieb15's far more awesome timelines at the end of this thread! Thanks, Angie! Also just found Classic_Griswald's excellent thread on the topic. Thanks, Gris!

[–]Traveler430 1 point 1 day ago

It was in the Fox Hills Resort.

Evidence Suppression Ruling - Avery Trial

I hope the new lawyers are tearing this sh*t apart. It's pretty evident to me that the court considered no one would give-an-eff about this case and ruled however they saw fit for the prosecution, citing cases with completely different scenarios for precedence and even citing facts that contradict their own rulings.

Obviously I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think one needs to be to see that:

1) The very beginning of the document clearly states that the warrant was issued for three "separately denominated areas" - the first area being the defendant's single family trailer and detached garage. The third SEPARATELY DENOMINATED AREA was the 40-acre parcel which comprises the Avery Auto Salvage business.

- The court somehow ruled that since the area to be searched was so large, a single search effort would not be enough and since the trailer is on the 40-acre property, it fell under the scope of being an area too large to search in a single effort. This very obviously no longer denominates the trailer as a separate entity, but instead groups it together with the 40 acre property and is not what the search warrant granted.

2) Since number one is questionable at the very best, this documents tries to assert reasons why the trailer in fact needed multiple searches citing arbitrary reasoning and then redundancies for the redundant searches.

- After the initial thorough search of the trailer was completed, this document states: "Fassbender further testified that while the representatives of local police agencies are allowed to collect evidence, in cases where the State is called in for a homicide investigation, he always uses Crime Lab technicians to collect evidence." Thereby justifying a second search by the Crime Lab - his "always" method of doing things is fine but how can it be used for a justification for breaking the law? - Totally arbitrary.

3) Further ridiculous justifications for re-entry after the Crime Lab has COMPLETED their search: After the Crime Lab completed their work and left the premises, re-entry is ordered (by who?) to get the serial number for a computer that had been seen in the initial searches. Colborn and Tyson do so. A second search warrant is granted to seize the computer. So now a 2nd search warrant has been granted based on redundant illegal searches to begin with. It's all simply justified away because "the court" has ruled it a "continuation of the initial search". This means any subsequent search can be justified by simply calling it a "continuation". To top off these reduncies and arbitrary justifications, now the Crime Lab has supposedly ordered Colburn to collect more swabs of blood that the Crime Lab reported they found while performing their search of the trailer.

- WTF is going on here?

-Fassbender says he only uses the Crime Lab to collect evidence.

- Crime Lab says they use Colborn to collect evidence (after they had completed their search). It makes absolutely no sense and it is fully documented in this report written by The Court. = Conflicting information, redundant argument dependencies.

Continuation of Evidence Suppression Ruling - Avery Trial

Not only that, but this document is full of suggestions for how defendant SHOULD have presented his motion to suppress, but since he didn't do it that way it won't be granted.

The document makes many references to items gathered that sound like real evidence, damning evidence that a murder may have occured in this trailer, but ultimately were of zero significance. It mentions blood, tools, items of clothing, computer. It also makes sure to include that it will, in fact, suppress the pornography findings found because it was not a part of the items that were ordered to be seized, but the key, an absolute cornerstone of the defense's case, is not mentioned ONCE.

They even pull a Kenny K. move and for no necessary reason, they further justify their denial of evidence suppression by stating: "...even if some of the re-entries to the Avery trailer and garage exceeded the scope of the November 5, 2005 search warrant, the information gathered is nevertheless admissible...". They cite a rule that is called "The Inevitable Discovery Rule" that states that ..."if the government can prove that the evidence would have been obtained inevitably and, therefore, would have been admitted regardless of any overreaching by the police, there is no rational basis to keep that evidence from the jury...". That's all fine and good except for the fact that they have video and pictures proving this area was searched already and multiple times, AND TWO search conducting officers (including LENK!) who have already testified that the searches were thorough and they were not able to find this key, yet the discovery is considered "inevitable".

* My favorite part of this document though is this:

"While Lt. Lenk's statement concerning the thoroughness of the search supports the defendant's position, it must be kept in mind that Lt. Lenk was really a mere foot soldier and not a commanding officer in the investigation." Ahhh, okay, so I guess a person that was actually performing the search and testifies to doing so thoroughly should have no bearing on the court's decision. Instead we should listen to Fassbender and Weigert who have admitted repeatedly to not being present during the initial searches due to "such a wide crime scene". This way we get to both justify why we are ignoring the defendant's claims AND allowing even MORE searches because hey, the Investigators in-charge haven't been to the crime scene yet.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/159/ootv/making-murderer-1577186/index106.html

"Making a Murderer," An FBI Agent's Take; Episode 10 [Excerpt]

By Steve Moore

April 12, 2016

CONCLUSIONS:

To be clear, I am certain about some things, because they are self-evident and do not require scientific confirmation. I believe that the evidence provided in the documentary is conclusive proof (at least in my professional opinion) that the prosecution of Steven Avery was conducted by an unscrupulous prosecutor more concerned about a conviction than he was the truth.

The episodes also provided sufficient evidence to prove to me, beyond any reasonable doubt, that Brendan Dassey’s ‘confession’ was absolute, police-fed, fantasy. My strong belief is that Brendan Dassey had nothing to do with the disappearance or murder of Teresa Halbach in any way, though I still want to confirm that with the evidence I have not yet seen.

I believe that from a professional and moral standpoint, Len Kachinsky stabbed Brendan Dassey in the back, and with the help of Michael O’Kelly, bears significant responsibility for the loss of a decade (and counting) of the life of Brendan Dassey.

---

I am convinced that evidence proves conclusively that Teresa Halbach was not murdered in Steven Avery’s garage or home.

I believe that the investigation conducted by Manitowoc and Calumet County Sheriff’s investigators, as well as Special Agent Fassbender from the Wisconsin Department of Justice was pathetic. It was the result of either gross incompetence or intentional (criminal) evidence planting—or both. I am not yet ready to say where I come down on that aspect.

The rulings and courtroom conduct of Judges Patrick Willis and Jerome Fox were appalling. I personally believe that both judges were strongly biased in favor of the prosecution. How could Judge Fox remove a defense attorney for allowing an unrepresented interrogation of a client, then allow the results of that interrogation to be admitted as evidence?

---

LEANINGS

The following are just some of the items about which I have a very preliminary opinion, which I believe might well be influenced by more substantial evidence.

• I have serious questions as to the behavior of certain officers during this investigation, among them Lt. Lenk and Sgt. Colburn.
• The fact that people who reasonable investigators around the country would consider prime suspects (ex-boyfriend, male roommate, obsessive caller), were apparently ignored during the investigation is stupefying.

FULL DISCLOSURE

At this juncture I must point out, as I suspected might happen, that I found that I have a tangential involvement with somebody involved in one of these cases. I am the chief investigative officer of an organization known as Judges for Justice, a group of former law enforcement, attorneys and judges as well as former elected officials, who are looking into several cases of alleged wrongful convictions. One of the cases in which I have been significantly involved is the pro bono defense of Christopher Tapp of Idaho Falls, Idaho. Christopher Tapp was convicted of murder approximately 18 years ago in a case strikingly similar to that of Brendan Dassey. In both situations, a person of, at best, low-average intelligence was fed information the police wished to use as testimony against a different suspect. In both cases, that information was used to convict a person who believed their only hope was to cooperate with the police.

Another person involved in the Tapp case is Steve Drizin. Drizin, of course, turns out to be Brendan Dassey’s post-conviction attorney; a fact of which I was not aware. I have never personally met Steve Drizin, and my efforts on the Tapp case were independent of his. We have been on the same E-mail string several times, but I have no recollection of ever even E-mailing him personally. That said, I believe that his conclusions in the Tapp case are spot-on. Mr. Drizin might recognize my name, but that would be the extent of our association.

INVESTIGATOR’S NOTES

• Michael O’Kelly and Len Kachinsky were wildly biased against Brendan Dassey before they saw the first piece of evidence.
• O’Kelly should never be allowed to testify in a courtroom again.
• Len Kachinsky is an embarrassment to the legal profession.
• Wiegert may not even have the ‘horsepower’ it would take to successfully plant evidence.
• I thought Kratz was enjoying the descriptions of an alleged sexual crime a little too much.
• If you think about it, there’s now more demonstrative, proven evidence of sexual deviance by Ken Kratz than there is of Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey – combined. (A date to an autopsy? No wonder he looked a little sweaty describing the fictitious version of the murder of Halbach.)
• If Kratz’ ability to keep his disgusting behavior (sexting the victim of domestic abuse???) a secret for a year with the help of the Wisconsin DOJ isn’t proof of a corrupt system, what is?
• Why didn’t Governor Foley prosecute Kratz?
• Kratz complains that his reputation would take a hit just because of an accusation? Really? Sucks, huh?
• Kratz laments that he’s forgotten. As long as I’m alive, he won’t be.

FINAL THOUGHTS

In the Christopher Tapp case in which I’m involved, most, including myself have long given up on the State of Idaho providing justice. It’s simply a matter of biding time until the last state appeal is (inevitably) denied. Once that happens, the case can be removed to the federal appeals system, which seems to have less trouble recognizing injustice.

In the Avery and Dassey cases, the same dynamic holds true. Once the cases are clear of Wisconsin, real chances for justice come into play.

Ultimately, I am left with a couple of thoughts;

First; the best (but hopefully not the only) way to conclusively prove the innocence of Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey, is to conclusively prove the guilt of the actual killer.

Second; if it turns out that Steven Avery was not the killer of Teresa Halbach, and the actual killer murders again, then Ken Kratz, Len Kachinsky, Michael O'Kelly and a number of law enforcement investigators will have blood on their hands.

Post Emails between Kachinsky and O'Kelly.
submitted by angieb15 at Reddit

So, I thought it would be interesting and helpful to organize these emails, and post them. I just recently read the whole “back and forth” between these two. Thought some of you would be interested. The link is included to the original pdf just below.

Emails: O'Kelly and Kachinsky

Timeline of Brendan's Statements with these emails and others Included

At 06:17PM sn/2006, O’Kelly wrote;
Sunday May 7, 2006.

Len,

Please notify the watch commander of the Sheboygan County Jail facility that I will be meeting with Brendan Dassey on Friday May 12, 2006 when he is returned from the hearing at Manitowoc County Courthouse. I would like to start my meeting with Brendan upon his arrival.

I will be bringing recording devices such as a Sony digital camera and Sony camcorder and a Dictaphone portable audio recorder. I will have accessories such as a~ and blank recording tapes. I will also be bringing my Toshiba laptop and Canon portable printer and paper.

I am cc'ing Prosecutor Ken Kratz, SA Fassbender and Det. Dedering with this email. as they are in possession of the Discovery that I will need in my meeting.

l will need copies of some of the Discovery such as;
I) Black/White aerial of crime scene (National Guard)
2) Color aerial of crime scene (law enforcement)
3) "For Sale" sign recovered from interior area of Steve Avery mobile horne (front & back)
4) Color photos (by law enforcement) of Victims car in position on day of discovery (Nov 5, 2005)
5) Color photos (by Pamela/Nicole Sturm) of Victims car in posttion at time/day of discovery (Dis pg 58)
6) Recorded/transcribed interviews of the following subjects;
A) Steve Avery.
B) Earl Avery.
C) Charles Avery.
D) Dolores Avery.
7) Anonymous letter (envelope and contents) (Dis pg 224) ?
8) Photo of Suzuki inside Steve Avery garage (Dis pg 101)
9) Photos of interior of Steve Avery mobile home.
I 0) 8 x 10 'Missing Person - Teresa Halbach" flyer.
II) Electronic copy of available Discovery (photos, documents, reports and transcripts)

Thanks,
Mike.
Michael J. O'Kelly.
Private Investigator.
Polygraph Examiner/Linguistic Analyst.
l-800-▪▪▪-▪▪▪▪ 1-800-DONT-LIE
Crime Scene & Statement Analysis.
Hughes, Dalton & Marcus, Inc.
Truth Is But A Chameleon Within Our Words
cc: Prosecutm· Ken Kratz, SA Fassbender, Det. Dedering

From: Len Kachinsky.
To: Crime Scene & Statement Analysis.
Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 7:20PM.
Subject: Brendan Dassey meeting on May 12th.

Mike,

I will fax the the Sheboygan County Jail on Wed. morning. It is sitting in my printer at the office. As to the items below, I would suggest calling the Cal Co DA's office and talking to Shirley. Phone; (920) 849-****. For item 11, I do not believe it exists in any unitary form. Unless you think it would be a bad idea, I was planning on going to Sheboygan on Wed afternoon for a general pep talk and talk to him about giving a complete statement to you on Friday.

LEN KACHINSKY.

"Not for the glory. Not for the rush. Sometimes you just do what you have to do."

At 10:11 PM 5/9/2006, O’Kelly wrote:

Len,

I am learning the Avery family history and interactions within and about each member of the Avery family.

These are criminals. There are members engaged in sexual activities with nieces, nephews, cousins, in-laws. Anyone else is fair game to these people. They have a history of stalking females who have no connection to this group.

Customers and/or their relatives unwittingly become Victims of their sexual fantasies and thus are stalked. The Victims have no idea that they are being victimized.

This is truly where the devil resides in comfort. I can find no good in any member. These people are pure evil. This is where one would eat their young to satisfy/justify a control issue where none previously existed. A friend of mine suggested "This Is a one branch family tree. Cut this tree down. We need to end the gene pool here. Steve Avery needs to be removed from society. I believe that his male siblings could have a role in Teresa's crime scene. I believe that Earl may have disposed of evidence and Chuck may have ignored Steve's physical movements during this period of time while he was transporting Teresa's car to the back of the Avery Salvage area. There is no question that Dolores is guiding and directing this behind the scenes.

I think that your visit will be counterproductive to our goals for Brendan. It could have Brendan digging his heels in further. He could become more entrenched in his illogical position and further distort the facts. He has been relying on a story that his family has told him what to say about October 31, 2005, thus It will take me longer to undo if I can even without your visit.

We need to separate him from fantasy and bring him to see reality from our perspective. We need to separate him from the unrealistic world that his family resides within. Brendan needs to be alone. When he sees me this Friday I will be a source of relief. He and I can begin to bond. He needs to trust me and the direction that I steer him into. Brendan needs to provide an explanation that coincides with the facts/evidence.

I would like to obtain his confession this Friday. Brendan should provide details of the crime scene and data that has been previously undisclosed that mirrors the crime scene data. However, I will follow your lead and adapt to your decision. It has been interesting to read Brendan's evaluations by the school psychologist. Yet, he was able to read each question, respond to, draw pictures of his recollection of the crime scene in my interview form.

Thanks,
Mike.

From: Len Kachinsky <***@sissonlaw.com>
Subject: Brendan Dassey meeting on May 12th.

Mike,

I will cancel my planned visit for today. I have plenty of other work to do here.

[–]MnAtty 

Ah Michael O’Kelly. Proving that private investigators can indeed be lower forms of life than even attorneys.

Maybe you haven’t seen this before, but O’Kelly discusses his nefarious plans quite specifically, in this lengthy email to Kachinsky—
  http://static1.squarespace.com/static/5691be1b25981daa98f417c8/t/569739261115e0cae7fe2fdb/1452751142676/20312830370+brendan+dassey+meetin+on+may+12.pdf.

It’s even worth quoting. O’Kelly tells Kachinsky "I think that your visit will be counterproductive to our goals FOR BRENDAN (emphasis added).

"It could have been Brendan digging his heels in further. He could become more entrenched in his illogical position and further distort the facts. He has been relying on a story that his family has told him what to say about October 31, 2005 > > thus is will take me longer to undo if I can even without your visit."

It gets even worse. O’Kelly lays out plans that can only be described as an ambush—

"Brendan needs to be alone. When he sees me this Friday I will be a source of relief. He and I can begin to bond. He needs to trust me and the direction that I steer him into. Brendan needs to provide an explanation that coincides with the facts/evidence.”

O’Kelly intended to prey on Brendan at his most vulnerable. Also, O’Kelly demonstrated his contempt for Brendan—how much he looked down on him. People who harbor such prejudices, can justify all kinds of bad behavior against those they hold such prejudices against. In Manitowoc—in MaM—the dominant prejudice that brought out the worst in so many people, was prejudice against poor, uneducated, lower class individuals.

Finally, there is the infamous “cut this tree down” discussion at the beginning of O’Kelly’s email, which he was later required to read in open court. I don’t know why this courtroom performance failed to get the entire case thrown out.

I can’t even believe the things O’Kelly said: “This is truly where the devil lies in comfort. I can find no good in any member. These people are pure evil. This is where one would eat their young.... This is a one branch family tree. Cut this tree down. We need to end this gene pool here.”

Yeah, pretty disturbing. Again, very extreme and bad behavior can become normalized when someone is conforming to a group who holds strong prejudice against another group. In this case, the “good” people of Manitowoc and Calumet would regard themselves as justified in whatever they did to the “bad” Avery’s and other people of this kind. There are echoes of eugenics in O’Kelly’s remarks. You know, there are a lot of Germans in Wisconsin. Hmmm.

[–]MnAtty

I didn’t have time to comment on this sooner. I wish I had, because you bring up an important point—one that a lot of people are missing. This isn’t a fairy tale where people will live happily ever after. Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey are not heroes, or even antiheroes. They only occupy the role of defendants in this particular case.

The true objective is to make corrections to the process, so that not only these two defendants, but any defendants who come after them, will receive fair treatment.

Also, you are illustrating another point. You’ve had it with Steven Avery. He’s crude and uneducated, and you don’t think he’s very smart. Why should you care what happens to him?

But that is an important dynamic here. In Manitowoc, there is strong prejudice against lower class people, whom they regard as uncouth and uncivilized. It reminds me of the awful things Michael O’Kelly said about Brendan, how O’Kelly could find “no good” in Brendan and his family, how they were “pure evil.”

This is at the very heart of discrimination. One group holds itself superior to another group. Actions by the superior group against members of the inferior group are considered to be “for the greater good.” This rationale can excuse all kinds of terrible behavior against the inferior group.

One of the things I find interesting about this case is that there aren’t any apparent racial aspects, unless you want to consider Scandinavians a race. It helps to strip away every other issue, and just look at this most basic situation. The Avery’s belong to an inferior social group. Strong prejudices against them justify every kind of unfairness and mistreatment. I’m sure there are many people who don’t even care if they are innocent, because they are just “throw-aways” from society.

Again, that’s why we have to have the same rules for everyone. Today’s inferior group can become tomorrow’s ruling class. Society is just a giant game of musical chairs, people always jockeying for position and grabbing that last, coveted chair.

Believe me, I understand your frustration. Think about the attorneys who are helping these defendants. They go to college and then to law school. They get all this education and acquire all these skills. Then their caseload consists of people perceived as social failures—people in and out of jail. I’ve always thought criminal defense attorneys are very interesting people, because they’ve learned to overcome their own prejudices and show tolerance and acceptance toward their clients.