Showing posts with label Wendy Baldwin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Wendy Baldwin. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 24, 2018

Did Bobby Dassey Kill Teresa Halbach with Scott Tadych as an Accomplice?





Audio of Bobby Dassey Interview with CASO and DCI on November 17, 2017
"The only two questions: (1) On 11/3 who knew SA’s finger re-bled & he went to his trailer to get tape? (2) Who had access to SA’s burn pit on 11/4-11/5, before cops arrived to plant bones from a burn barrel? Hint - Bear did not bark." [Kathleen Zellner, @ZellnerLaw, October 22, 2018]

Audio of Barb Janda Tadych's interview with DCI agent Joseph Kapitany and CASO deputy Wendy Baldwin on November 9, 2005

Kathleen Zellner's investigators said that Bobby Dassey was "unbelievably rattled" during their interview with him, particularly when they mentioned his computer hard drive. Evidence found within Bobby's internet search history has shed new light on him as a potential suspect. [Source]

Question: Hadn’t TH taken photos for the Avery’s/Dassey’s previously? Why would she need to call for an address/directions?

Zellner: She was only given the Dassey phone number and not the ASY address. Because she did not know the Dasseys, she left a voicemail asking for directions.

The message Teresa left on the Janda machine at 11:43 AM on 10/31/05:

"Hello. This is Teresa with AutoTrader Magazine. I'm the photographer, and just giving you a call to let you know that I could come out there today, urn, in the afternoon. It would -- will probably be around two o'clock or even a little later. But, urn, if you could please give me a call back and let me know if that will work for you, because I don't have your address or anything, so I can't stop by without getting the -- a call back from you. And my cell phone is xxx-xxxx. Again, it's Teresa, xxx-xxx-xxxx. Thank you."

On 10/31/2005, the Dassey computer was used to access the internet at 6:05 AM, 6:28 AM, 6:31 AM, 7:00 AM, 9:33 AM, 10:09 AM, 1:08 PM, and 1:51 PM.

Did Bobby use the internet to contact Autotrader and request a same day photo shoot, and did he give them an address other than one at the salvage yard (the Autotrader website had a form you could submit online to request a photo shoot)?

Autotrader called Teresa at 9:46 AM and left a message. Was this message about a photo shoot request from Bobby at a location other than the salvage yard (maybe Kuss Road or the house in Maribel, across from Cedar Ridge Restaurant, which was vacant at the time -- the German's wife didn't move in until 11/4)?

At 11:04 AM, Teresa retrieved the 9:46 AM message left by Autotrader. Is this why Teresa called the Dassey home at 11:43 AM? Was it a separate photo shoot unrelated to Barb's minivan?

Or did Bobby text, instant message, or email Teresa, requesting a same day photo shoot? And is this the reason Teresa called the Dassey residence at 11:43 AM, requesting the address because he only left a name and number? Teresa said: "I don't have your address or anything, so I can't stop by without getting the -- a call back from you."

"After Teresa called the Dassey landline for directions, our suspect contacted her back with the Dassey address." - Kathleen Zellner

Zellner says after Teresa called the Dassey landline requesting contact with directions, the killer contacted Teresa, but not by phone.

Question: Bobby's computer shows activity at 1:51. Was the computer used to communicate with Teresa or was this via someone else's phone?

Zellner: Communication was not by phone.

The phone number Steven Avery gave Autotrader wasn't his own but, according to the job sheet, was the Dassey/Janda landline. And the address Steven gave, according to the job sheet, was 12930-A Avery Road, so Teresa had the address for the minivan photo shoot and would have known from the name of the road that it was the salvage yard -- she had been there at least six times before, the last time being 10/10/05.

Steven Avery wasn't expecting Teresa to call him back to confirm the appointment because he gave Barb's number to Autotrader. This probably is why Steven called Teresa twice, at 2:24 PM and 2:35 PM, to check if or when she was coming since he hadn't received a confirmation from Autotrader or Teresa.

Steven's 2017 affidavit gives the following reason for the 2:35 PM call to Teresa:

"I called a second time at 2:35 PM but I hung up immediately because I saw her at the van. Photographing it. I have had an opportunity to review my phone records to refresh my memory. Based on my recent review of my phone records, I know that Ms. Halbach began photographing Barb's van at 2:35 PM."

On Teresa's Autotrader job sheets for the B Janda minivan photo shoot, the Avery Road address is there in full (trial exhibits 17 and 22 -- see images below).

A logical explanation: Bobby Dassey contacted Teresa directly to arrange a hustle shot, but he only gave a name and phone number. And the job Teresa was calling about was this hustle shot, not the B Janda minivan job that Steven requested when he called Autotrader around 8 AM on 10/31/05.

When Bobby contacted Teresa again, after 11:43 AM on 10/31/05, but not by phone (according to Zellner), he gave her the Kuss Road location or some other location west or southwest of the salvage yard.


Two exhibits from Steven Avery's trial (image above) demonstrate that Autotrader gave Teresa Halbach B Janda's name, address and phone number, the number she called at 11:43 AM on 10/31/05

Kathleen Zellner @ZellnerLaw at 10:30 AM on November 15, 2018:

Making a Murderer watchers, listen up.  I'm going to walk you through what I've learned through my investigation that you didn't see in the show.

1 . On 10/31/05, Scott Tadych visited Bobby at the Avery salvage yard (ASY) around noon.

2. After Teresa (TH) called the Dassey landline for directions, our suspect contacted her back with the Dassey address.

3. Teresa arrived at the ASY around 2:30–2:31 p.m. on 10/31/05.  Only Bobby and Steven saw her.  After completing her photo assignment, she left & turned West on Hwy 147 around 2:38 p.m.  Our suspect followed her.  Steven was in his trailer.

4. Our suspect gets TH to pull over.  She opened her car's rear cargo door to retrieve her camera, was knocked to the ground and struck with an object.

5. TH was put in the rear cargo area of the RAV4 and driven back to ASY.

6. TH's RAV4 was spotted leaving the ASY with an unknown driver at 3:45 p.m.

7. RAV4 was left by the old dam West of Mishicot on 10/31/05.

8. 3 witnesses saw RAV4 up to 11/4/05, then it was gone.

9. Recent investigation shows the RAV4 battery died, so it was replaced in order to move the RAV4 to the ASY.

10. TH's body was burned in a burn barrel.  Dassey burn barrel had human bones.

11. 60% of bones and 31 teeth missing.

12. A witness smelled horrible odor of something burning in Manitowoc County gravel pit the evening of 10/31/05.

13. The Dassey garage was never luminoled or DNA tested.  Bobby hung a deer in the Dassey garage on 11/4/05.

14. Sikikey note—Body burned at smelter 11/4/05, 3 a.m.  Tadych worked the night shift at a smelter facility.  His nickname: Skinny.

15. TH's electronics were not burned in Steven's burn barrel; they were burned in Dassey burn barrel.

16. Suspect knew Steven's finger re-bled on 11/3/05 because he observed it.

17. Suspect had access to Steven's trailer to remove blood from the sink.

18. Only our suspect knew the blood in the sink was Steven's and not TH's (this rules out the police).

19. Suspect planted blood in RAV4, bones in Steven's burn pit, and TH's electronics in Steven's burn barrel.

In conclusion, the killer is the person who had the access and opportunity to plant Steven Avery's fresh blood in Teresa Halbach's car.

Use #AskZellner for questions

Below are some of the questions and answers from #AskZellner on October 23, 2018.












Exhibit J, video reenactment from Kathleen Zellner's 10/23/2017 Motion for Reconsideration - Bobby Dassey Following Teresa Halbach

If the scenario in the video above is true, then Teresa never made it to Zipperer's or she went to Zipperer's before driving to Avery Auto Salvage.



The earliest Teresa would have arrived at Zipperer's is 2:14 PM if what the State presented at trial is accurate: that Teresa called Zipperer's at 2:12 PM, looking for help in locating their home. She checked her voicemail at 2:13 PM, so 2:14 PM is the earliest she would have encountered JoEllen in the backyard. The transaction would have taken longer for a new customer, which the Zipperers were, and longer since the vehicle she was supposed to photograph wasn't in the driveway. JoEllen showed Teresa how to get to it, and then she came back and hand-delivered the new-customer packet to JoEllen. This would have taken no less that three minutes. So the earliest Teresa left Zipperer's driveway was 2:17 PM. Based on cell tower data, Teresa drove from Zipperer's to Avery's via County Road B. According to Google Maps, it is a 14-minute drive to 12923 Avery Road from 4433 County Road B (before the traffic circle was built at the intersection of US-10 and County Road B). So the earliest Teresa would have arrived and parked near Barb's minivan, if she was driving the speed limit for the 9.7-mile trip, is 2:31 PM, which coincides with the termination, 2:32 PM, of the 2:27 PM incoming call to Teresa's cell phone (Teresa and the caller talked for five minutes).



If Teresa went to Zipperer's before Avery's, the question to ask is: Why would Teresa turn left from Highway 147 onto County Road Q? The answer: She had a pre-arranged appointment along that route or she was waved down and pulled over before the intersection of Highway 147 and Q; otherwise, she would be heading toward Green Bay or home, and she would have driven west, not south.




Kathleen Zellner Interview with The Daily Beast, October 2018:

You lay out a convincing case against the forensic evidence used by the prosecution, as well as come up with a theory of your own—namely, that Brendan’s brother Bobby and stepfather Scott Tadych were likely behind the killing. Is that still your theory? And if so, is there anything new on that front?

In the series, they really got to all of that at the end of the tenth episode, because they were following my process. When I started the case, I started with nothing—no new evidence or anything. Then I gradually worked my way through the state’s case.

But no, my theory hasn’t changed, and this is what it comes down to. We realized that the 1996 blood vial had not been accessed by the police—the defense was just wrong about that theory. The packaging had been opened up in 2002 by The Innocence Project. The defense thought the packaging had been tampered with by the one officer, Lenk. It had not been. He never had possession of that blood tube. There was no missing blood from it; we got the exact quantities. All of those tubes have a hole in the top of them. Once I talked to experts that were dealing with EDTA tubes all the time, they said there was nothing that substantiated that theory.

One of the big problems with the defense was, they got locked into that theory, and then the state did the EDTA testing—which we considered redoing in the beginning, but experts said you’re going to end up with the same results, there’s just not EDTA in the tube. I always go back to the client and talk to them about the source of the blood. And in listening to Steven’s interviews, he’s always said the blood came from the night his finger broke open again, and he bled in his sink, and then he noticed the blood was missing. Sure enough, in his audio interviews back in ’05, he was telling the police that, and he told his attorneys that.

That changed the dynamic of the case, and who could be responsible for the murder—because I realized the police didn’t plant the blood. If the police had gotten in the trailer and seen blood in the sink, they’re not going to remove the blood, because they don’t know that that’s not Teresa’s blood. You would never do that. You would think, “Oh my god, there’s blood in the sink, it’s probably the victim’s.” You’re not going to scoop it up and go and drip it in the car.

So I realized the killer was the one who planted the blood. That then narrows the whole universe of suspects, because who knew that Steven’s finger had broken open again? There were witnesses that said the cut had existed for a couple of weeks. But his finger broke open again, and then it’s: who realized that he was bleeding and went back to his trailer to get a Band-Aid? Then we narrowed it again to just Bobby Dassey, because Brendan Dassey had gone with Steven. And the taillights that were in front of Steven’s trailer as they pulled out, and they ended up coming back, could only have been Bobby Dassey’s vehicle, because there was no one else who could have gotten that close to Steven’s trailer that quickly.

Then we started really looking at him, because he was the star witness for the state, and there have been other cases where the star witness ends up being the killer; the DNA subsequently proves they’re the killer. There’s a famous case in Nebraska where that happened. We started digging in, and discovered all of the stuff on the computer. We knew that he was very obsessed with her [Teresa Halbach], always watching her when she would come over. Then when the older brother gave me the affidavit saying Bobby told him that he saw her leave, we knew his trial testimony was false.

Given all of this, where is Steven’s case at the moment?

We prepared and filed the petition, and we filed an enormous amount of material—scientific evidence, our theory, all of that. We filed it at the trial court, and our experience across the country has been that trial courts do not reverse convictions; it happens at the higher court level. So we filed it knowing that the judge in this little place, Sheboygan, would summarily deny it, which means nothing. We’re in the process of appealing it to the appellate court, and that’s where most convictions are overturned across the country. Our appellate brief, which has all of these theories, all of this scientific evidence—the record’s 30,000 pages—is due on December 20.

Steven’s case, compared to Brendan’s, is just starting out, because Steven hasn’t had an attorney for years. Brendan has had Northwestern since 2010, and they did what we’re starting out to do—they went all through the state appellate system, and then when they lost, they jumped over to federal court, and took it all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. They’re years ahead of us. In some of the things I’ve read, they’ve acted like, well, what does any of this mean, the case is over. No, the case has just started. The post-conviction has just started for him.

Brendan’s case seems to have hit a ceiling at the Supreme Court.

It has, totally.

Does that hurt Steven’s case?

Brendan’s case is over, in the sense that they raised all the issues on the confession being involuntary, and they went through the state system. They were, in 2011 or 2012, where we are now with Steven’s case. Then they took it over to the federal courts, and got a couple of positive opinions that got overturned. So the only possibility, I think, for him—he would have to come back to the lower court, in the state court of Wisconsin, with new scientific evidence to try to dispute the validity of the confession.

That’s why what we’ve developed may ultimately help him. But the problem in the post-conviction world is there are so many procedural hurdles. The first response of the court to the Northwestern attorneys would be, why didn’t you do this the first time? It’s a really difficult system to operate in.

The show suggests that an enormous problem here is that the state of Wisconsin will do anything to avoid admitting any wrongdoing. Does this always happen in post-conviction cases?

No, it doesn’t. If we had developed the same evidence in Steven’s case and we had been in Illinois, in a big urban area like Chicago where they have a conviction integrity unit, we would have been given an evidentiary hearing immediately. And quite frankly, if the prosecution had determined that there were enough flaws in the original trial, by agreement, we would have gotten a new trial.

Because there are no conviction integrity units in Wisconsin—none of the prosecution offices have them—we have just hit a brick wall. We got some cooperation initially with the scientific testing—we had an agreement with the state to do an evidentiary hearing. They thought it would last four weeks, and we were going to have it in the spring of 2018. And then the judge just arbitrarily dismissed our petition. Even though we had an agreement with the state, and we told her that, she still dismissed it.

So we’ve just hit a brick wall with cooperation, or any of them thinking at all that there could be something wrong with the case. It’s really unlike what we’ve experienced in other jurisdictions across the country. I haven’t had a single one of my twenty exonerations retried. They decided the case was flawed, my client was released, and that’s the end of it. But this one, we couldn’t even get in for an evidentiary hearing. And that’s going to be part of the appeal—that we should be granted an evidentiary hearing.

But yes, they’ve really thrown up a lot of roadblocks. Is that your impression?

Absolutely. It seems like the state has dug in its heels, to the point that they don’t even want to find out if mistakes were made, or an injustice has taken place. It’s galling.

I one-hundred-percent agree with you. It just seems very backwards to me compared to what a lot of jurisdictions are doing. People are recognizing across the country, in Illinois, in Texas—which has had tons of exonerations—New York, California. The longest one I’ve ever had pending was in Missouri, Ryan Ferguson’s case, but that was only four years. We got the hearing, the witnesses admitted they had committed perjury in that one, the trial judge denied release, and we had to get release from the appellate court.

But this! I swear, if I was granted a new trial, Steven Avery would not be convicted again. Because the defense attorneys didn’t even have the most basic experts. They didn’t have blood spatter. The point of the blood spatter was that Teresa Halbach was ambushed. She opened up the rear cargo door to get her camera out, and somebody hit her and knocked her on the ground and they’re beating her. So it wasn’t at all like what the state said. She was ambushed.

Then, also, with Steven’s blood—it was dripped selectively into the car. There are no fingerprints in the car. So how do you bleed from your finger, don’t leave fingerprints, and there’s twelve places in the car where there’s no blood—like the door handle, the steering wheel, the gearshift, the brake shift? If we got back into court, just with the blood spatter expert—because I’ve won cases just on that—we would win this. And then look at the bullet. The bullet didn’t go through anyone’s head.

How hopeful is Steven—and are you—that the case is going to move forward productively in the near future?

He’s extremely resilient, and he’s very hopeful because he knows that I’ve done this so many times before. That’s also what gives me hope, because we’ve hit walls before, and we’ve always persevered. And I think the publicity really helps. I think eventually, you can almost shame people into doing the right thing.

Just let us back in court. If this thing is so solid, let us do another trial. It should be simple for them to get a conviction if this is so solid. But to know that the state had fourteen experts, and Steven had one, and he just looked at photographs of the bones; he never looked at the bones. The case was just so deficient in the way it was presented. That’s why if they’d just let us back in court…but that’s what they’re fighting. They don’t want us back in court.

But trust me, I will outlast them. I have incredible endurance for these things! I’m not going away. I’m like a bad recurring dream.
Zellner tweeted on November 15, 2018: "A witness smelled horrible odor of something burning in Manitowoc County gravel pit the evening of 10/31/05."

Wednesday, December 28, 2016

Blaine Dassey Testified to the Opposite of What He Told Investigators on November 7th and 11th


Had Scott, Barb, Blaine and Bobby, pictured above as the guilty verdict was read at Brendan's trial, told the truth in their statements and testimonies (better yet, had they consulted an attorney and invoked their Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination), Brendan, and perhaps Steven, would not have gone to prison for crimes against Teresa Halbach.
"Mr. Kratz is well-aware that other individuals lied about their contacts with Ms. Halbach on 10/31". - Kathleen Zellner's statement to Dateline, February 2017
On November 5, 2005, when police took control of the Avery property, Blaine and Brendan Dassey's bus driver told police that at 3:40 p.m. on October 31st, when she dropped off the brothers, she saw a woman taking pictures of a van parked at the intersection of Avery Road and the shared driveway leading to the homes of Barb Janda and Steven Avery.

Also on November 5th, DCI agent Kim Skorlinski contacted Barb Janda, who agreed to bring Blaine to the Cedar Ridge Restaurant in Maribel so that they could "ask him a few questions that had to be clarified" (CASO page 282). At 5:00 p.m., CASO deputy Wendy Baldwin and DCI agent Skorlinski "made contact with Blaine." Skorlinski wrote a report on their contact with Blaine; however, this report was not entered into evidence at Avery's trial.

The following map of the property must have been drawn by Blaine during his interview on November 5th, although it was included in the DCI report of his second interview on November 7th, and the date of the map was changed.





During cross examination at Avery's trial, Strang asked Blaine about the interrogation at Cedar Ridge Restaurant (page 103), but Strang misrepresented this meeting as having taken place on November 15th:

Q.   The Cedar Ridge Restaurant?
A.   Yes. 
Q.   Over in Maribel, near you?
A.   Yes.
Q.   Okay.  Was your mom there for that?
A.   Yes.
Q.   Just you and your mom?
A.   Yup. 
Q.   And then a couple of officers or agents?
A.   Yes.
Q.   And did you guys sit across the table from the agents, in the restaurant?
A.   Yes.
Q.   Did there come a time in that discussion between you and your mom and the agents, when the agents sort of got in your face a little bit?
A.   Yes.
Q.   What were they doing to get in your face?
A.   They were arguing.
Q.   They were arguing?
A.   Yes.
Q.   They raised their voices?
A.   Yes. 
Q.   They got angry?
A.   Yes.
Q.   They accused you guys of not accepting that Steve was guilty, didn't they?
A.   Yes.
Q.   They accused you of embarrassing yourselves by believing in your uncle, didn't they?
A.   Yes.
Q.   They tried to convince you that Steven Avery was guilty, didn't they?
A.   Yes.
Q.   And they got loud about it, at the restaurant?
A.   Yes.
Q.   And then they stomped off and left you there, when you wouldn't turn on your uncle, didn't they?
A.   Yes.
Q.   And that was back in November 15 of 2005.
A.   Yes.

ATTORNEY STRANG: That's all I have.

Two days later, on November 7, 2005, at 10:11 a.m., Agents Debra Strauss and Lisa Wilson of Wisconsin DOJ, Division of Criminal Investigation, interviewed Blaine Dassey at the home of his boss, Michael Kornely, where he had been staying since November 4th (trial exhibit 355).

On November 7th, Blaine told the DCI agents Strauss and Wilson that he did not see anyone or any vehicle that did not normally belong in the driveway when he and Brendan got off the bus and together walked directly to their house on October 31st. He explained that a red and black Blazer and a Monte Carlo/Grand Prix were parked at the mailboxes, where the school bus driver picks them up and drops them off. He said he did not see Steven Avery when he got off the bus. He said that Bobby was sleeping in his bedroom when they got home, and that them coming home woke Bobby up.

Blaine said he listened to the message that Teresa Halbach left on their answering machine. He recalled her saying that she would be at their residence to take pictures between 1:00 and 2:00 p.m., and he recalled that she left a callback number to reschedule if necessary. Blaine said that Barb had placed ads in AutoTrader in the past, the most recent being for a black Lincoln.

Blaine said he was picked up by a friend's mother at 5:20 p.m. to go trick-or-treating and that he returned at approximately 9:30 p.m. He said when he got home, Barbara, Bobby and Brendan were inside and awake. He said he went to bed shortly after he got home, sometime between 9:30 and 10:00 p.m. He said he didn't recall anything unusual happening that evening after he went to bed.

Blaine said he didn't recall anyone using the burn barrels that day. He said that the last time he recalled anyone using the burn barrels was Thursday, November 3rd.

When asked if there were any bonfires the week of October 31st, Blaine said there weren't any.

The DCI agents asked Blaine "if he had seen any media coverage of the missing woman, including her name and picture of her vehicle." He said that he had "but these photos did not help Blaine recall having seen Halbach or her vehicle before."

Blaine was questioned about the Suzuki and snowmobile in the garage. He was asked to describe in detail the trailer that had been used to transport the Skidoo snowmobile from Crivitz to the Avery property.
Blaine was asked if he recalled Steven coming to the house and asking for assistance in moving a Suzuki or a snowmobile into the garage. Blaine said he did not. Blaine said if Steve would have made such a request, Blaine would have remembered

Blaine asked if he could describe where the gray Suzuki was normally kept. Blaine responded that for the last week or two, this Suzuki was parked on the side of Steve's garage closest to Blaine's house. Blaine said he thought Steve's plan was to fix the Suzuki so Blaine's grandpa, Allen Avery, could take it to the cabin in Crivitz. [This could be interpreted as the Susuki being parked on the east of the garage, inside or outside.]

Blaine was asked where the Suzuki currently was located. Blaine said he thought it was still parked next to Steve's garage. [This could be Fassbender twisting Blaine's words by using the word "next" when Blaine could have said it was still parked on the side of the garage closest to his house.]

Blaine was asked what he knew about Steve's snowmobile. Blaine responded Steve brought this snowmobile back from his grandpa's cabin about one week ago. Blaine was with Steve when Steve did this. According to Blaine, the snowmobile was put on a trailer and brought back home. Blaine did not help Steve unload this trailer because the snowmobile had been left on the trailer. As of the week of 10/31/2005, Blaine thought the snowmobile was still on the trailer. [Steve brought the Suzuki home on 10/30 from someone named Tim, and he also brought the snowmobile home from Crivitz on 10/30.]

Blaine was asked to describe the trailer. Blaine described this trailer as approximately 14' long, black metal with a drop ramp, and approximately 2' sides. Blaine said this trailer is capable of hauling two snowmobiles. This trailer is actually Barb's trailer and usually sits [sic] on the left side of Barb's garage.


The two DCI agents returned on November 11th to re-interview Blaine about any bonfires the week of October 31st. Blaine said he was "supposed to have a girl over to his house for a bonfire" but the "bonfire never took place" because the girl said "she did not want to come out for a bonfire." 








To summarize, Blaine was questioned on November 5th, 7th and 11th.

During cross examination of Blaine at Avery's trial, Strang was mistaken about an interview occurring on November 15th (page 83). There was an interview on November 5th at Cedar Ridge Restaurant (unless Baldwin misrepresented the date in her report on CASO page 282, and this interview actually occurred on November 15th and not November 5th).

Q.   Good morning.
A.   Good morning.
Q.   I'm going to call you Mr. Dassey, even though you-- I guess you are 18 now, you turned 18?
A.   Yes.
Q.   Since this is a little bit of a formal place; do you mind if I address you as Mr. Dassey?
A.   Yes.
Q.   Yes, you do mind?
A.   Or no.
Q.   All right. Mr. Dassey, you have been approached by the police a number of times, I think, since October 31, 2005, haven't you?
A.   Yes.
Q.   Started probably a week later, on November 7?
A.   Yes.
Q.   And on November 11?
A.   Yes.
Q.   November 15?
A.   Yes.
Q.   And times after that, right?
A.   Yes.
Q.   Right up through today, when you talked to Mr. Fassbender during the break?
A.   Yes.
Q.   And the police have asked you the same questions over, and over, and over, about October 31, haven't they?
A.   Yes.
Q.   You give them an answer?
A.   Yes.
Q.   And if they don't like the answer, they ask you again?
A.   Yes.

Other than the excerpts of testimony above, Blaine outright lied at Avery's trial (page 52). Blaine caved into pressure from Scott and Barb to change his original statements to match the State's narrative. Kratz wrote the script, which he rehearsed with Blaine prior to Avery's trial. Blaine followed Krtatz's script when he testified, but his performance wasn't flawless.

The following are Blaine's lies about October 31st during direct examination by Kratz.

1. The bus dropped him off at 3:40 (he originally said the bus drops him off between 3:30 and 4:00 p.m.).

2. He got home from trick-or-treating at 11 p.m. (he originally said he got home at 9:30 p.m.).

3. As he was walking from the bus stop to his home, at 3:46 or 3:47 p.m., he saw Steven bringing a plastic bag to his burning barrel (he originally said he didn't see Steven that day).

4. When Steven threw the plastic bag into barrel, there was smoke and flames coming out of the barrel (he originally said he didn't see Steven that day, he didn't see anyone using burn barrels that day, and burn barrels were used on November 3rd).

5. When he got home at 11 p.m. he saw one person, who he believed to be Steven, sitting and watching a bonfire with four to five foot flames behind his garage. (He orginally said that he got home at 9:30 p.m., and that when he got home he didn't see anyone outside; he also originally said he hadn't seen Steven that day and that there weren't any bonfires that day or that week.)

6. When he got home at 11 p.m. he went to bed in the bedroom he shared with Brendan, but Brendan wasn't in the bedroom (he originally said that when he got home at 9:30 p.m., Barb, Brendan and Bobby were inside, and then he went to bed by 10 p.m.).

7. At 3:45 p.m. he saw the Suzuki parked on the "right side, outside of the garage" (he originally said that for the last week or two, this Suzuki was parked on the side of Steven's garage closest to Blaine's house, meaning the inside of the garage).

8. Kratz, knowing that Blaine screwed up, used a diagram to have Blaine point out where the Suzuki was parked, and Kratz clarified for the jury that Blaine is "pointing to the outside of what would be Steven Avery's garage, just to the left side." (Fassbender twisted Blaine's words in his report of Strauss and Wilson's November 7th interview with Blaine, writing that "when asked where the Suzuki currently was located, Blaine said he thought it was still parked next to Steve's garage." However, Blaine hadn't said it was "parked next to Steve's garage;" he said it was "parked on the side of Steven's garage closest to Blaine's house.")

9. He also noticed a snowmobile outside, parked in "back of, behind the Suzuki." (He originally said Steven had towed the snowmobile from his grandpa's cabin about one week ago, on October 30th, and that the snowmobile had been left on the trailer. He also said that as of the week of October 31st, he thought the snowmobile was still on the trailer.) Kratz stopped at this point to add the following:
Q.   Now, I'm just asking you about your observations, Blaine, I don't know -- I don't care who you talked to, or what somebody might have said, but just what you saw with your own eyes, okay?
A.   Okay.
Q.   Do you remember seeing, with your own eyes, or remembering your own observations, whether or not that Suzuki and that snowmobile were moved somewhere else, at some point after the 31st of October? 
A.   I'm not sure, no.
Q.   Okay.  You just remember the 31st, that they were next to the garage; is that right?
A.   Yes.
10. Because Blaine, when asked twice before about the burn barrel, didn't say, as he had rehearsed with Kratz, that he saw white smoke, which would be the color of smoke if plastic were burning, Kratz asked him a third time about the burn barrel:
Q.   Now, can you describe for the jury the smoke or anything else that you saw coming out of that burn barrel when you got home that day?
ATTORNEY STRANG:  Asked and answered, twice. 

ATTORNEY KRATZ:  I want him to describe, if he can, I want to know if he can describe the color, or if there were flames, or more descriptive of what he saw, Judge. That has not been answered.

ATTORNEY STRANG:  It's been asked and answered, twice.

THE COURT:  I know the question has been answered if there was something coming out of it. I don't remember if there was a request for a description, so I will allow the question.

Q.   (By Attorney Kratz)~ If you remember, Blaine, do you remember anything coming out of that burn barrel?
A.   Yeah, white smoke.
(Blaine originally said there weren't any fires in burn barrels that day.)



The screenshots above and below are from CASO's November 4th flyover of the Avery property. Many portions of the recording seemed to be intentionally blurred, especially the areas in front of Avery's truck and Barb Janda's shed, where Avery parked the trailer after returning it to Barb. Are the trailer and Skidoo snowmobile parked between Avery's truck and the garage overhead door in the screenshots above and below?



The flyover video from November 4th is blurred but there appears to be something between Avery's truck and his garage overhead door (image above). That something could be the Skidoo snowmobile on the trailer Avery borrowed from Barb to haul the snowmobile from Crivitz to his home on October 30th. That snowmobile on the trailer would have been blocking the garage overhead door, preventing anyone from pushing the Suzuki outside the garage, as the State claims was done to make room for Teresa's RAV4 on October 31st.



Avery's truck was parked to the side of his garage overhead door when law enforcement commandeered the property on November 5th (Steven and other family members were at the family cabin in Crivitz). The trailer used to tow the Skidoo snowmobile from Crivitz to the Avery property on October 30th had been parked, with the Skidoo still on it, in front of Avery's garage overhead door. Prior to November 4th, Avery had moved the Skidoo inside his garage and moved the trailer, which belonged to Barb, beside her home.




On October 30th, Avery used Barb Janda's trailer and his Ford truck to tow a Skidoo snowmobile from Crivitz to the Avery property. According to Blaine, he was with Steven when he towed it on October 30th; and during the week of October 31st, it was still on the trailer as far as he could remember (Blaine stayed at the home of his boss November 4-12th). Avery had moved the Skidoo off the trailer and into his garage prior to the evening of November 4th, and then returned the trailer to Barb, moving it to the side of her home.



The image above is from a flyover video taken by a drone on October 31, 2016.  The large yellow box at the bottom of the image is the turnaround on Avery Road, near the mailboxes, where the school bus driver dropped off the Dassey brothers. The tiny pink box at the top of the image is where the minivan that Teresa photographed was parked on October 31, 2005. The distance is about 1000 feet or 333 yards (the length of about three football fields). The school bus driver said she saw Teresa taking pictures of a van by the mailboxes (the yellow box); however, the van that Teresa photographed was parked in the long, shared driveway between Steven Avery and Barb Janda's homes (the pink box).


Screenshot of a 2016 drone flyover of the Avery property.

In the image above, the spot where the bus driver picked up and dropped off the Dassey brothers is marked with the yellow box. It is at the end of Avery Road, where it intersects with the long shared driveway to Barb and Steven's homes. The spot where Barb's van was parked on October 31st, and the days that followed, is marked with the pink box.

On November 5th, the day police took over the Avery property, the bus driver for the Dassey brothers approached law enforcement at barriers on HWY 147 and County Road Q (she walked there from her home on County Road Q). She told them that on October 31st around 3:40 p.m. she saw a women, who she thought was Teresa, talking pictures at the spot where she dropped off the Dassey brothers. She gave a statement to Wiegert two days later, on November 7th, and clearly stated that it was at the intersection of Avery Road and the long, shared driveway where she saw Teresa taking pictures of a van. But the van was not parked at the spot. It was parked down the shared driveway, near Steven's trailer.

The bus driver was mistaken. She did not see Teresa on October 31st. She may have seen a women taking pictures of a vehicle parked at the mailboxes since there was a red and black Blazer, along with a Monte Carlo/Grand Prix, for sale on that day; or she saw Teresa taking pictures three weeks earlier, on October 10th, when she came to the Avery property to photograph the Grand Prix that Steven wanted to sell. Steven said Teresa usually came between 2:00 and 3:00 p.m., so it is likely the bus driver never saw Teresa at any time or on any day because she dropped off the boys between 3:30 and 3:45 p.m.



Sunday, November 27, 2016

Did Teresa Halbach Make All Her Stops, Schmitz, Zipperer and Avery, in That Order? [Updated 06-14-2017]

kratz-how-to-make-a-murderer
Making a Murderer: 'Secret Courtroom Signal' Made by Ken Kratz to Scott Tadych

In the clip below, Scott Tadych, Steven Avery's brother-in-law, takes to the stand to be questioned by Avery's lawyer, Dean Strang.

In the screen shot above and the clip below Ken Kratz appears to be giving a cecret signal to Scott by brushing his finger across his lip.



But as the camera pans across to Kratz, he can be seen subtly moving his finger across his lip, a signal which some viewers believe is directed at Scott in a bid to stop him from talking.

The apparent hand gesture was brought to light by Twitter user Ian Atkinson who said: "Ooh little, finger symbol there, little symbol to him [Scott Tadych]. 'Shut up Scott'."



At the time of questioning, Scott was attempting to affirm his alibi.

kratz-how-to-make-a-murderer 2

Kratz was caught on camera, implicating both himself and Scott.

Summary of Scott Tadych's interviews and statements:

https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/71m2uu/summary_of_scott_ts_interviews_and_statements/