The video linked here and in the image above is a report by Action 2 News from November 4, 2005.
At the 3:05 mark in the video, Teresa Halbach's roommate and Ryan Hillegas' good friend, Scott Bloedorn, is interviewed.
CASO investigator Mark Wiegert reported on November 3rd that Scott told them "he was aware that on Saturday night Teresa had been at a Halloween party in Green Bay," which they talked about on Sunday (CASO pages 6-7).
Scott states he had talked to Teresa last on Sunday afternoon, 10/30/05, at about 2:00 p.m. I asked him what they had talked about to which Scott stated they talked about the Halloween parties they had both attended over the weekend. I asked Scott if she had talked about what she was going to be doing on Halloween, the 31", to which Scott stated she did not mention anything to him. Scott states they are just roommates and they do not check in with each other and only talk if they happen to meet each other in the house. He states they basically both live their own lives out of that house. When asked what may have happened to Teresa, Scott said "maybe she had met a guy when she was out over the weekend. Scott did tell me that he was aware that on Saturday night, Teresa had been at a Halloween party in Green Bay. He also stated Teresa hangs out in Green Bay a lot and has a lot of friends from Green Bay.Mike Halbach, Teresa's brother, confirmed during his testimony at Steven Avery's trial in February 2007 that Teresa went to a Halloween party on Saturday night, October 29th:
Q. Okay. The gathering at -- was at grandpa's house on Sunday, October 30?sIn March 2006, almost one year before he testified at Avery's trial, Ryan Hillegas told Milwaukee Magazine that Teresa was dressed as a cowgirl the last time her saw her (the "friend's house" was Scott's house, which was also Teresa's house):
A. That's correct.
Q. For his -- for his birthday?
A. Correct.
Q. And then, I think -- Were there, if you know, did she -- had she had plans to go to a Halloween party the Saturday night right before that?
A. I believe so. Earlier in the evening she was helping me with a wedding, shooting a wedding video. After that I think she would have went to a Halloween party. I believe that's correct.
Q. Okay. Saturday night, October 29?
A. Right. Yeah, it would have been later on in the night.
"On the Sunday before she disappeared, Hillegas ran into Teresa at a friend’s house. Halbach told him she planned to join her family at a bar in Appleton for a Halloween party. She was dressed as a cowgirl."In February 2007, during Ryan's testimony at Avery's trial, Buting asked Ryan about seeing Teresa on Saturday or Sunday.
Ryan changed his story when he testified in February 2007: he said Teresa "mentioned she had a cowgirl hat and she was going to dress up like a cowgirl."
Ryan Hillegas testified at Avery's trial that he stopped by Teresa's home on Sunday, October 30th, to drop off something for Scott, at which time he spoke to Teresa while she was using her computer, but he testified that he didn't remember what time it was or if it was day-time or night-time (he was not asked if Scott was home or not, and Scott did not testify).
Q. Now, the night before, Saturday night, was sort of Halloween weekend; there would be parties, bar parties, house parties, whatever. Did you chit chat at all, talk about that?
A. On Sunday we just talked and she had mentioned that she had a cowgirl hat and she was going to dress up like a cowgirl. And that was pretty much the extent of it.
Q. This was, I’m sorry, Saturday or Sunday?
A. Sunday.
Q. Okay. Did she talk about having gone out the night before, Saturday night at all?
A. No.
Q. Do you know from any other information whether she did go Saturday night?
A. I don’t know.
Q. Or Sunday night?
A. I don’t know that either.
On Sunday afternoon Teresa was going to her grandfather's to celebrate his birthday with her family. Why would she be "dressed as a cowgirl" for his party?
CASO investigators reported on November 3rd that Scott told them the last time he saw Teresa was at 2 PM on Sunday, October 30th (CASO page 6).
This would mean that Teresa left for her grandfather's birthday party at 2 PM, while Scott was still home (and he was home until at least 2 PM). This was after Ryan called Scott's cell phone at 1:25 PM (call duration less than one minute) and after Scott returned Ryan's call at 1:36 PM (call duration one to two minutes).
Ryan's testimony suggests that Scott was not home when he stopped by and saw Teresa for the last time.
Scott was home until at least 2 PM, when Teresa left.
Therefore, Ryan did not stop before 2 PM on October 30th.
Teresa didn't return home until around 4:30 PM on October 30th.
Therefore, Ryan could not have stopped by and talked to Teresa between 2 and 4:30 PM on October 30th.
The Cingular report entered into evidence indicates on October 30th the first activity for Teresa's cell phone was at 4:41 PM, which was an incoming call. At 5:05 PM, she received another incoming call. The first time Teresa made a call was to check her voicemail at 5:27 PM. According to the Cingular report, at 5:40 PM she made at outgoing call; however, this call is not listed on the report generated by AT&T in 2017.Teresa's mother, Karen Halbach, testified at Brendan Dassey's trial (day 1, page 108) that on Sunday, October 30th, Teresa came over at 7 PM and left sometime after 10 PM (after returning from the birthday party, and before Teresa came over around 7 PM, the Halbach family milked cows on their diary farm, about 1/4 mile from Teresa's home).
These three or four calls were the only activity for Teresa's cell phone on October 30th, and the Cingular report indicates that these calls were serviced by Teresa's home tower.
Therefore, if the Cingular report is correct, and if the report was not altered before being entered into evidence, Teresa returned home from her grandfather's party no later than 4:41 PM on Sunday, October 30th.
Q. Could you tell the jury what you remember about Sunday, the 30th of October?Karen Halbach testified at Dassey's trial that Teresa was at her parents' home from 7 to 10 PM on October 30th.
A. Um, my dad's birthday is October 31, Halloween, so the day before, my whole family got together at his house and we just celebrated his birthday during the day.
Q. Was Teresa in attendance at that party?
A. Yes, she was.
Q. Were the rest of, uh, the siblings there as well?
A. Yes, they were.
Q. What happened that night if you recall?
A. That night, um, we milked cows, and then Teresa came home from -- about seven, because Extreme Makeover Home Edition was coming on and she wanted to watch it with the girls.
Q. She was at your house?
A. Right. At our house.
Q. All right. Do you know about what time Teresa left your home on the 30th?
A. I would say it was after ten.
Karen testified at Avery's trial (trial testimony, day 13, page 106) that "it became a tradition" for Teresa to come over on Sunday nights to watch TV with her sisters:
"It kind of became a tradition, Teresa would come over Sunday after -- Sunday night, and three of her favorite TV shows were on that night, and they (she and her two sisters) would watch it together and laugh and have a good time."The defense didn't follow up at Avery's trial with the question, "Did Teresa come by on the Sunday night, October 30th, to watch TV with her sisters."
This means the only time period on October 30th for Ryan to have seen Teresa at her home, dressed as a cowgirl, was between 4:30 and 7 PM.
On Sunday, October 30, 2005:Ryan is the only person to mention Teresa wearing a cowgirl costume on October 30th.
- Around 2 PM, Teresa left home to attend her grandfather's birthday party at his home (if the report about Scott last seeing Teresa at 2 PM is accurate and not falsified).
- Around 4:30 PM, Teresa returned home from the party (if the Cingular report is accurate and not falsified).
- By 7 PM, Teresa went next door to her parents' home and watched TV with her sisters.
- Sometime after 10 PM, Teresa returned home.
- At 10:29 PM, Teresa printed her day planner for the week beginning October 31st. We know that Teresa was at home at 10:29 PM on October 30th because this is the timestamp on the page that she printed from her day planner.
Teresa did not put on her Halloween costume to go to her grandfather's birthday party at 2 PM. Nor did she come home at 4:30 PM and dress up like a cowgirl before going to her parents' house to watch TV with her sisters at 7 PM. Nor did she come after 10 PM, print her day planner at 10:29 PM, dress up as a cowgirl, and then head out to party in Appleton at 11 PM, the day before Halloween and the day before she was supposed to work from 9 AM to 2 PM for Autotrader.
Teresa did not dress up as a cowgirl on Sunday, October 30th.
Teresa was planning to meet friends in Appleton to party for Halloween, dressed as a cowgirl, on Monday, October 31st.
At the 42-minute mark in episode 5 of Making A Murderer, Ryan testifies that he ran into Teresa at her house, but doesn't remember if it was day or night.
Ryan stated that he saw Teresa the day before she disappeared yet he cannot give any specific details about the visit. He knew nothing of a major Halbach family gathering planned for that afternoon, nor did he provide an alibi for the time period from October 30th through November 3rd.
Ryan can't provide any details because he didn't see Teresa on Sunday, October 29th. He saw Teresa at her home sometime between 4 and 7 PM on Monday, October 31st, as she was completing her Autotrader paperwork and preparing to go to Appleton, first to FedEx her package to Autotrader, and then to meet friends at a bar to party for Halloween.
Around 4 PM on Halloween, Monday, October 31st, Teresa returned home after completing her Autotrader assignments.
As she was doing her business paperwork and preparing to leave for Appleton, Ryan stopped by.
Ryan told Milwaukee Magazine in March 2006 that Teresa was dressed as a cowgirl for Halloween the last time her saw her.
Tom Pearce said in his affidavit dated April 21, 2017 that Teresa told him on Saturday, October 29th, that she planned to go to a party on Halloween, October 31st (Tom said in his testimony at Avery's trial in 2007 that he last saw Teresa at their studio in Green Bay on October 29th):
"Ms. Halbach told me on October 29 that she intended to go out to a party on Halloween. I know that most of the time when Ms. Halbach went out to a party, she went to Green Bay or Appleton."
Teresa never made it to Appleton for Halloween on Monday, October 31st [see Teresa Halbach's Last Day].
Ryan was the last person to see Teresa alive on Monday, October 31st.
Ryan told Milwaukee Magazine in March 2006 that he called Teresa on Tuesday (November 1st) to ask her about the [Halloween] party, and her voicemail box was full [Scott Bloedorn told Wiegert on Thursday, November 3rd, that "he noticed on Tuesday (November 1st) Teresa's truck was also not anywhere to be found at the house"].
At 2:52 PM on November 3, 2005, Karen Halbach called the Calumet County Sheriff's Office and reported Teresa as missing and last seen at home on Monday (image above):
"Daughter has not been seen since Monday at home."UPDATE APRIL 2018: The 911 call placed by Karen Halbach at 2:52 PM on November 3, 2005, was requested in March 2018 by FOIA. Click here for the audio and transcript. Karen told the dispatcher that Teresa's roommate Scott Bloedorn saw Teresa at home on Monday, October 31, 2005; however, Wiegert's activity report for November 3rd says that the "last time Scott talked to Teresa was at 2 PM on Sunday." Therefore, either Scott lied or Wiegert's report was falsified.
Pagel told reporters on November 4th that "parents, friends, relatives, nobody has had any contact with her since the 31st:"
"It is out of character for her not to have contact with family or friends for this length of time," Pagel said. "This is behavior that is not normal for this young lady. It's suspicious. Parents, friends, relatives, nobody has had any contact with her since the 31st."Action 2 News reported on November 4th that the last time her family or roommate saw her was Sunday afternoon (October 30th):
"The last time her family or her roommate saw her was Sunday afternoon."At Avery's trial, Karen Halbach was not asked if she saw Teresa after the birthday party on the afternoon of October 30th:
Q. Tell the jury about, um, your relationship with Teresa? And I'll -- How often would you talk to her?At Dassey's trial, Karen Halbach was asked about seeing Teresa after her grandfather's birthday party:
A. Um, at least once a week. She'd come over a lot on the weekends to spend time with us and her two sisters. Um, she took pictures for us. She did our family picture, and she was always taking pictures of the girls and around the farm. She liked to take pictures a lot. And we'd spend a lot of time together. We'd go out, out to eat, or -- it seems like the kids were always over on a Sunday afternoon, and we'd talk, sit around the island in our kitchen and talk a lot. We did spend a lot of time together.
Q. Was Sundays a day that the family would typically get together?
A. Yeah. Yes.
Q. In fact, the Sunday before Teresa -- Teresa's death, a Sunday, the one day before her death on the 30th of October, do you recall all getting together for a birthday party that day?
A. Yes. It was my father's birthday on Halloween, but we got together that Sunday before and celebrated his birthday at his house.
Q. Okay. So Teresa was actually killed on your dad's birthday?
A. Yes.
Q. I think you told us, um, Mrs. Halbach, that Teresa lived close to you in -- in physical proximity. Who owned the property in which she lived?
A. My husband and I do.
[...]
Q. Your, um, daughter, Katie, who we've heard from, um, were you familiar with Katie's relationship with your daughter, Teresa?
A. Yes.
Q. Would you describe that? What -- what you noticed about that relationship?
A. Um, Teresa was very close to both of her sisters. Um, you know, they spent a lot of time laughing and picking on each other. Uh, it kind of became tradition, Teresa would come over Sunday after -- Sunday night, and three of her favorite TV shows were on that night, and they'd watch it together and laugh and have a good time. You know, she took them shopping.
Q. All right. When you heard that Katie knew about Teresa's clothing, when she knew that she owned a pair of Daisy Fuentes jeans, do you have any doubts that, uh, they were close enough that she'd know that?
A. Oh, yeah. Teresa, um -- The girls would go over to Teresa's house and they would try on her clothes, because if Teresa had jeans that wouldn't fit her, she'd give them to the girls. So I'm sure Katie knows she had them.
Q. All right. There's been at least some suggestion that on, perhaps, the 2nd or 3rd of November, that your daughter, Teresa, may still have been alive. May have been accessing her cell phone. After the 31st of October, Mrs. Halbach, um, did you ever hear your daughter, Teresa's voice again?
A. No, I did not.
Q. Is Teresa -- or was Teresa the kind of girl that would have taken off, or would have left, or would have, um, vanished without talking to you, or talking to her family?
A. No, she would not.
Q. Could you tell the jury what you remember about Sunday, the 30th of October?At Dassey's trial, Teresa's sister Katie indicated that the last time she saw Teresa was at her grandfather's birthday party:
A. Um, my dad's birthday is October 31, Halloween, so the day before, my whole family got together at his house and we just celebrated his birthday during the day.
Q. Was Teresa in attendance at that party?
A. Yes, she was.
Q. Were the rest of, uh, the siblings there as well?
A. Yes, they were.
Q. What happened that night if you recall?
A. That night, um, we milked cows, and then Teresa came home from -- about seven, because Extreme Makeover Home Edition was coming on and she wanted to watch it with the girls.
Q. She was at your house?
A. Right. At our house.
Q. All right. Do you know about what time Teresa left your home on the 30th?
A. I would say it was after ten.
Q. Okay. Katie, on Sunday nights did your sister, Teresa, and you make a habit of watching some television shows together?
A. We did.
Q. Where would you guys usually watch those shows together?
A. Either at our house or hers.
Q. All right. Do you remember the day before she was killed, that is, on the 30th of October, if you and Teresa and your other sister spent that night together and watched those shows together?
A. Urn, I believe we were at my grandpa's house for his birthday.
Q. All right. You remember that birthday party that night?
A. Yeah.
Q. Or that day at least?
A. Yeah.
Q. And the same question that I asked of your mom, after the 30th of October, have you ever seen or heard from your sister, Teresa?
A. I did not.
Q. Last question for you. Urn, do you know what kind of soda that, uh, your sister, Teresa, used to drink? Did she have a brand of soda she liked?
A. Urn, she likes cherry sodas a lot.
Q. Do you know if she liked Wild Cherry Pepsi brand soda?
The following is a clip from NBC Dateline. It includes interviews from 2005 of Mike Halbach and Ryan Hillegas.Buting: So the last time you actually saw Teresa was Sunday?— TickTockManitowoc (@TManitowoc) January 25, 2018
Hillegas: Yes.
Buting: Do you know about what time that was?
Hillegas: Uhm, I dunno.
Buting: I mean talking morning, afternoon, night?
Hillegas (shaking head expressively): I dunno
"She'll be in my heart forever.." pic.twitter.com/GfeKIxaw5v
https://www.nbcnews.com/dateline/video/remembering-teresa-shell-be-in-my-heart-forever-611975235991
Teresa lied to her ex-bf. Teresa Dressed as a Cowgirl - The Halloween Party - Where was it? Who was there?
By Bill_Shackelson, MakingaMurderer
December 27, 2015
"On the Sunday before she disappeared, Hillegas ran into Teresa at a friend’s house. Halbach told him she planned to join her family at a bar in Appleton for a Halloween party. She was dressed as a cowgirl."
Source: http://www.milwaukeemag.com/2006/05/01/blood-simple/
"Wygralak last saw her at a Halloween party Oct. 21, which Halbach attended dressed as a cowgirl, and she planned to see her Saturday when the two were to throw a surprise party for two friends in Green Bay. Instead, Wygralak spent the day helping friends search for some sign of Halbach." [I presume the date Oct. 21 is a typo by the newspaper.]
Source: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-31696.html Original: http://www.wisinfo.com/heraldtimes/news/archive/local_23315707.shtml
I understand her family could have been at this Halloween party (on Sunday along with her friend Aubrey Wygralak), but come on guys...single, pretty and dressed up as a cowgirl on Halloween? She ain't hanging out with her family, ya'll. And these dates are a little funky. Halloween party on Friday October 21st and then another Halloween party on Sunday October 30th with her family? That first date could be wrong. Let's say it is the same party -- then Teresa lied to Ryan. I'd put money on it that there was another guy there or she was bisexual or gay. And Ryan Hillegas felt burned or jealous.
Bill_Shackelson also wrote on reddit in December 2015:
Well, according to that older article, on Sunday, October 30th, the day before Halloween, the ex-boyfriend, Ryan, said he showed up at the house of his "friend" who lived with Teresa and saw her dressed up as a cowgirl...to go to a Halloween party. He didn't mention at all that she was dressed up to go to a Halloween party except the one mistaken slip to the magazine in 2006, telling them that she was dressed up as a cowgirl and on her way to a Halloween party. The story he stuck to consistently thereafter and in court was that she was at her computer and he had no recollection of what time of the day it might have been. Just doesn't sound right.
Who dresses up in her costume in the morning or afternoon, even? And who goes to Halloween parties with their family at 25 years of age? Something's not right here. And her ex-boyfriend doesn't remember what time of the day it was when he saw her dressed up? That never even came up in court -- "What was she wearing when you saw her?" The ex-boyfriend didn't remember what time of day it was when he last saw her, yet he told a reporter that she was dressed as a cowgirl? Do people wear their Halloween costumes for breakfast and wear it all day?
What I am saying is, if he wasn't invited to this Halloween party, he's gonna feel a little butt-hurt. And you remember when a girl you dated for five years is looking sexy in her cowgirl costume.
Can't underestimate what Halloween means to dudes when they know the girl is dressed up all nice and fancy. Their imaginations start running wild -- in the wrong direction.
Trust me. The burned weiner is a powerful force. And if it smells like a duck and quacks like a duck, the thing works for Aflac and is a mf'g duck! The duck in this case being Ryan, who shows up to his "friend's" house where his ex-girlfriend of five years lives, as well. And the other duck being Teresa, who seems to be hiding something from him.
Here is the still of Pagels Duping delight. pic.twitter.com/0ASP6aS1b7— MysticJynx (@MysticJynx) January 25, 2018
Related Posts:
[–]UnpoppedColonel 7 points 2 years ago
ReplyDeleteI find it interesting that the media reports say Hillegas ran into her at a friend's house, but am I crazy for getting the impression that that "friend" was Scott, Theresa's roommate, and that Hillegas actually "ran into" TH at her own home?
[–]UnpoppedColonel 3 points 2 years ago
I mentioned this in another thread, but in his testimony on the stand he gives off this weird way-overconfident vibe. Sort of a Dexter-like "I'm not worried about slipping up because I know you won't find any evidence pointing to me" kind of attitude.
And he's a registered nurse, so we know he has at least a basic understanding of physical evidence, blood, DNA, etc.
[–]richard-kimble 5 points 2 years ago
YES! More media games by the state.
"I ran into her at a friend's house"
vs.
"I went to her house, not to see her though"
[–]UnpoppedColonel 4 points 2 years ago
It really makes you wonder. It wouldn't be hard to believe if Ryan had something to do with the death but because of the cozy relationship between the search party and the police, he had all the inside information he needed to stay one step ahead of them, and he had TH's brother by his side constantly as a sort of shield against any suspicions that it could have been the ex boyfriend.
[–][deleted] 2 points 2 years ago
I think it happens often that the murderer stays close to the family and police to remove suspicion from themselves. The movie "A killer among friends" is a good example.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Killer_Among_Friends
(I am NOT saying Villegas is the murderer, just discussing the facts as we know them)
[–]UnpoppedColonel 2 points 2 years ago
Exactly. He has wrapped himself in the Halbach family and the legacy of Theresa, which up to this point has made him invisible to all suspicion. I eagerly await the results of Zellner's work.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/41d72k/did_ths_coworkers_or_roommate_contact_her_family/
Name: Scott Bloedorn, roommate of Halbach
ReplyDeleteInterview: Nov. 3, 2005
Highlights: Bloedorn and Halbach had been roommates for eight or nine months. Bloedorn said he last saw Halbach at the farmhouse they rented from Halbach's parents at around 2 p.m on Sunday, Oct. 30. Bloedorn said he usually was the first to leave their house every morning since he worked carpentry. During his interview, Bloedorn implied he and Halbach didn't spend much time together. He talked about how Halbach usually commuted to Green Bay for work and she often went there on weekends to socialize with friends. "Scott stated they talked about the Halloween parties they had both attended over the weekend," Calumet investigator Mark Wiegert's report indicated. "I asked Scott if she had talked about what she was going to be doing on Halloween, the 31st, to which Scott stated she did not mention anything to him. Scott states they are just roommates. ... He states they basically live their own lives out of that house." When asked what may have happened to Halbach, Bloedorn said "maybe she had met a guy when she was out over the weekend. ... Scott did tell me that he was aware that on Saturday night, Teresa had been at a Halloween party in Green Bay." Bloedorn also told investigators that he knew of no instances when Halbach stayed overnight at somebody else's place.
Overlooked details: Investigators glossed over the fact that Bloedorn did not report Halbach missing, even though Bloedorn noticed Halbach and her Toyota RAV4 were nowhere to be found for four straight days. Other reports reflect that Halbach's parents approached Bloedorn to inquire about the whereabouts of his missing daughter. After her parents reported Halbach was missing, Bloedorn told Calumet County Cpl. Leslie Lemieux: "Teresa made no mention of any plans to go out of town and although she worked out of Green Bay, (she) did normally commute and stay at (their) residence. Scott said it was unusual for Teresa to be gone like this without letting anyone know." There was no follow-up to determine Bloedorn's work schedule on the day Halbach vanished.
CONTINUED...
Name: Ryan Hillegas, former boyfriend of Halbach
ReplyDeleteInterview: Nov. 4, 2005
Highlights: During interviews with Wiegert, Hillegas revealed he and Halbach dated for five years, ending their romance in 2001. They had known each other since their high school freshman year at Hilbert. At the time of Halbach's disappearance, Hillegas was unemployed and living at his parents' home in Hilbert. He and Bloedorn were also long-time friends. Hillegas typically visited the house to see Bloedorn or Halbach about once per week. Hillegas said he stopped over at the farmhouse and saw Halbach sitting at her computer on Sunday, Oct. 30, the day before she vanished. "Ryan stated Teresa seemed completely normal and they had talked about Halloween parties," Wiegert stated.
Overlooked details: Calumet made few inroads trying to determine the true nature of Hillegas' relationship with Halbach, including the substance of his last communications with her. Authorities did not ask Hillegas to explain his whereabouts on the day Halbach went missing. And while authorities had learned from Bloedorn that Halbach attended a Saturday night Halloween party in Green Bay two days before her death, investigators downplayed the significance of the party during their questioning of Hillegas. The investigative reports do not mention whether Hillegas was asked whether he attended the same Halloween party in Green Bay.
During Avery's murder trial, Avery's defense lawyer Jerry Buting raised the scenario that Halbach went to the Green Bay Halloween party and that she didn't tell Hillegas about it because he was becoming her shadow. Also, investigators didn't find it strange that Hillegas immediately moved into Halbach's farmhouse after her disappearance. When deputies stopped to look for empty boxes of Halbach's camera equipment or her dirty clothes to use for DNA testing, Hillegas directed authorities where to find the items.
http://www.postcrescent.com/story/news/local/steven-avery/2016/11/11/did-superficial-questioning-affect-halbach-case/93415858/
[–]JJacks61
ReplyDeleteThat's Special Agent RH. :D
[–]MnAtty
Kratz had the strangest way of identifying RH. He called him an "untrained law enforcement officer," and to this day, I don't know why he said it that way—very carefully chosen words. Does anybody know the reason for this?
Remember—it was when RH was on the stand, and Kratz was walking him through his testimony. RH was as coached as a witness could possibly be, so what were they up to? Were they trying to navigate around some minefield of disqualification?
Also, RH was a well-prepared hostile witness during defense questioning—very evasive and completely disingenuous. What was he up to? What were they up to?
[–]JJacks61
Ryans testimony was so overcoached in my non-lawyer opinion. Especially certain areas, I just didn't believe him.
I believe because Kratz knew Fassbender had used Ryan for certain information gathering purposes, maybe he was doing what he always does. Try and lead people away from asking questions.. like, you guessed her password and made up a username that worked on Teresa's PC? That's just one area.
But because S&B were limited in what they could ask Ryan, Kratz could dance all over the room and not worry to much because of Denny.
It almost seems like Kratz is bragging at times in the way he questioned Ryan.
[–]MnAtty
I read through the transcripts of his testimony, and I was able to get a feel for what those in the courtroom saw and heard. RH was being so smarmy and dickish, I bet Buting wanted to go up there and smack him. RH was clearly siding with the prosecution, and he seemed annoyed that Avery was even being given a defense.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/7nxxky/front_end_damage_from_a_bad_tow/
Ryan's testimony on direct examination by Kratz:
ReplyDelete17 Q. Well, Friday night you said that you were making
18 some maps; how was that done?
19 A. Satellite imagery off the internet mostly,
20 otherwise just Map Quest.
21 Q. Maps of what?
22 A. Maps of, you know, the areas we wanted to search.
23 We kind of blew up smaller portions so you could
24 see the roads better and county highways out in
25 the Manitowoc area near the Averys, any kind of
165
1 county highway. Basically, we tried to cover
2 anything from Hilbert to Green Bay, all the way
3 to the lake. Pretty much covering as much land
4 as we could.
5 Q. Well, this was a citizen search effort; is that
6 right?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. In other words, family members and friends and
9 very -- very much so just a citizen effort
10 coordinated by you; is that right?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Let me ask you something, Mr. Hillegas, why would
13 you center or why would you direct some of your
14 search efforts around the Avery property?
15 A. Well, mostly for the fact that, you know, the
16 media had covered so much of it. You know, all
17 you heard about was around the Avery property.
18 And I believe at that point we had known that,
19 you know, her last kind of whereabouts were in
20 that neck of the woods.
21 Q. So even as an untrained law enforcement officer,
22 you knew to look for the last place she was seen
23 alive; is that right?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Okay. It didn't strike you as being unfair to
166
1 Mr. Steven Avery, did it?
2 A. No.
Ryan's testimony on cross examination by Buting:
ReplyDelete8 Q. Mr. Hillegas, can you give me a little bit of
9 background on how long you knew Teresa?
10 A. Sure. I met Teresa, I believe, when I was a
11 freshmen in high school and I have known her ever
12 since.
13 Q. And did you grow up in the same general town,
14 then, I take it?
15 A. She lived in St. John; I lived in Hilbert. We
16 went to the same high school.
17 Q. And then you went off -- How are you employed by
18 the way?
19 A. I'm a registered nurse.
20 Q. And where are you working right now?
21 A. In Milwaukee.
22 Q. At various hospitals?
23 A. At Froedert Hospital.
24 Q. Okay. And back in October of 2005, where were
25 you working?
174
1 A. I was currently unemployed. I had just finished
2 school.
3 Q. Okay. So on October 31st, you were not working
4 at all?
5 A. That's correct.
6 Q. And where were you living?
7 A. At home with my parents.
8 Q. Which is?
9 A. In Hilbert.
10 Q. In Hilbert, okay. Now, you said that you used to
11 date Teresa kind of on and off, or for how long
12 were you on and how long were you off?
13 A. Well, we dated for a total of five years, I
14 think. We broke up two or three times in the
15 middle for short periods, maybe for a month at a
16 time.
17 Q. So when was the last time you would say when you
18 broke up?
19 A. 2001, I believe.
20 Q. Was that your initiative or hers?
21 A. Just kind of a general understanding, kind of
22 both of us. We were just going separate ways,
23 so.
24 Q. Okay. And after that time, did you have any
25 interest in renewing that nature of that kind of
175
1 a relationship with her?
2 A. No.
3 Q. Now, Scott Bloedorn, was also a friend of yours,
4 right?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Was he, back in October of 2005, your best
7 friend?
8 A. One of them, yes.
9 Q. Okay. Would you -- When did he move in with
10 Teresa?
11 A. I don't know that.
12 Q. Well, was it less than a year?
13 A. It was less than a year before that Halloween.
14 Q. Eight or nine months sound about right?
15 A. It might be. I guess I'm not sure.
16 Q. Okay. You have been over to that house before I
17 take it, right?
18 A. Yes.
Ryan's testimony on cross examination by Buting:
ReplyDelete19 Q. What's the layout of the house? How is it set
20 up? How was it set up back then?
21 A. Well, Scott had -- Scott's room was upstairs.
22 Teresa's was downstairs. It was kind of an --
23 almost an understanding; all Scott's stuff was
24 upstairs and Teresa's was downstairs. They kind
25 of had it split, shared a kitchen and the
176
1 bathroom.
2 Q. So they had sort of their own floors and separate
3 bedroom on each floor?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. But they shared the kitchen and you said the
6 bathroom, there was one bathroom they shared?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. So they would see each other frequently,
9 presumably, during the day? Is that a yes?
10 A. Sure. Yes.
11 Q. Okay. And did you come over and visit Scott
12 various times while he was living with Teresa?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And did you spend time over there; dinner,
15 watching TV, or a movie or something?
16 A. Occasionally, yes.
17 Q. Was it -- Well, I take it, then, from -- when you
18 say that you talked with her at least every other
19 week, or every week even?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. On the phone, or would you actually get together
22 with her, or what?
23 A. Either on the phone, or I would see her at the
24 house when I would go visit Scott.
25 Q. Okay. So you were over there quite a bit during
177
1 that last six months or so?
2 A. I wouldn't say quite a bit.
3 Q. Once a week?
4 A. Occasionally, once a week, maybe.
5 Q. Okay. Okay. Over that time, would it be fair to
6 say that you became accustomed with Teresa's
7 habits and routines, generally?
8 A. No, I wouldn't say that.
9 Q. Well, did you know, for instance, was she a
10 homebody; did she like to go out?
11 A. She kind of did what she wanted. Sometimes I
12 would go over there and, you know, not see her
13 the three times that I stopped that week. And
14 the following week I could go there and I would
15 be there three nights in a row when she would be
16 there every night, just depended.
17 Q. Were you familiar with her circle of friends?
18 A. Most of them, yes.
19 Q. For instance, she went to UW Green Bay, right?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And she worked in Green Bay?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. So she had a lot of friends in Green Bay?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And would she go out, socializing with those
178
1 friends, if you know?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Did you ever go with her when she would socialize
4 with that group of friends?
5 A. When we were dating, yeah. She was in Green Bay
6 the first -- the last two years when we were
7 dating, so, occasionally, then, I would go out
8 with her and her friends, but other than that,
9 not really.
Ryan's testimony on cross examination by Buting:
ReplyDelete10 Q. Would you say she was a sociable person,
11 generally?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. She liked to be around people?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. She liked to go to parties?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Liked to go to bars?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Particularly karaoke bars, I think, was one of
20 her favorites?
21 A. I believe so, yes.
22 Q. Okay. And in 2005, were there times when you
23 would also go out with her to those kinds of
24 places, either parties or bars?
25 A. I don't think I -- I think the only bar -- I
179
1 maybe only went out with her once that whole
2 year, probably just didn't share that with her.
3 Q. And do you know whether Scott ever went out with
4 her to bars or parties?
5 A. A few times. I don't believe it was too often.
6 Q. Okay. And when she would be home, do you know
7 whether she would have dinner there or whether
8 she would eat out? You know, what did she do at
9 home?
10 A. Occasionally she did both.
11 Q. Did she and Scott have dinner together?
12 A. Not that I'm aware. I mean, maybe they sat down
13 and ate a meal together, but.
14 Q. So you are not that familiar with what the
15 evening routine was; is what you're saying?
16 A. No.
17 Q. Okay. Do you know whether it was unusual for her
18 to be out overnight during those last six months
19 or so?
20 A. Occasionally she would. I know she would go to
21 Green Bay and stay at a friend's house overnight.
22 Q. Okay. Let me ask you about the weekend of
23 October 29th and 30th, 29th being Saturday; did
24 you see her or talk with her that day?
25 A. I don't believe I talked to her on Saturday. I
180
1 don't think so.
2 Q. Okay. Did you talk with her or see her on
3 Sunday?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And where was that?
6 A. At her house.
7 Q. And how did that come about?
8 A. I had just stopped briefly. I was dropping
9 something off for Scott and she was sitting there
10 at her computer.
11 Q. Do you know about what time that was?
12 A. I don't know.
13 Q. I mean, are we talking morning, afternoon, night?
14 A. I don't know.
15 Q. You don't remember at all?
16 A. No.
17 Q. And she was just sitting at the computer?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Did you talk to her at all?
20 A. A little bit, yes.
21 Q. Now, the night before, Saturday night, was sort
22 of Halloween weekend; there would be parties, bar
23 parties, house parties, whatever. Did you chit
24 chat at all, talk about that?
25 A. On Sunday we had just talked and she had
181
1 mentioned that she had a cowgirl hat and she was
2 going to dress up like a cowgirl. And that was
3 pretty much the extent of it.
4 Q. This was, I'm sorry, Saturday or Sunday?
5 A. Sunday.
6 Q. Okay. Did she talk about having gone out the
7 night before, Saturday night at all?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Do you know from any other information whether
10 she did go out Saturday night?
11 A. I don't know.
12 Q. Or Sunday night?
13 A. I don't know that either.
Ryan's testimony on cross examination by Buting:
ReplyDelete14 Q. You said that you distributed 1,000 to 3,000
15 posters?
16 A. Roughly.
17 Q. And that she had all these friends and helping
18 out, including friends in Green Bay calling. You
19 called some friends; is that right?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. This was on November 3rd, when you called the
22 friends, right?
23 A. That was Thursday, yes.
24 Q. Yeah, Thursday. But you said none of those
25 people were particularly helpful, giving you any
182
1 information about her. Most of them hadn't seen
2 her for awhile?
3 A. That's correct.
4 Q. With all those posters out, all that publicity,
5 did anybody ever come forward and talk to you,
6 tell you where Teresa was on Saturday night?
7 A. No.
8 Q. October 29th?
9 A. Not that I remember.
10 Q. So that night is an unknown in her life; is that
11 right?
12 A. I don't know of what happened that night with
13 her.
14 Q. Be fair to say that Teresa had a private side as
15 well, that you didn't know about?
16 A. No, I don't think so. I don't think she had a
17 private side that I didn't know about. We were
18 pretty open with each other. We talked a lot.
19 Q. Well, if she had gone out Saturday night with
20 somebody, or some place, and you know nothing
21 about it, would that surprise you?
22 ATTORNEY KRATZ: Objection relevance,
23 Judge.
24 THE COURT: Mr. Buting.
25 ATTORNEY BUTING: I will withdraw it.
183
1 THE COURT: Very well.
2 Q. (By Attorney Buting)~ So the last time you
3 actually saw Teresa was Sunday?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. You never talked with her on the phone after
6 that?
7 A. No.
8 Q. Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, you never
9 called her?
10 A. No. Well, that's not correct. I did call her
11 somewhere in the middle of the week and I did not
12 get an answer and her voice mailbox had said that
13 it was full.
14 Q. Okay. Do you remember what day that was?
15 A. No, I don't.
16 Q. Thursday, Wednesday?
17 A. I called her on Thursday when I realized she was
18 missing, but I believe I called her once earlier
19 in the week.
20 Q. Okay. So when you first learned, you said it was
21 Scott that came over; did he come over, or call
22 you, or what did he?
23 A. He called me.
24 Q. Called you and said that -- he said that he
25 wanted your assistance, or what?
184
1 A. He just called and said that Teresa's dad had
2 came over to his work site and asked him if he
3 had seen her recently. And Scott had called me
4 on his way home just asking if I had talked to
5 her. Asking if I could come over and help.
6 Q. Now, you said that -- Scott's work site? What is
7 that?
8 A. Scott worked construction. I don't know where
9 his work site was, but usually they did kind of
10 local house work.
Ryan's testimony on cross examination by Buting:
ReplyDelete11 Q. Okay. Did you ask Scott if he had tried to call
12 Teresa at all during the Monday, Tuesday,
13 Wednesday, Thursday?
14 A. I don't know.
15 Q. May have called, is that what you are saying?
16 A. I don't know.
17 Q. Did you think that it was odd that three or four
18 days had gone by without Scott coming forward and
19 saying, where is she?
20 A. No.
21 Q. That didn't strike you as odd at all?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Why not?
24 A. Well, they were kind of on differing schedules.
25 Teresa worked for herself and Scott worked
185
1 construction. So he would be up and out of the
2 house by 5:30, 6 in the morning. A lot of times
3 I know Teresa didn't get up and go to work until
4 9 or 10.
5 Q. So did you know Scott's schedule?
6 A. Fairly well, yes.
7 Q. But you didn't know where he was working, is what
8 you are saying?
9 A. I didn't know what site they were on that day.
10 Q. On any given day?
11 A. On any given day, for that matter. Occasionally
12 I would know, just from driving by and seeing him
13 on the side of the road working on a house, but.
14 Q. Okay. What kind of construction did he do?
15 A. Rough work, rough framing.
16 Q. Rough carpenter?
17 A. Yeah.
18 Q. Now, when you went over there, to her house, on
19 Thursday; you said Scott had already found some
20 kind of information or no?
21 A. No.
22 Q. What did you do first; how did you start to
23 gather information about who to call?
24 A. I just started looking through all her records.
25 She had filing cabinets set next to her computer.
186
1 Kind of her business workstation, I guess. Just
2 started looking through the files. Turned her
3 computer on and there was actually a -- She had
4 an icon that was named Teresa's friends. Clicked
5 on that and her friend's basically popped right
6 up with phone numbers.
7 Q. Was this a laptop?
8 A. It was.
9 Q. Okay. And what did you do first? You talked
10 about going online with her phone records, or did
11 you call friends first?
12 A. Well, we got the phone list of her friends and
13 started calling them. And I guess you could
14 probably say it kind of all went down at the same
15 time. We were calling friends; it was me and
16 Scott, and Kelly Bitsen was calling friends as
17 well. And we were kind of working on getting her
18 phone records at the same time.
19 Q. How soon did Kelly Bitsen arrive? How long were
20 you and Scott there together before she arrived?
21 A. I'm going to estimate and say between --
22 Q. Six, something like that?
23 A. What's that?
24 Q. She arrived like 6 or 7, something like that?
25 A. Yeah, she was there a few hours after I got
187
1 there, I believe. She was one of the first
2 people --
3 Q. Okay.
4 A. -- that we called of her friends.
5 Q. Now, tell me about this online search. You tried
6 calling her phone and it was full, right?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Did you know her voice mail password?
9 A. No.
10 Q. Did you ever -- So you didn't call and listen to
11 her voice mail at all?
12 A. No.
13 Q. Never?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Never did that day, or before?
16 A. No.
Ryan's testimony on cross examination by Buting:
ReplyDelete17 Q. Or since? Okay. And she had never shared her
18 password with you for the online records either?
19 A. No.
20 Q. So you just went online to Cingular Wireless, or
21 whatever, .com and just guessed her password.
22 A. Well, we -- me and Kelly Bitsen had just kind of
23 figured that it would fairly be something
24 relating to her sisters. I believe -- I think it
25 was their birthdays that got into it for us. I'm
188
1 not exactly sure about what the password was.
2 Q. But you didn't know what her user name was.
3 A. No, I believe that automatically came up when you
4 entered her phone number in, you just need the
5 password.
6 Q. Okay. And that's the first time you ever tried
7 to search her phone record or use that password?
8 A. Yeah.
9 Q. Do you know if -- if anybody else knew her voice
10 mail password?
11 A. I don't know that.
12 Q. Or if anybody else listened to her voice mails?
13 A. I don't know that either.
14 Q. All right. By the time that Calumet county
15 investigators arrived, I take it you guys were
16 pretty concerned about Teresa's well being, where
17 she was?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And you knew that it was important that you
20 provide as much information, as accurate
21 information as you could?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Did the police interview you and Scott together,
24 or did they put you in separate rooms when they
25 talked to you, or how did they do that?
189
1 A. I believe we were -- I believe we were in the
2 same room.
3 Q. Okay. Now, did the investigators ask you any
4 questions about the nature of your relationship
5 with Teresa?
6 A. Yeah.
7 Q. And they learned that you were a former
8 boyfriend, stayed good friends with her?
9 A. Well, I believe I just said that I was a friend
10 of hers. I don't think I mentioned that I was an
11 ex-boyfriend.
12 Q. Okay. And they didn't pursue that and ask if you
13 had ever had anything more than a friendship is
14 that what you are saying?
15 A. I believe so. It came out eventually, I just
16 didn't feel that it mattered.
17 (Court reporter coughing, asked him to repeat.)
18 Q. Let me try again.
19 A. Ask it again, please.
20 Q. Did the police ever probe further and ask if you
21 had -- the nature of your relationship with her
22 beyond whether there was ever anything more than
23 friendship?
24 A. I don't think they really probed into that. I
25 mean, I don't remember when it came out or who
190
1 was the one that mentioned that we used to date.
2 Q. Okay. But it wasn't talked about that night?
3 A. I don't believe so.
4 Q. When they were trying to find out what was
5 happening -- or what had happened to this missing
6 person, right?
7 A. Yeah.
8 Q. And if Scott was there with you, then, did they
9 ask Scott the nature of his relationship with
10 Teresa?
11 A. Yeah.
What is clear, though, is that Ryan Hillegas committed perjury when he testified under oath, that he and Scott were interviewed together.
Deletehttp://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Jury-Trial-Transcript-Day-2-2007Feb13.pdf
Page 188 of Day 2 of the trial:
Q. Did the police interview you and Scott together, or did they put you in separate rooms when they talked to you, or how did they do that? A. I believe we were -- I believe we were in the same room.
They were not in the same room while questioned. In fact, it was more than 12 hours apart on completely different days per CASO.
Scott was interviewed on 11/03/2005 upon LE's first visit to he and Teresa's home. On page 5 of CASO, his name is included with Teresa's parents and a couple others as being interviewed.
Ryan was interviewed on 11/04/2005 at 10:04 a.m. by Wiegert.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/7x1tjs/why_did_ryan_lie_on_the_stand/
Why am I so fascinated with this case? (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeleteby sveddycheeze
1) Bored at work
2) Bored at home
3) Drunk at the bar (Beer is state subsidized in Wisconsin) yaay! 🐒
4) My Bro was SA's guard at the supermax. Spent lots of time in his presence. Thinks SA was framed. Thinks SA was FRAMED.... THINKS SA WAS FR@MED!!!
5) My Pops is Sippel's neighbor.
6) Thinks Mani's SD may sink like the submarine downtown at the museum.
7) TH's lil sis lives in my hometown and her hubby is the local math teacher at the High School.
8) My better half is a WI Deputy Sheriff. Spent half my life around the popo. Lots of them think SA was set up.
9) I don't pretend SA is great guy. But I would rather him be by neighbor then anybody from Mani SD.
10) SA authored the Sikikey letter and I have no fuckin idea why?
11) Someone else authored the Sikikey letter to make it look like SA's handwriting... Why when where how?
12) Is the RAV4 a 2 door or a 4 door? Is it green or blue or both? Was the V.I.N. readable or tampered with? Thanks POG... Glad RH GAVE YOU A FUCKING CAMERA and MAP! Wish I we all had a picture of the VIN number to share with the world.
13) The blood... There was a cargo mat. The pictures prove that... Will make a video of that later called blood in blue.... Many fasinatating things about the rear of the rav that can be seen by altering the colors of the photos available. There was a cargo mat. THERE WAS A CARGO MAT! Circular blood stains equil to the size of the end of a rav4 tire iron. Why? I don't know... Maybe because of a hit to the head from a tire iron?
14) A Bissel carpet cleaner would not clean up the blood from a Bissel carpet cleaner.... No fuckin way SA cleaned up anything with that POS and got away with it. No crime scene happened in the trailer or the garage.
15) KK... Fucktard. Made up 2 crime scenes. No evidence to back up either...2 peeps in jail and he is not. Like New Glarus Beer... Only in Wisconsin!
16) I hope for TH's sake someone can prove she is dead or alive and why! My friend "brushes across thy bedonkedonk" swears she never perished. I hope she is still breathing the o2 but this case has me questioning it either way.
17) All of the above!
18) go to BED you drunk from Wisconsin!
Let the votes begin!
CONTINUED...
[–]Mr_Precedent
ReplyDelete11) I think KK wrote the SiKiKey letter (with his loopy Ks and Es) and tried (and failed) to make it look like SA’s handwriting so he could trick ST into thinking SA was guilty but TRYING TO FRAME HIM. ST suddenly invents a giant fire to fit KK’s narrative and tries to sell a gun, then is happy when SA is convicted without him being named as an accomplice.
WHY would a prosecutor all but IGNORE a letter from an alleged EYEWITNESS to a crime unless it had already served its only purpose (getting ST to change his story to match KK’s narrative)?
[–]MnAtty
I didn’t mean to set off a firestorm with my comments about the cargo area a few days ago. Let’s just go with, “there was a mat.” That works for me.
It’s interesting, how much more our analysis has focused on the actual crime scene—which was the Rav4–whereas KK & Company built their own case, primarily on fairy dust and gossip.
You are 100% correct—Bissel carpet cleaners do a marginal job of cleaning carpets. What a joke, to claim that a criminal mastermind cleaned up every speck of DNA using a Bissel machine. You make a very good point, that this was a ridiculous proposition.
Both KK and MG did sloppy work. I once read a single paragraph from MG’s book, and even from such a small sampling, I shuddered at how inaccurate his facts were. I couldn’t imagine putting something like that out for the public to read, much less to pay for. (I’d say more about this, but I’m afraid if I say his name one more time, he’ll appear like Beetlejuice!)
I’m not surprised that law enforcement, outside of Manitowoc SD, believe SA was framed. I think the only people who argue for his guilt, have a personal stake in the outcome. We have often pointed out, that whoever is here on Reddit, putting up such a fight on behalf of the prosecution, is clearly misrepresenting who they are. They are here on Reddit to control the public’s reaction to the MaM documentary. They’re doing everything they can to manipulate us. They are not objective at all—they must have a great deal to lose, if the public were to get behind the defense of this case.
Seriously, who in the world would believe the documentary was some kind of distorted expose’? It was a well-done job, that swept the Emmy awards that year. When you think about it, the people who voted on which nominated films would win, were among the film industry’s best experts. I trust their judgment, far more than that of anonymous Reddit posters, with an obvious axe to grind.
Those two women filmmakers spent ten years, methodically and thoroughly going through all their raw footage, with the goal of creating an absolute masterpiece. They didn’t care one way or the other about some local sheriff’s department.
It’s a very interesting point you make, that the bloodstain patterns may match a tire iron end. This might be the simplest explanation—the missing tire iron was the murder weapon (and this is why it went missing). It makes sense and would be consistent with the evidence.
Maybe the KK/prosecution narrative was so shocking and obscene, because this was what was required, to make people lose their heads and veer so far from the most probable explanation of the case—that TH was assaulted behind her Rav4 at the side of the road. The prosecution’s obvious goals were to put SA back in prison, to close down the civil case and to avenge the Manitowoc SD, for being embarrassed—all because they were caught red-handed, framing Avery for the Beerntsen rape.
They did everything they could, to delay Avery’s release from prison after the Beerntsen case, just like they are doing now. By the way, it’s clear they don’t expect to ever answer for their own crimes in this matter.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/7vthnw/why_am_i_so_fascinated_with_this_case/
Truth serum thread part 2: Ryan Hillegas called Teresa on 11/1 and her voicemail was full. (self.StevenAveryIsGuilty)
ReplyDeletesubmitted 9 months ago * by [deleted]
From March 2006 - About one year prior to trial
https://www.milwaukeemag.com/blood-simple
Relevant quote:
::Article Start::
“Photography was her life,” says Hillegas, now a nurse at Froedtert Hospital. “She could do anything with a camera.” Her expertise became portraits of children. Her favorite song, when she mustered the guts to sing karaoke, was “Picture” by Sheryl Crow and Kid Rock.
On the Sunday before she disappeared, Hillegas ran into Teresa at a friend’s house. Halbach told him she planned to join her family at a bar in Appleton for a Halloween party. She was dressed as a cowgirl.
On Tuesday, Hillegas called to ask Halbach about the party. Her voicemail box was full. “Which was weird for someone with a business,” he says. “She’s not the kind of person who would just take off and not call.”
By Thursday, he knew something was wrong. With the help of a friend, he went to Teresa’s house, fired up her computer and printed out a list of names and phone numbers of everyone she knew. The search was on.
::Article End::
Ryans phone record, and CASO reports corroborate, 5 different occasions between 11/3 and 11/4 a full voicemail message that is received below without any ringing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkPDVorNAC4
[–][deleted] 4 points 9 months ago
March of 2006 Ryan does an interview with a paper and gives context and confirmation to calling her not only on Tuesday 11/1 but also that the voicemail is full.
Think about it.
Voicemail is full at 11/1 at 6:41 pm. How are voicemails left on 11/2 and 11/3 ?
It's a very simple answer.
There were previous posting by the resident shit shover (pardon my italian), that made claims Ryan Hillegas didn't receive a full voicemail box and twisted testimony to prove his point. Little was it known that Ryan himself cleared the issue up nearly a year before trial.
It's not only a magazine article. It's a quote 10 years prior to his cell phone records being released that corroborate the EXACT scenario he describes in the magazine article yet is unsure about at trial.
The cloudiness of his testimony was used as a "not sure". The article is being dismissed as inaccurate.
I never understood the logic of people that read someone saying something, then looking at that persons phone records and it corroborates what they said, yet still hanging on to the "unclear" testimony when it was cleared up a year prior.
CONTINUED...
[–][deleted] 5 points 9 months ago
ReplyDelete"I have no reason to think this paraphrase is more accurate than his testimony,"
Why would that be considering the article lists the days pretty accurately? Would the reasons to believe scamper away from you because you don't WANT to believe it?
"nor do the phone records corroborate he heard the mailbox was full on 11/1."
They corroborate he called. He wasn't making that mistake in the article. He called. Before Zellner would have released his cell phone records, i'm positive now that the argument would have been that Ryan was simply mistaken on the day and it wasn't tuesday. Just like his testimony was somehow accepted as fact that he didn't specificaly say tuesday in his testimony. This article, pre dating his testimony, should clear it up. The phone records corroborate his tuesday call, a short call at that, corroborates a full voicemailbox greeting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkPDVorNAC4
This greeting is further corroborated by MULTIPLE reports in the CASO reports that the phone went directly to a message indicating the voicemail box was full.
You are not only discounting Ryan's quote and the article in general, you are discarding the actualy voicemail full message which is law enforcement themselves corroborate in their reporting.
"I also don't understand how a paraphrase could "clear up" something he said under oath later."
Because the paraphrase lists the exact day while his testimony a year later "isn't clear." What's the definition of clearing up in your mind? Ryan goes from saying Tuesday in March 06 to "sometime earlier than thursday" in his testimony. Keep spinning, pretty soon you'll lead a cycle class.
"It is, unfortunately, routine."
For me, it's not about just exxagerating how evidence might have been found. It's about directly contradicting cellular records that show Ryan wasn't at Teresas house from 3-7 at all like his cell phone records show -- because he doesn't roam at teresa's.
"But I don't base my opinion of the outcome on possible lies and speculation"
You are discounting the cellular records and their meanings, along with ryans own words because it doesn't fit your stance. As a lawyer, you should be better than that.
"And if she comes up with something meaningful I will listen. I'm not holding my breath."
If Ryan roaming on 11/4 isn't meaningful, then you have an even less grasp of how technology works than I previously thought. I know you said you try not to talk about things you don't know about, but it's a shame that the things you don't know about cause you to turn a blind eye and just write it off as "nothing unusual".
Shame, indeed.
https://www.reddit.com/r/StevenAveryIsGuilty/comments/6c1461/truth_serum_thread_part_2_ryan_hillegas_called/
[–][deleted] 2 points 9 months ago
ReplyDeleteRyan called Teresa on 11/1 and the VM was full. Phone bill corroborates it.
voicemail being full on 11/1 would make it weird for any messages to be saved subsequently.
I think Ryan was untruthful on the stand as corroborated by his cell phone evidence and his words a year before trial. Simple as that. Nothing more, nothing less.
I have laid out my case for the voicemails and ryans phone bill, that is all.
It is up to you, using your "guilter" logic, to now show me a source where ryan says that the voicemail was NOT full on tuesday 11/1. Until then, you have an article predating the trial and even predating all technological discovery handed over to the defense, and you have his phone bill that corroborates the article.
You stick to your trial testimony which you seem to oogle over... Oh except when it's Tom Pearce's because it would also say that 11/1 was a full voicemail.
I don't understand the tendency to see evidence that contradricts that you have been told by trial testimony and the first remedy in your eyes and other people's eyes on this board have been "What does that have to do with Steven killing Teresa?"
When the real question you should be asking is, why was her voicemail full on 11/1, why did kratz do what he could do prevent buting from showing another voicemail document, and why did another witness, tom pearce also say he received a full voicemail on 11/1.
You are choosing to claim media missquoted ryan hillegas when we have been discussing for two days, and i have made technical points and explanations showing why the combination of the Newspaper quote, his testimony, his call records, and knowing what we know about the status of Teresas phone in terms of being REGISTERED with the network, ALL point to the voicemail being full and receiving a full Voicemail message with a disconnect right after, as is the norm for erricsson mailboxes.
CONTINUED...
[–]SDGAydenzz 2 points 9 months ago
ReplyDeleteHow do know that the Voicemail was full on 11/1 again?
[–][deleted] 2 points 9 months ago
Ryan Hillegas said it in march of 2006 a year before trial, and his phone records prove he actually made the call when the march 2006 article say he made the call.
Zellner has pointed it out but others have dismissed it as "misremembering" because all that was sourced on this forum was his testimony, which the only hanging factor was that "it was unclear."
Here, the news article that pre-dates even the summer of 2006 pre-trial motion hearings is sourced with a direct quote from ryan and attributing, with clarity, the 2 major days of Tuesday 11/1 and Thursday 11/3.
hard technology confirms it: There is no way his 4 second call was too short when CASO reports corroborate his own experience, that the phone does not ring and goes directly to a message saying the voicemail box is full, not that the caller is unavailable THEN the voicemail box is full.
[–]SDGAydenzz 2 points 9 months ago
So all you have is a 'paraphrased' sentence from a magazine?
[–][deleted] 2 points 9 months ago
Thanks for your input.
If All i have is a sentence from before trial and phone records corroborating that sentence, then yes that's all i have.
What do you have to show that it's missquoted? Surely his phone records show he made the call and it was similar length of what one would expect to hear when calling a person, off the network, with a full voicemail box.
Not only do I have an article, I have the knowledge of the back end technlology that is used on the networks in question.
I have debunked Ryans phone bill (which you and others seemed to eat up when the misinformation was posted in the past), and I have shown yet another, more clear source of the voicemail being full on 11/1.
Is that not good enough? Why? Because your wiki says it isnt?
I am pointing it out because there have been posts saying that voicemail couldnt have been full and that post was discounting the testimony of two witnesses, while one of them was unclear.
The unclear testimony was cleared up a long time before the trial even started.
That's the point. If voicemail was full on 11/1 then no voicemails should have been saved on 11/2 and 11/3
If you don't see the relevance in that, we can end the conversation here.
[–][deleted] 3 points 9 months ago
Can you please explain Ryan's roaming for 4 hours on 11/4 when he was testifying to be at Teresas?
I have proven to be true that he was roaming on 11/4 and that he has stated, very clearly I might add, what a post a couple of weeks ago was saying that "ryan meant this by his wording" when in fact his wording was clear as day an entire year before his testimony.
I have stated why he should not have been roaming west of two rivers.
CONTINUED...
[–][deleted] 1 point 9 months ago
ReplyDeleteIt's not our job to answer the question without speculating. It's impossible and you know that.
The non speculation you all clamor for has been provided in my links. That's what I have substantiated. That's my claim. I have expanded on those links with explanation of how the technology fits into the equation.
My answer is only that Ryans testimony doesn't match up to his honest cousin named Technology. I have proven that. It is you that are speculating on what he probably was doing outside of a Verizon and or alltel roaming area. That is, considering you accept my argument that a non partner roaming carrier would not always provide all the call information packets and not that the NO CALL ID is an non billable number because it's law enforcement.
"I'm not speculating and have no reason to do so. I'm simply pointing out that your claim he was lying is based on a misstatement of his testimony,"
That's not all he's cloudy on. He never once mentioned calling cingular 3 times before he "guessed" her password. Kind of important details when you look at the questionable voicemail issue.
"You've acknowledged before you don't know whether or not the NO CALL ID means it was law enforcement. Or are you certain again?"
To be fair I can only say i'm not certain without seeing the source of the callers records. I gave two possible scenarios as to why it could be NO CALL ID and no airtime information. Both, based on how this whole thing works, are plausible to me.
And both show he didn't mention details that would account for a good chunk of his day, or that he was lying when he said he didn't talk to law enforcement on friday on the phone. Because that would be 21 times that he did.
CONTINUED...
[–][deleted] 2 points 9 months ago
ReplyDeleteI joined this board because there was a post proclaiming that the D in ryans phonebill means a "skype" (laughable when you consider in the timeframe and the technology limitation at the time to support a multi meg voice call with good quality on a 2g network), or either a walkie talkie call because Alltel happened to roll out push to talk earlier in 2005.
I said to myself, this person is creating another posting with patently false information in it, and selling it as fact. I started a post trying to explain how the technology worked, how roaming (follow me roaming with automatic call delivery) worked, and then I got questioned about my job history. About my knowledge. It's not surprising to me, since other people's knowledge has been chastised on these boards when their professional opinion muddies the waters for you in any way with whatever theory you have concluded to in your head, which have you know, will be completely different 100 times with any grouping of 100 random posters on this forum.
You really don't understand the technology that houses these inconsistencies that I pointed out.
I simply pointed out that Ryan was roaming for 3+ hours on 11/4 when he doesn't roam at teresa's house any of the prior days. I also point out how call delivery works on non roaming partner networks which could explain the no call information when I was called out for suggesting it was a caller with a federal wireless agreement to have unbillable airtime minutes wherever they call (such as law enforcment or 911 emergency).
My reasoning is then further explained about the roaming partner for alltel in the northern wisconsin area and other small carriers located in the north east tip of wisconsin and along the shoreline of lake michigan all the way down to kenosha. That a non partner will not always deliver packets of data that contain relevant call information as you see in the 21 calls.
Do I think the cops called him or do I think that it was a roaming issue? I don't know. But what I do know, is that instead of going off of Zellner's claim alone, I look at Ryans testimony where he specifically says he got little to no service around the avery salvage yard, i'll look that cellcom in NE wisconsin was not a roaming partner of Alltel's, which would explain him not being at Teresa's house and handing out flyers or whatever you'd like to say. The weird part then is he doesn't mention anything during trial about leaving for 4+ hours to hand out posters near northeast wisconsin and two rivers.
So you see, in my case even 5 inconsistencies are corroborated by hard evidence and sourcing. If you want to say these 5 are isolated from each other, then you and I need not speak any further because you're just disagreeing to be stubborn.
The root of it starts with the voicemails for me and how two people have said Teresa's voicemail was full on 11/1 and we even have corroborating evidence for the only person that "wasn't sure" of the day he called Teresa prior to 11/3.
So, "dude", my crawl is apparently still light years ahead of your fetal position because I can grasp the basic connecting factors in the technology that you wholly dismiss whether it be because of ignorance or idiocy.
Thanks for your contribution, it's well appreciated. Can you elaborate why Ryan would be roaming when Verizon, his carriers roaming parter, covered all the way to the west edge of two rivers? Or do you not believe the call information is missing because he was roaming near two rivers? Would you rather jump on the reason that it could have been a federally unbillable number like a law enforcement line?
Pick a door, any door. When you step through you'll either way see Ryan's testimony was not truthful.
CONTINUED...
If we were to assume that he is roaming on Cellcom in NE wisconsin near two rivers, it is 4+ hours that he is away from the Halbach house with drive time to and from.
ReplyDeleteI'll let the facts that he was roaming for 3+ hours in a row along with the fact he was quoted as saying the voicemail box was full on 11/1... as well as Pearce during his own testimony.
Everyone keeps asking me to speculate and give them the "bigger picture". Now you are saying you dont like speculation.
So don't speculate about his call records and take the facts at face value. He called her on 11/1, it was a 4 second call, long enough to hear a full voicemail message from a phone that is not registered on the network (no rings). I have posted an article that corroborates the hard evidence from Zellners 2016 motion.
If you don't want to speculate, then you will accept a full voicemail box on 11/1 from the mouths of two horses.
Ryan hillegas was roaming on 11/4 for 3+ hours and he received a full voicemail box on 11/1.
[–][deleted] 7 points 9 months ago
So we have Ryan saying a year earlier that he called her this specific day first and received full voicemail. Then we have testimony where it was claimed that Ryan wasn't clear in what day he received a full voicemail.
Yet you still won't conclude that his testimony was indeed saying full on 11/1 when it's corroborated by Ryan himself a year earlier?
Do u see the lack of logic there?
Oh yeah. Trial testimony "Trumps" all. I forgot.
Ryan may have misremembered but his call records don't.
call length would give you a good idea if the mailbox was full or not when someone calls. Which lucky for us it does. So we know it was a short call.
Ryan says he received a full VM box and puts context behind it. Add to that the next paragraph in the article doubles up and mentions two days later Ryan became even more worried.
We have the person making the call telling you what he received and the call records corroborate what he SAID happened when he called. Yet, you find a way to brush it aside because... trial testimony.
Voicemail records that as I have pointed out were gathered two weeks after the original subpoena. Another oddity if you're looking for accurate evidence.
even in the article yet his phone bill would seem to corroborate the article quote. Date, length, everything.
CONTINUED...
Please review the phone call between police officers before the RAV 4 is found especially the timeline call. You will see even more why I question the voicemail and cellular evidence. There were some good posts on the othe forums but we cannot link to them.
ReplyDeleteKen Kratz objected to BUting showing ANOTHER voicemail document in addition to what was shown at trial. Ever wonder why? He claimed misleading the jury because kratz put the theory that since Buting wants to show her voicemail being picked up on the 2nd, that it would "tell the jury" that she's still alive. Although in reality it would just show that the technological investigation was shoddy at best.
Voicemail was full 11/1.
Repeat.. Voicemail was full on 11/1.
Now that you understand, ask yourself how voicemail messaged are left 11/2 and 11/3.
Do u feel this article coupled with his phone records don't lead one to believe he didn't in fact misremember?
Blurry testimony can maybe be skewed to fit a preconceived notion but a direct quote a year before trial is hard to skew when the phone records corroborate the article.
First explain why voicemail was full on 11/1 then explain why kratz objected to buting showing another voicemail document.
We are discussing cell phone evidence and voicemail being full on 11/1 that's direct attributed to someone we know from their records called her on 11/1.
Then explain Ryan roaming on Friday 11/4 for 3+ hours when he's supposed to be at Teresa's during that time, in a place he doesn't roam at all during the time he's there on the 3rd and 30th.
CONTINUED...
[–][deleted] 4 points 9 months ago
ReplyDeleteWould it not be fair to say, that this posting clarifies the voicemail issue better than say, Speculating that ryan hillegas' testimony was simply mistaken as well as Tom Pearce's?
Would it not be fair to say that this gives even more credence to why Buting wanted to introduce another voicemail document that Kratz objected to?
"But if that's the case, what is it that the possibility of voicemails being deleted, by someone or by autodelete, prove?"
If auto delete deleted voicemails in the early hours of 11/2, then you'd have to simply accept that Teresa had saved the messages two weeks prior at the same time of the night. Auto delete doesn't happen 14 days after a voicemail message comes in... It happens 14 days after a message is saved. Within those 14 days, if you save the message again, it's saved for another 14 days exactly 336 hours after the save button is pressed...
For teresa, a woman who rarely if ever (as said by all her close friends) has a full voicemail box, you'd have to accept that she had old message from October 17th that were saved in the middle of the night.
One more thing, the voicemail exhibit is dated 11/16, about two weeks that the original Cingular subpoena already provided voicemail records. So it begs the question, why did they need another voicemail document from beyond 11/16 when teresa's death certificate was already signed 6 days prior?
The original voicemail document was not at trial. I wonder why.
"Trial testimony, like memories, and articles are never 100%."
Oh thanks for that. in that case, do you feel it's a little odd that Dawn remembered the exact contents of her conversation with Teresa when 15 months prior she wasn't sure if she left a voicemail or even spoke to teresa at all on the afternoon of 10/31?
I find that odd. You probably don't because it goes against your testimony logic when it fits the "story"
"IS that not more reasonable than making one more in a series of suspicion-generating assumptions to make this fit into an otherwise unsupported conspiracy?"
It's reasonable to you Teresa saved over 10 messages to you in the early morning weekday hours two weeks prior to them auto purging on 11/2? We can't know that, can we without seeing her phone records for the middle of october? So no, not more reasonable that a woman who never has a full voicemail would be toying with filling up over half the capacity of her box with saved messages that she doesn't delete after she doesn't need them any longer.
But hey, what's reasonable is subjective.
CONTINUED...
"If not deleted, what makes you think they were purposely saved? If she did not delete them, and in the interim, other messages continued to pile up, until 11/2, when the clock strikes at 336 hours, they get deleted. Is that not fair to say? Am I missing something?(real question)."
ReplyDeleteYes you are missing the fact that if 10+ voicemails purged overnight on 11/2 and you want to claim she didn't save them then you have to accept the fact that 10+ calls came in and messages were saved in the middle of the night on 10/17.
Two scenarios with saved messages:
You get a call today at 4pm and listen to the message tomorrow at 3pm. You save the message. The message will be saved for 336 hours starting at 3pm tomorrow when you save the message.
Second scenario is you get a call today at 4pm. YOu listen to the message but don't save it. The message auto deletes 336 hours from today at 4pm when the message was left.
Does that clear it up?
"So let's just assume that the answer is something nefarious...................?"
No , not assuming. It points that way since we now know that Ryan said she had a full box on 11/1 long before Kratz coached his testimony.
"Apply even a fraction of logic consistent to what you are trying to get at here to that problem, would ya?"
me turning the conversation? No no no my friend. I was simply pointing out the double standard on relying on testimony when it's been disproven by other, unrelated sources as an "oops".
That's all. We're still on the topic of Ryan's testimony being false because of two things I have proven to be true.
Even you can't argue that, but nice shift!
The big picture can't be clear if you don't want to accept that for Voicemail to be full on 11/1, that at least one person, Kratz, had to have misled the evidence found at discovery.
Suppose you accept it... what's the big picture of a girls voicemail being deleted a day after it has been claimed she was killed, her phone was burned, and a day BEFORE she was reported missing? You don't see a big picture of that in a missing person's case?
My way of thinking says this. If cell phone evidence isn't what it is, then why? Forget the evidence found until you can answer why was her voicemail tampered with on the early hours of 11/2 so that more people could leave messages after Ryan says it was full on 11/1 (and Pearce as well at trial)?
I'd rather focus on the early days and not what happens after the "questionable" cellular evidence is brushed aside once the car is found on the 5th.
You can crawl before you can walk. You should be asking yourself why would ryan and pearce say voicemail was full on 11/1 (ryan a source an entire year before trial), and ask yourself why there are undocumented law enforcement calls from the morning of 11/5 that relate to the same voicemail messages in question that weren't handed over until the defense found out about them in the summer of 2006.
The technology and testimony don't add up. I looked into it, and it raises some valid questions that so far, have been attributed to Missquotes or misremembering by two people on 3 different occasions. Eye roll.
https://www.reddit.com/r/StevenAveryIsGuilty/comments/6c1461/truth_serum_thread_part_2_ryan_hillegas_called/dhrl7l3/
A kink in all day and all of the night (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeletesubmitted 1 day ago by sweatyforeheads
Simple observation as a cheesehead packer fan...most young male wisconsinites are packer fans...don't know the stat on it but it is safe to say living near green bay ups the odds...on oct 30,2005...green bay played at noon central...vs. cinn. I golfed that day and taped the game. This was the game that a fan stole the ball from favre. My point is every fan knows where there were. Ryan knows where he was. Night or day is real simple...
[–]Strikeout21
I’m SO glad you said this! I brought this up when the doc first came out on the main board. IIRC Favre also threw like a bunch of INT’s too? I know it was a REALLY bad day for Packer fans regardless. When I lived in MN, every one of my friends could remember where they were at any given game during a season. No doubt in my mind he knew!
[–]desertsky1
Revisiting TH's day planner page being at her home, along with the tower ping indicating she was heading back in that direction, it really is the best clue as to what happened. As has been discussed before, TH had that page with her that day. Without a doubt. She wrote notes on it throughout that day. (coinciding with various calls and corroborated by some of the people she spoke to). For me, how that page ended up back at her residence can be explained by only a few possible scenarios.
TH made it back home and brought it in the house.
The Killer, upon going through his post murder planning, took it from the RAV and brought it back to her house. This narrows down the pool of suspects, cuz no way ST, BD, Creepy Ax dude, or even TP, could have access to her home. RH, SB, and MH certainly had access.
LE/MH/family/RH, whoever, didn't kill her but found it with her in the RAV and brought it back to her place.
Option 2 is highly unlikely. Why would the killer do this? "Oh looky here, here's TH's schedule for the day. Maybe I'll put this back at her home so when the investigation starts, folk will have something to work from." Not.
Option 3 highly unlikely as well. IF LE (or anyone else) came upon TH dead in the RAV in some hidden, remote area, no way they would have said "Here's a page from her day planner, let's get this back to her home. But we'll leave other items here."
What makes the most sense is that it was found at her house because TH made it back there.
[–]desertsky1
Great info! Wish RH would have been asked...can you at least say if when you stopped by to drop something off, was it before or after the Packer game.....anyway, knowing where TH was that Sunday could corner RH into pinning down a time, I wish the attorneys would have pursued this...I don't think RH knew exactly what TH did or where she was that Sunday and so didn't pin himself down to a time of his visit cuz he wasn't sure how it could come back to bite him by someone saying oh no, she was with us at that time. Needless to say, I don't believe he saw her that Sunday. I believe he last saw her Monday, Oct 31.
Possible Sunday Oct 30 activities of TH (to narrow down possibilities of time RH could have seen TH if he stopped by):
Sunday morning- church??
noon-3-watched Packers? (if so, where/with whom did she watch)
afternoon-grandpa's birthday party/packers watch party?
7pm-10pm-ish-at her mom's watching Extreme Home Makeover and a few other shows with her sisters
10:30pm (approx)-at her home, prints day planner page
[–]MMF27
or she said something like "last party you went to you picked a fight, so no i'm not telling you where i am going, you [explitive etc]"
and then he lost his shit and went crazy
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/87shf1/a_kink_in_all_day_and_all_of_the_night/
Deceptive behaviour (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeleteby tuckerm33
Most experts say when a family talks about a "missing" loved one in the past tense, before they even know what happened to the loved one, it is because they are guilty of knowing the truth and they know the person is not coming back, most likely that they are already dead.
I agree with that, but on top of that, I also feel it is because they are basically trying to give out subliminal vibes to the public and LE to "let it go". They basically want the investigation to stop in it's tracks so they don't get caught.
I've seen so many times over the years that the general public and local communities are filled with people that are sympathetic to a grieving family's pain over a missing loved one. Once the local news reports a loved one is missing, there is an immediate outpouring of friends, family and local well wishers that will do anything to help find that person or help find out what happened. These volunteers are often relentless too. They will keep it at and keep at it.
For most of us, that would be a welcoming thing of course. The more people helping, the better chance of finding our loved one, hopefully alive. That's what we want right? To find our loved one alive, back safe with us? We won't stop until we get answers. "Please help, please if anyone saw him/her or knows anything please help us"! These are the frantic things I would be expect to hear from a family of a missing loved one.
However, for a guilty person that already knows what happened to their loved one, it is not such a great thing to have hundreds of volunteers swarming around them. Maybe they did something to that loved one or maybe they know who did and they want to protect them or afraid to say anything. Either way, they have knowledge about what really happened and they don't want 300 volunteers showing up every day trying to help.
The volunteers only have the best intentions of course, but in this scenario, the guilty person will not want them around. The more there are and the longer they are around, the greater the risk the truth will be uncovered of course.
As long as people think the family is still grieving, the volunteers will keep helping. So how do they get the volunteers to stop digging around and to "let it go"? They go in front of the cameras and give bizarre interview with comments talking about their loved ones in past tense as if they have already been buried and given a funeral. All hope is gone. "We just want our privacy at this time". That means "go way and stop meddling". If they subtly hint to the public that they have already processed it and accepted the fact that their loved one is dead, this will tend to give the public the perception that the case is closed and in the hands of the LE now. "Nothing to see here, please go home". They want to get rid of the help because the help is going to rat them out.
It's a fine balance though. They have to allow a certain amount of volunteerism because if they don't, it's a red flag.
For a guilty person, the the plan is, hide the body, destroy evidence, wait a few days so the trail gets cold while they formulate and rehearse their story. Then they call the police to report it. The key is to prevent the searching and investigating to roll on for days. They may have someone organize where to let volunteers search and direct them to places that are merely decoys, then send them back on their way empty handed. They want to get them out of there before one of them finds something they missed while trying to cover their trail.
The problem is, a good LE will see this and smell that something is not right. That is of course unless the LE is in on it. When that happens you end up with an investigation that reads like a badly written crime story where the conclusions don't match the evidence.
Sound familiar?
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/8a1tfr/deceptive_behaviour/
[–]JacksnakeJames
ReplyDeleteWhat if her death was accidental, and was caused by a member of the family, or someone close to them, and certain LEO took advantage of that by implying, or outright saying, that if they did not cooperate with the LEO, that they would be charged with manslaughter, or even murder? People with guns, who are used to getting away with their crimes, unscathed, just might have this kind of hubris.
My life was threatened by a cop upon our first meeting. I later worked for a company he owned, and he would revel about the crimes committed by the police department he worked within. He literally described several violent crime that they chose to commit against their victims. He also reveled in the fact that when they found underage girls skinny dipping in a private pool, they forced them to remain unclothed (creepy sexual predator behavior). When they caught underage males at the same pool, they had them promptly re-dress, and berated them. This guy was only 24 or 25 when he described these things to me, and that was 10 years ago. I hope he's no longer a cop.
When people with guns, whom are willing to use them against another person, and are almost certainly going to get away with it, even if it's criminal behavior, force their will onto others, generally, people use the emergency tactic of self preservation, by abiding by the violent perpetrator's whim, or fighting them off.
[–]KaizenKZ
Find Rav
Claim body burned by SA
MediaMasturbationCampaign by KK (I read this term here & found it fitting :))
Destroy SA in media near and far
Create outrage by portraying victim as #SaintlyCatholicFamilyRoots
Make it the most expensive & most visibly WI investigation in state history
Bonus
Save the asses of many lives from a professional/financial/social standing
Thwart/cease civil suit by SA
Ensure victims of GA don't file suit
Ensure crime lab isn't given a colonoscopy
DisposablePeopleMinSet =SA&BD
[–]Booty_Grazer
This is why this is my number two theory. If the family tried to cover it up and LE was on to them quickly... then LE gave them a choice. Then since they had SA to frame it worked for both parties.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/8a1tfr/deceptive_behaviour/
[–]skippymofo
ReplyDeleteI am more interested how it comes to the change. When did Lemieux ask KH about the last seeing. We only know, she wrote a report (maybe from the dispatch call) and quoted KH.
He hasn´t seen her since Monday
and
KAREN said the last time SCOTT had seen TERESA at home was on Sunday afternoon. SCOTT had not seen or heard from TERESA since. SCOTT told KAREN that TERESA's vehicle was not at the residence either.
Here from the CASO (Lemieux report):
I (Lemieux) spoke with SCOTT by phone
I spoke with TERESA's supervisor ANGELA S. at the AUTO TRADER magazine by phone.
I notified Inv. WEIGERT of the situation. Inv. WIEGERT and I responded to TERESA's residence and spoke with TERESA's roommate, SCOTT, and her parents
Wiegert report:
On 11/03/05 at approximately 1730 hours, I (Inv. MARK WIEGERT) received a phone call from Cpl. LEMIEUX
Cpl. LEMIEUX and I then responded to TERESA's residence at the address. Upon arrival, we were let into the residence, which SCOTT and TERESA rent.
SCOTT states he had talked to TERESA last on Sunday afternoon, 10/30/, at about 2:00 p.m
I then briefly met with TERESA's parents
[–]desertsky1
Do you know when did this Weigert report got written [or last edited and by whom]?
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/8cbipi/identified_as_a_person_of_interest/
[–]skippymofo
KH called Calumet.
About the other question: on 11/3 Wiegert got a list from LEMIEUX (he called before AT) and gave him the names of CRAIG SIPPEL, B. JANDA and GEORGE ZIPPERER.
Then they got also a copy of TERESA's cell phone activity from TERESA's computer.
The next previous phone call would have been on 10/31/2005 at 11:39 a.m. to 920-755-XXXX. which lists to a STEVEN AVERY.
(the number was Tom Jandas number).
Later at 19:00:
I (Wiegert) learned that Sgt. COLBORN had been to the address of T. JANDA and had spoken with an individual known to him as STEVEN AVERY. Apparently COLBORN leamed that AVERY's sister, BARBARA, is maried to Mr. JANDA.
I guess Wiegert wrote his report some days later.
[–]JacksnakeJames
Wiegert, who wrote that the Janda # listed to SA, committed a heinous crime against SA. Why not be truthful and accurate in his report? He had to have known he was lying about this fact. You never have to go far to find criminals in this case.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/8ccxnn/look_for_a_pattern_of_mistakes_during_the_first/
TickTockManitowoc
ReplyDelete@TManitowoc
17h17 hours ago
When you listen to Karen's call, keep in mind that she is not the only one saying Scott was the last person to see her on Monday. She was asking Tom questions. Had she been mistaken, Tom would have corrected her answer about Monday. So basically 2 people are saying SB saw her.
TickTockManitowoc
@TManitowoc
17h17 hours ago
At the time of Wiegert showing up, Steven wasn't even known of yet. So why did Wiegert not take the CAD report and ask "Who is Scott, and what time did you see her?"...The fact he didn't nor was Scott alibi'ed at that moment in time, tells me this was gonna be pinned on someone.
TickTockManitowoc
@TManitowoc
18h18 hours ago
I don't get it. TH cell phone. TH landline.
How are they trying to both say a fax was sent from her house with a machine, that would need to be plugged into a landline (should show her 2911 number), yet chasing a phone number for the fax in GB on Quincy St.?
[–]cannotsleep_jr
ReplyDeleteI just go where the evidence takes me:
Zips scenario seems less likely because of the evidence that TH made it home in the afternoon. A couple of things point in that direction.
Her planner was written on during the day and ended up "at home" being TH & SB's place.
Her mother says is her call the last time she saw TH, was "at home" which based on other quotes likely means at KHs house. It says on THs planner that she will pick up stuff from Mom's. So, it is a possible indicator that KH did see TH at KHs house Monday after the photo shoot and lied about last time she saw her. Or...knew TH had picked up things Monday and didn't physically see her so KK got her to bend the truth about the last time her seeing her is Sunday.
RH says in the beginning he last saw TH in Cowgirl costume which doesn't make sense on Sunday. So, it is more likely she was getting ready to go to a Halloween party on Monday. Then RH later recants that she talked about the costume.
AW says she saw her last at Halloween party Oct 21st according to the paper. It is assumed to be a mistake and should say Oct 29th. But, TP says she was meeting friends for a party Oct 31st. Seems like AW can't keep her lie straight.
Mike H doesn't give a straight answer about TH going to a party after the wedding photography gig on Sat. He dances around saying "I believe" and such until it is repeated and he agrees.
However, none of these are concrete proof that she went home. But, they all support the theory that she did go home, met up with Ryan, and went to a party with or without him.
Zips are definitely sketchy. But, that could be any number of things. Maybe GZ was drunk, high, etc. when LE came and was afraid to answer the door. Maybe GZ was growing MJ in his basement. Maybe there was an alien in his house...to Kratz it a little bit. Who knows? But, things are leading away from that theory now. Maybe TH swung by the Zips after she went home and met her untimely death there.
Given that none of her friends called her on halloween, it leads me to believe she was with them.
Given the voicemail ids put the condolences call from a photographer on Nov 1st, it leads me to believe THs photographer friends know she is dead.
Given the AQ call asking for family photos, it leads met to believe it was an alibi or find the phone call since his wife and two sister-in-laws are photographers.
Given that MH didn't listen to all of THs messages leads me to believe he already knew what happened and was more interested in removing incriminating info for TH & MH set of friends.
The simplest explanation is she died in a negligent-homicide as reported originally. Friends either were with her when she died or found her dead. If with her, they would cooperate with any police investigation that points away from themselves. (Like JB pointing towards BC.) If they found her, LE could set it up to point to SA and get them on board.
I haven't eliminated the idea that she died in another way and LE set up the friends to either find or feel guilt to cooperate with LEs plan to frame Avery. There are many possibilities: simple accident, Zips did it, LE did it, RH did it, AQ did it, stranger did it. We have so little information about any of the other options it is difficult to eliminate or settle on any one.
I really can't buy into the special agent and she's still alive notion. But, I don't comment on everyone of those posts stating my position against it because I think every topic/idea has its place for logical discussion and debate. I wish all would have the same respect and not try to turn every OP into his/her platform to promote his/her favortie theory.
So, until the next discovery to turn our perspective, THs friends have some explaining to do....
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/88xovd/anything_in_this_case_is_possible/
[–]HuNuWutWen
ReplyDeleteThey had to wait for Teresa to be reported missing, this was necessary to make the crime appear random, not connected to anyone initially...patterns of "normal" behavior, intended to divert attention...
.... even though they had the rav4 and all it's contents since 2:41 pm 31st...they could not yet go anywhere near ASY, and they could not take any action which would indicate prior knowledge of something having happened to Teresa...
... is that why they had Ryan go in and scrub the VM phone records?...
...Teresa was merely a random person, unknown to LE,(nudge, wink) until her mother changed all that...
... as soon as Karen made the call, Gene and crew had the green light, they set about to create a plausible narrative of a crime,...keep in mind, they already had 3 days to figure out Teresa's actual schedule for the 31st, they knew where she had been...
...what they were not sure of was what actually happened regarding the Zipps, and what actually happened at ASY...not sure if they had Teresa's phone info at this point...interesting, if we could prove that LE queried Cingular for Teresa's cell data prior to Karen's Nov 3rd call, that would be difficult for them to explain...but, they knew Teresa had departed ASY, so they had to develop a narrative which would "put her in the garage...", so to speak...
...look at the evidence which was first "found" at ASY ?...the plates, the camera, pda, phone, all of the aforementioned physical items came from where ?...the Rav4, itself childishly "hidden" a stone's throw from Steven's home ?...the point here is the nature of this evidence...it is silly to think that any criminal would sprinkle inculpatory evidence around his own house in this manner...patterns of behavior...this is allegedly the same guy who orchestrated the MOTHER OF ALL BOMBFIRES !!!!....yeah, no.
... this would also mean that this evidence had been there for 3-4 days, yet Steven just leaves it where it is, after so many warnings ?..Steven was previously warned three times by Andy, Jimmy, Dave... Steven was searched...The TV News Crew warned Steven...yet Steven doesn't lift a finger to collect/dispose of the easily "found" evidence ?...why ?...simple...Steven did not know that any of that stuff was there, because it WAS NOT there, until after Steven arrived at Crivitz...
...patterns of behavior...Steven's behavior in particular...he's behaving exactly as any innocent dupe behaves...
... I think the killer obliterated her body in order to conceal the actual cause of death, separated Teresa's remains from the vehicle, and kept that location secret until such time as the other evidence was planted, to guarantee their own immunity and that Steven was effectively framed...there was absolutely no discovery of "bones" or any forensic evidence related to Teresa's body until several days later...Teresa's killer is not involved in the planting of evidence...
...absolutely AMAZING that this collection of bumbling idiots, this group of morons who could not follow even the most basic S O P protocols, were able to ZERO in on their chosen culprit...
...imagine that, huh ?....bunch of clueless assholes, yet they get their man...FIRST TRY....didn't even need to investigate anyone/anywhere else... almost unbelievable...patterns...
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/8ccxnn/look_for_a_pattern_of_mistakes_during_the_first/dxeqpmc/?context=0
[–]AnnieShipsea
ReplyDeleteIt seems from his erratic/stalky behaviour towards her, her previous boyfriend was in the right frame of mind. I think the TH murder/disappearance in that general area of Wisconsin fell into their lap. Once the SO realised that this had happened every effort was made to pin it on the Avery family - just like the original case for which he'd been proven innocent. I imagine a conversation very early after her disappearance with the distraught Halbach's that went 'We know Avery did this but we need to make the case. We need you to hold tight while we gather evidence.' In their grief the family went along with it for what must have seemed to them like good reasons, including that TH had been at the Avery yard - most people would be easy to manipulate in all the circumstances. The Hs failed to see the deeply suspicious evidence that was right under their own noses, and unwittingly recruited her possible killer into leading the team of civilians who went out looking for her. RH's behaviour is entirely consistent with this scenario. This explains everything about the way the Halbachs and the boyfriend behaved together. I also believe the SO subsequently pressured a couple of the Avery family members to give evidence that would shore up this story line. So where was the murder committed? Not even close to the Avery's, that much is clear. It is not even proven that the bones that were produced were even TH's, so her body is probably somewhere else entirely. Judging from his behaviour, I think MH suspects that he was had by the SO but that he is unable even to begin to admit that to himself, hence his increasingly bizarre interviews as the case went along - and his and his family's willingness to go along with the unfolding farce. They had been utterly convinced of Avery's guilt before he was even arrested and had helped to frame him by allowing themselves to be comprehensively manipulated - same as every other victim in this awful case.
[–]lickity_snickum
MCSO didn't "choose" Halbach. She fell in their lap, an answer to their prayers.
Her death was accidental, whether her own fault or at the hand of someone else; that "someone else" had the misfortune of either causing her death or being involved in something that caused her death (drugs?) and that "someone else" was acquainted with someone involved in the lawsuit ... the rest is what it was.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/8fxttf/why_teresa/
Halloween party email invitations (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeleteby cannotsleep_jr
Thanks to those who requested THs computer info. Velie documents that he made a copy of THs hard-drive as was done for the Dassey computer. Therefore, anything could be restored found. I really love to see the sent email box.
I found an email message about the friends Halloween party. This does actually match the 10/21 date the AW gave the newspaper of the Halloween party with TH. It seemed early and therefore suspicious, but we have a second confirmation of the date.
Page 5 from TH_YAHOO_PAGE_1_THRU_PAGE_12.pdf From: melancholy mechanic To: various, mquadrini (mquadrini is AW's sister and married to AQ who left TH voice message Oct 31st and murdered his army friend in 1980)
Place: my house, xxxxx, DePere Date/time: 9:00 Oct 21st What to bring: what you want to drink ...
AND THERE WAS ANOTHER HALLOWEEN INVITATION from Tracy H with no date.
So, if there was no date on the invitation, then the natural assumption is that this party is on Halloween.
If there was a family Halloween party, then someone should have noticed and tried to call TH.
[–]PetrichorGirl
If TH was meant to meet friends on 10/31 for a gathering and never showed up, the fact this has never been revealed doesn’t mean those friends are liars or shady. LE probably would have told them “TH never got to your gathering because she was killed by SA early that afternoon”. That would make total sense so there was no reason to “come forward” about anything at the time.
But in 2019, we now know there are big holes in the family’s story that no one noticed TH was gone until Tom P called in 11/3. And we’re all wondering why everyone would lie about this.
So IF her friends noticed she never showed up for a party on 10/31 and they took steps to alert people (her family, other friends, etc) they need to come forward now because it appears that has been suppressed and the reason why could be significant.
How much do her friends know about this case? The whole missing person poster controversy was not discussed in MAM (it hadn’t even been discovered when MAM 2 aired) so do they even know the significance of the info they might hold?? Probably not. I tried to simply follow one of TH’s friends on Twitter (one who KZ has been unsuccessful in interviewing) and she blocked me immediately. I pray the stubborn people in this case who might hold relevant info (but don’t know it) see the light and start engaging with KZ.
https://old.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/e8y5q1/halloween_party_email_invitations/
[–]Onehardnope
DeleteI do think people get caught up on the Halloween party thing. I happen to live in WI. Because of college towns and an otherwise generalized love to party/drink and make a big deal out of it....there’s always multiple Halloween party dates. And in my many years of Halloween partying, if Halloween falls on a M-W the funnest most exciting Halloween party is the weekend before. I would never go to a Halloween party on a Monday night because there wouldn’t be one, unless it was families getting together for trick or treating.
[–]PetrichorGirl
RH’s inconsistent statements and memory failures regarding that weekend of October 30 are pretty suspicious. Since his weird claims all revolve around parties and costumes, I figure we should be examining all the possible parties TH may have been invited to & whether this has something to do with why RH is lying his ass off.
21st - interesting that date has been confirmed. I always thought it was a typo in the media but it appears not.
29th - another rumoured party took place.
30th - official story is TH celebrated her grandfather’s birthday with family, but in 2006 RH made a weird claim to the press she was going to meet family at a bar in Appleton. Q: did TH go out somewhere after the family party?
31st - sure it was a Monday but TH was young with lots of young friends so I wouldn’t be surprised if she was invited to some gathering on the actual Halloween day. Maybe just low-key at a bar, with Halloween as an excuse for old college friends to have a few drinks?
Gotta question why early reports of her missing told the public she was last “seen” in Manitowoc but may have travelled on to Green Bay or Fox Cities. What info did the family have about Green Bay and Fox Cities?
[–]cannotsleep_jr
Nice breakdown of the dates. We don’t really know who the Sat Oct 29th Halloween party was with. MH is a bit dodgy on is confirmation of a Halloween party after the wedding. He doesn’t correct the questions but never actually says he knows TH went to a Halloween party sat.
Tracy Hs party could have been the party that sat. Or, maybe it was Halloween. Again, why is this not determined and documented by le.
[–]cannotsleep_jr
Right, the Halloween parties are usually the weekend before. Oct 21 is two weekends prior which made it suspicious however now we have confirmation that there was an invitation for two weekends prior.
So, TH reportedly went to another Halloween party after the wedding shoot. Who’s party was that? I had always assumed it was her former roommate and friends, but that party was the 21st.
And, when was Tracy Hs party? Was that the Sat party or was it on Halloween. The invitation does didn’t give a date. Logical Halloween party dates would be Fri Oct 28, Sat Oct 29, or Mon Oct 31st.
LE really should have better recorded THs last day s.
[–]Onehardnope
I tend to believe RH last saw her in a costume but don’t believe he doesn’t remember what time of day it was. It was a Packers Sunday.
[–]7-pairs-of-panties
RH has said that he last saw her in a cowgirl costume. I kinda doubt that they dressed uo for her grandfathers thing so I would think that it would have been after if it was indeed Sunday, BUT we have TH on her computer in a yahoo chat w/ a guy on Sunday night at I believe 8:00 or around there. This is the guy she tells that she will be going to Avery’s the next day (before SA made the appointment) anyway this leads me to believe that any party TH may have gone to May have been Friday or Saturday night or even on Monday. There was said to be a big party out in the twin rivers area Monday night, which is also where Brad C ex wife was living at the time.
[–]GiftOfGabs
Wait....what? How does she know shes going there if he hasnt made the appt???
[–]7-pairs-of-panties
Everyone has always asked that question. We don’t have the answer to that.