Netflix to stream new documentary on Steven Avery

[stephsb]

I grew up in WI, in Sheboygan County, and my family still lives there. I was a junior in high school during this trial, and remember the coverage of it, which was non-stop. My parents both followed the trial extremely closely (like a lot of people in the area did) and up until this documentary came out, I had no doubt of Avery's guilt, and from what I have gathered from friends, family, and acquaintances who still live in the area, most people don't doubt Avery's guilt either. Of the people I have talked to in the last few days while home for the holidays, people are more willing to be sympathetic and doubtful of Dassey's guilt or involvement. When Avery was convicted, people weren't really surprised. There was a lot of negative opinions about the Avery family prior to any of this happening, and while some of it is certainly just small town gossip, Avery did spend time in prison for throwing a cat in a fire, and he did assault a relative w. a firearm. IIRC, his brother's also had served time in prison. Obviously none of this makes him guilty of the Halbach murder, but I'm just trying to give some context into why local opinion of Avery is the way it was.

I'm currently a law student, and from a legal perspective, I wish this documentary would have focused more on Dassey. Avery had great attorneys (better than many defendants get) and he had as fair a trial as could be expected given the media coverage. Just because Avery's case was covered non-stop in the media doesn't mean a jury would be unable to find him not guilty- both OJ Simpson, Casey Anthony, and George Zimmerman are just a few examples of that. All the evidence presented by the documentary was presented to the jury, and they still found him guilty. Dassey, however, gave a confession that someone w. no legal training should be able to see as garbage and coerced. He was a 16 year old CHILD of clearly lower intelligence, who coached and guided not only by the investigators but his own ATTORNEY into giving confessions that didn't make sense w. the evidence. While the investigators behavior is reprehensible, his attorney's is deplorable. Most adults of average to above average intelligence would be scared and confused and in need of guidance when on trial for first degree murder. This is the exact reason why every defendant is guaranteed an attorney, and there should be no doubt in their minds that their attorney is working 100 percent in protection of their best interests. Allowing Dassey to speak w. investigators w.o his attorney present, knowing that Dassey was easily manipulated and of lower intelligence is beyond reprehensible, and his attorney should be ashamed of himself. Dassey's conversations w. his mother are absolutely heartbreaking- he clearly had no idea the severity of the situation he was in, how he got into it, or what he could do to help himself. If anyone deserves a new trial, it is Dassey.

The question I have for everyone who watched this and suddenly is 100 percent convinced of Avery's innocence, is who killed Teresa Halbach and put her charred remains and belongings on Avery's property? If someone planted that car on Avery's property because they wanted him to look guilty, why would they take off the license plates and throw them in a salvaged car on the property? Wouldn't they want to keep them on so the car could be quickly identified and Avery framed? I don't think there is any doubt evidence was tampered with, but it's one thing to tamper w. evidence and entirely another to murder an innocent woman and plant her body on Avery's salvage yard. Clearly, the murder didn't go down like Dassey said, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. Why did Dassey's mother state that he came home covered in bleach, and he responded that it was from cleaning Avery's garage? If someone else murdered Teresa, how did they know when she left Avery's and how were they able to get back on Avery's property to plant her car and charred body and belongings? She never had any contact w. anyone after heading to Avery's. Avery said she was there to take pictures, he is the one who requested her personally, and the only person saying he wasn't the last person to see her alive is Avery himself. Even though there was plenty of evidence questioning Avery's guilt, there was just as much evidence supporting it, and IMO the documentary doesn't do enough to show this evidence.

 

[Fred J Walsh]

Like Max, I'm a bit hung up on the alleged bleach-stained jeans.

The jeans are mentioned in the criminal complaint against Brendan Dassey. It's stated that in an interview on Feb 27, 2006, Brendan's Mom, Barb Janda, told investigator Thomas Fassbender that on Oct 31, 2005, she noted stains on her son's jeans, and he explained at that time that he'd stained his jeans in the process of helping his uncle Steve Avery bleach the garage floor. It's further stated that 2 days after that interview, an investigator then recovered the jeans from Brendan's home.



The jeans are mentioned again in Brendan's interview/interrogation on May 13, 2006. Brendan confirms, at investigator prompting, that the jeans were the pair he had worn on Oct 31, 2005.



Lastly, according to one case page, Steve Avery's girlfriend Jodi Stachowski "testified that in one of two phone calls to Avery on the night of 31 October, 2005, Steve said Brendan was helping clean the garage."

What I wish, is that we had some access to the alleged Fassbender interview with Barb Janda on February 27, 2006, in which she supposedly related the bleach stains detail. I'd also like to know what role if any the jeans may have played at trial.

 

[MaxManning]

The question I have for everyone who watched this and suddenly is 100 percent convinced of Avery's innocence, is who killed Teresa Halbach and put her charred remains and belongings on Avery's property? If someone planted that car on Avery's property because they wanted him to look guilty, why would they take off the license plates and throw them in a salvaged car on the property? Wouldn't they want to keep them on so the car could be quickly identified and Avery framed? I don't think there is any doubt evidence was tampered with, but it's one thing to tamper w. evidence and entirely another to murder an innocent woman and plant her body on Avery's salvage yard. Clearly, the murder didn't go down like Dassey said, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. Why did Dassey's mother state that he came home covered in bleach, and he responded that it was from cleaning Avery's garage? If someone else murdered Teresa, how did they know when she left Avery's and how were they able to get back on Avery's property to plant her car and charred body and belongings? She never had any contact w. anyone after heading to Avery's. Avery said she was there to take pictures, he is the one who requested her personally, and the only person saying he wasn't the last person to see her alive is Avery himself. Even though there was plenty of evidence questioning Avery's guilt, there was just as much evidence supporting it, and IMO the documentary doesn't do enough to show this evidence.

First, thanks so much for this post, and I agree with you about brendan. It's so hard to see this kid in the interrogations and listen to him on the phone and not feel sympathetic for him, and rightfully so. Regardless of what happened, I think he has been manipulated by people he should be able to trust.

Do you have transcripts of the trial or any of the statements ? I honestly don't know what is real, so don't know if the documentary did indeed leave out key evidence.

For example, I see it said that Avery called and specifically asked for halbach. How do we know this is true ? If it is true, certainly it's a major exclusion from the documentary. It doesn't provide motive, but it does indeed create a path you have to investigate.

Who was this person that divluged this information ? Was this recorded in any way ? when was it divluged ? Was it included as evidence in the trial ?

See, if it was evidence in the trial, and the documentary didn't mention that.... that's troubling in terms of the integrity of the documentary. Surely they understand that a jury is going to place quite a bit of weight on that information, especially if Steve has said that he didn't do that. Which the documentary doesn't come out and say, but most certainly plays it off as he didn't specifically request her.

Don't get me wrong on this, I think that obviously it could be completely innocent that Steve regularly called auto trader and requested her. But to deny it, if it occurred, that's called deception.

 

[MaxManning]

Like Max, I'm a bit hung up on the alleged bleach-stained jeans.

The jeans are mentioned in the criminal complaint against Brendan Dassey. It's stated that in an interview on Feb 27, 2006, Brendan's Mom, Barb Janda, told investigator Thomas Fassbender that on Oct 31, 2005, she noted stains on her son's jeans, and he explained at that time that he'd stained his jeans in the process of helping his uncle Steve Avery bleach the garage floor. It's further stated that 2 days after that interview, an investigator then recovered the jeans from Brendan's home.

The jeans are mentioned again in Brendan's interview/interrogation on May 13, 2006. Brendan confirms, at investigator prompting, that the jeans were the pair he had worn on Oct 31, 2005.

What I wish, is that we had some access to the alleged Fassbender interview with Barb Janda on February 27, 2006, in which she supposedly related the bleach stains detail. I'd also like to know what role if any the jeans may have played at trial.

Yes, without knowing the actual evidence that was in the trial, how can anyone be outraged at a judge or jury's decisions on any given topic. I have not been able to find a transcript, so it's frustrating.

Also, I want to point out that I don't think brendan's confession is even relevant on this topic. To me, it's purely about what Barb said. I believe that she wouldn't have said anything to incriminate her son. So, if she said something it was likely truthful and she didn't have any reason to be deceptive. Later, she might have regretted saying it, because it opened the door for police to craft a narrative including that.

But, I'd find it hard to believe that she'd make something like that up. What would be the motive in saying that and not being truthful?

 

[Fred J Walsh]

To me, it's purely about what Barb said...I'd find it hard to believe that she'd make something like that up. What would be the motive in saying that and not being truthful?

Agreed. The key thing is what Barb is alleged to have volunteered to investigators about the jeans. (Though, I think the Brendan comment merely confirms that jeans were in fact collected from his home, and that he agreed it was the pair in question.)

One last bit about the jeans I edited into my last reply:

According to one case page, Steve Avery's girlfriend Jodi Stachowski "testified that in one of two phone calls to Avery on the night of 31 October, 2005, Steve said Brendan was helping clean the garage."

Makes you go hm.

Perhaps with the popularity of the docu-series, we'll see court transcripts and other documents emerge? I don't know.

 

[Tiger09]

Maybe SA just called the kid, asked him to clean the garage with the bleach with the thought/knowledge of Brendan being "slow" and tried to use that to his advantage? Brendan (or is it Brenden?) doesn't seem to be a great liar tbh. It could be very simple that SA called him and said "Hey, let's have a bonfire, oh by the way, can ya help me clean my garage, buddy? Here's some bleach? " Brendan gets home, mom is probably very angry his pants have bleach on them (I don't mean this rudely at all, but maybe they couldn't afford much clothing. Clothes are expensive and teens/kids go through them. The family doesn't seem to have much money, which is why that may have stuck in Barb's mind, like "Yeah that's how his pants were ruined! ") So Brenden says "Well SA needed help cleaning the garage." Maybe that seriously was the extent of Brenden's involvement in this crime.

I still feel TB's ex bf and brother are hinky though. There are variables that need to be looked at imo.

Sent from my SM-T310 using Tapatalk

 

[Boytwnmom]

Did you see any pictures of their place? It was like an enormous junkyard/auto salvage place and the Avery family owned a large expanse of land, about 40 acres. Their homes and business were on Avery Rd. I don't find it at all odd that something could be placed there.View attachment 86034 This is a picture of part of it.

The RAV 4 was found on the Avery property...if it were planted...how did no one notice, or even offer a possibility as to how it got there...? Vehicles make noise...people concealing vehicles with other vehicle parts make noise or otherwise make their presence known...[/QUOTE

 

[Boytwnmom]

That was the biggest head scratcher for me. Other than the key, there was no evidence, not anything at all, that showed the victim had ever been IN the trailer. She was chained, raped, murdered, and not a shred of dna or blood evidence. And no way could anyone have cleaned that trailer of all evidence-the place was not exactly neat ad there was old carpeting and the mattress and bedding-there should have been dna all over and the place should have lit up under UV light that shows blood. It doesn't compute.

The prosecution tried to say there was other evidence, a bill of sale or title to do with the car S Avery was selling but that has no bearing on whether she was in the trailer and everyone knows she was at the property to photograph the car so that proves nothing. Only that key, found by the two guys who weren't supposed to be there.

RBBM, was searched way more times than one when they found the key. And that bedroom (in the video when Jodi returned home) was tossed and everything dumped out, but the mattress was still on the frame. No blood that I seen anywhere, unless was covered up but didnt appear that way. The LEO were there 8 days searching the property. One LEO on stand said that when first searched, the shoes (which were by the key) were first moved there was no key there. Then it appeared... sketchy for sure...

 

[Boytwnmom]

I just don't find bleached pants very compelling. Bleach is a pretty commonly used cleaner and its easy to splash around. Ask em how I know? HA!

It's easier for me to find an innocent explanation for bleach than it is for the "key" to be found, the only evidence that the victim was there-her key, which had none of her DNA on it and was found by the previously deposed, lying detectives who weren't supposed to be there.

Yes! I read that forum frequently! I'm there a lot. I don't know who to trust either, but I do agree with their list. I'd add Brendan too, though. I think the bleach on his pants could be from literally anything. Example, in a call with his mom, they talk about how he's getting another cat. I have two cats and clean their litter box with bleach once every two weeks because it's an awesome disinfectant. (And have you smelled cat pee? Have you bought cat litter/liners/etc? Lol. I scoop daily, Lysol every 3 days, but bleach every 2 wks fyi. Cat lessons.) Anyway, on topic, there's a number of mundane non murder things that could/would splash bleach on myself or my clothing. I can see that happening, Brendan saying it, and LE insisting he's lying.

Sent from my SM-T310 using Tapatalk

 

[Tiger09]

I agree. I don't even get how or what SA's motive would be. He was engaged, about to get a 36 mil settlement. His fiancée was a reasonably attractive woman, albeit with a drinking problem she was working on. Which btw he sounded super chill for a dude who was/did raped/murdered a woman.

Sent from my SM-T310 using Tapatalk

 

[MaxManning]

Agreed. The key thing is what Barb is alleged to have volunteered to investigators about the jeans. (Though, I think the Brendan comment merely confirms that jeans were in fact collected from his home, and that he agreed it was the pair in question.)

One last bit about the jeans I edited into my last reply:

According to one case page, Steve Avery's girlfriend Jodi Stachowski "testified that in one of two phone calls to Avery on the night of 31 October, 2005, Steve said Brendan was helping clean the garage."

Makes you go hm.

Perhaps with the popularity of the docu-series, we'll see court transcripts and other documents emerge? I don't know.

Yeah, to know what actually was said in court will be the barometer for the integrity of the documentary. imo

I did read the confession here - http://convolutedbrian.com.s3.amazonaws.com/dassey/13May2006/13May06Transcript.pdf

I also read the probable cause which DOES mention Barb Janda's statement. -- http://convolutedbrian.com.s3.amazonaws.com/dassey/courtdocs/complaint-02Mar2006.pdf

These are both official docs.

What I find weird is that Barb Janda's statement was made almost 5 months after the murder. That's alot of time for Barb to think about what happened that day, but it also shows that the bleach on the jeans and what he said stuck in her head. Even further, she must not have though it was significant or that it would implicate Brendan in anything. So, no motivation to be deceptive.

 

[matou]

I think Teresa killed herself and police found her body. They found her car near where they found her and they used her already dead body and planted her car on his lot to save the town from paying for the lawsuit. Ridiculous, I know. JMO

 

[Brightbird]

So that's 3 people who say Steven and Brendan cleaned the garage floor with bleach - Brendan himself, Barb, and Jodi. I'm inclined to believe that did happen. It would be nice to read how they gave those statements, since Brendan's statements sound so damning until you see how they were obtained. Most of all, I'd like to know what Steven said about it. If he denies it, I'd be suspicious. Do we know if the bleached floor was used in Steven's trial?

The only thing I'm feeling confident about is that Teresa wasn't killed in the house and probably not the garage. I say probably not the garage because police even hacked into the floor to look for trace evidence in crevices. I am struggling to believe that she was shot in the garage because I think that would have left too much splatter to clean. However, that makes the bullet with her DNA problematic. So I think she was probably killed by someone with a connection to the Avery property. But was it Steven? Maybe. Maybe not.

At a bigger level I have problems with how this was all handled. It is so cruel to sensationalise the brutal murder story according to Brendan if there's so little evidence to back that up. Also, the involvement of Lenk and Colburn seriously undermines the integrity of the investigation. It is not a huge leap to see how an innocent person could be convicted with this kind of 'guilty until proven guilty' approach.

 

[MaxManning]

I just don't find bleached pants very compelling. Bleach is a pretty commonly used cleaner and its easy to splash around. Ask em how I know? HA!

It's easier for me to find an innocent explanation for bleach than it is for the "key" to be found, the only evidence that the victim was there-her key, which had none of her DNA on it and was found by the previously deposed, lying detectives who weren't supposed to be there.

Well, you have to agree that bleach was on his pants and being used an garage floor where a murder supposedly happened and on the night of that murder, is in need of at least an explanation ?

You saw that garage, we all did. We even talk about how hard it would be to clean that garage if blood spatter was there. So it's not even a reason for you to question "hey, what were you cleaning off the floor ?". Did it look like the garage was often cleaned ? not via the pictures I saw. It looked a mess.

Sorry, I'd ask the question, even though i can think of a million and one reasons that are completely innocent. that's kind of what an investigation is about, you ask questions and evaluate the answers. right ?

It could have been completely innocent that jeffrey dahmer had a stench coming from his freezer. Everyone has a freezer and most keep meat in a freezer and if it dies out, the meat will spoil and stink. But..... if the meat is human, you are gonna feel awfully good about verifying what was in the freezer and asking questions. right ? that's just common sense.

Bleach gets used 99.9% of the time for perfectly innocent reasons. but in the case that you are investigating a murder, bleach is one of those things that is commonly used for cleaning up blood/dna. So are you telling me you don't understand why this would be suspicious ?

Again, not saying it wasn't innocent, but I'm curious as to why 5 months later this first gets noted -- by a member of the Avery family via a voluntary statement, if it isn't true.


now if Steven and Brendan said... hey we spilled some kitty litter on the floor or whatever and thats why he said that, that's the first step towards an explanation.

suggesting that there was no cleaning of the garage floor however, is calling Barb/Brendan a liar, not police. right ?

 

[MaxManning]

I think Teresa killed herself and police found her body. They found her car near where they found her and they used her already dead body and planted her car on his lot to save the town from paying for the lawsuit. Ridiculous, I know. JMO

I kind of find that hard to believe, but stranger things have happened.

I think it's possible that someone (steve or any number of other people who weren't investigated) killed teresa, and the police planted evidence because they couldn't connect Steve but believed he did.

Bob/Scott ? are you sure they didn't ? they both alibi'd each other. - easy access to junkyard
Chuck ? sexual assault history - easy access to junkyard
Earl ? sexual assault history - easy access to junkyard
Ex boyfriend - had password to her voice mail and admitted going through them
roommate ? Was the one that gave the camera to the lady who found the vehicle and maybe instrumental in point them at the vehicle ?

I find all of these more plausible than here committing suicide. Also, didn't they say 2 shots in the skull ? How does that happen ? can you shoot yourself in the head twice ? not sure about that, but I'd question it.

 

[Boytwnmom]

I'm not very convinced by this. The statement is in a criminal complaint written by LE. Is there a transcript of the interview acknowledged by the mother or a copy of her sworn statement? It also sounds suspect on it's face. Someone is questioned in February about what their son had on in October on a specific night and they right away tell LE this story about bleach? And nothing Brendan says can really be taken at face value, at least by me. He is clearly mentally challenged and has no consistent recollection of basically anything under questioning by authority figures.

Given the behavior by LE all along toward SA I just don't trust anything they say without independent objective verification. And the DA is/was a total creep as well as ethically challenged so, yes, I am admittedly prejudiced against him. Wasn't he forced to resign for unethical behavior? Sending sex messages to a DV victim? Creep with a capital C.

I believe the Avery's were totally weird and probably scary people to the "normal" population. The equivalent of untouchables under the old caste system. They are a staple of American small town lore. They even run a huge junkyard. They are not educated nor savvy. They're all a bit "off". It's easy to see them as guilty. But the two Avery brothers involved in DV with their wives doesn't translate to murder to me, especially by SA. None of them apparently ever assaulted a stranger or non-family member. Not that it makes them good, it just is not as easily translated to this type of crime against a stranger. I didn't catch the whole saga of the gun incident-but didn't it involve another Avery, a cousin or something who was married to the sheriff and it was provoked by something-can't remember what. I don't doubt that the Avery's committed crimes. But I'm at all convinced SA did this crime.

I can imagine the locals were aghast at the SA lawsuit for, what, 36million? I'm sure that angered a lot of people, not only LE. I obviously don't know what did happen here but I don't trust the investigative and adjudicative process in this case.

Like Max, I'm a bit hung up on the alleged bleach-stained jeans.

The jeans are mentioned in the criminal complaint against Brendan Dassey. It's stated that in an interview on Feb 27, 2006, Brendan's Mom, Barb Janda, told investigator Thomas Fassbender that on Oct 31, 2005, she noted stains on her son's jeans, and he explained at that time that he'd stained his jeans in the process of helping his uncle Steve Avery bleach the garage floor. It's further stated that 2 days after that interview, an investigator then recovered the jeans from Brendan's home.

View attachment 86058

The jeans are mentioned again in Brendan's interview/interrogation on May 13, 2006. Brendan confirms, at investigator prompting, that the jeans were the pair he had worn on Oct 31, 2005.

View attachment 86059

Lastly, according to one case page, Steve Avery's girlfriend Jodi Stachowski "testified that in one of two phone calls to Avery on the night of 31 October, 2005, Steve said Brendan was helping clean the garage."

What I wish, is that we had some access to the alleged Fassbender interview with Barb Janda on February 27, 2006, in which she supposedly related the bleach stains detail. I'd also like to know what role if any the jeans may have played at trial.

 

[MaxManning]

So that's 3 people who say Steven and Brendan cleaned the garage floor with bleach - Brendan himself, Barb, and Jodi. I'm inclined to believe that did happen. It would be nice to read how they gave those statements, since Brendan's statements sound so damning until you see how they were obtained. Most of all, I'd like to know what Steven said about it. If he denies it, I'd be suspicious. Do we know if the bleached floor was used in Steven's trial?

The only thing I'm feeling confident about is that Teresa wasn't killed in the house and probably not the garage. I say probably not the garage because police even hacked into the floor to look for trace evidence in crevices. I am struggling to believe that she was shot in the garage because I think that would have left too much splatter to clean. However, that makes the bullet with her DNA problematic. So I think she was probably killed by someone with a connection to the Avery property. But was it Steven? Maybe. Maybe not.

At a bigger level I have problems with how this was all handled. It is so cruel to sensationalise the brutal murder story according to Brendan if there's so little evidence to back that up. Also, the involvement of Lenk and Colburn seriously undermines the integrity of the investigation. It is not a huge leap to see how an innocent person could be convicted with this kind of 'guilty until proven guilty' approach.

I'm with you here, it very likely could have been any number of other people but if you didn't investigate them, you'd never know.

Which makes it even more believable that they'd feel the need to plant evidence to get a conviction. I don't doubt that the police thought they were right about Avery and also the lawsuit obviously could be another large factor. There is no doubt in my mind that the police had egg on their face over the overturned conviction via the DNA of the rape case.

All that being said, I will say, I am still not convinced that Steven couldn't be guilty. Just because someone felt the need to plant evidence, doesn't mean avery is innocent. But he is innocent until proven guilty, so thats why you have to investigate. 5 months after the murder they get around to finding out what Barb Janda had to say about the night ?!?!?

 

[Juan23]

Yes, this is really big. Do we have any idea why the one juror left?

He had "family issues" according to the documentary. It was never fully explained.

 

[MaxManning]

I'm not very convinced by this. The statement is in a criminal complaint written by LE. Is there a transcript of the interview acknowledged by the mother or a copy of her sworn statement? It also sounds suspect on it's face. Someone is questioned in February about what their son had on in October on a specific night and they right away tell LE this story about bleach? And nothing Brendan says can really be taken at face value, at least by me. He is clearly mentally challenged and has no consistent recollection of basically anything under questioning by authority figures.

Given the behavior by LE all along toward SA I just don't trust anything they say without independent objective verification. And the DA is/was a total creep as well as ethically challenged so, yes, I am admittedly prejudiced against him. Wasn't he forced to resign for unethical behavior? Sending sex messages to a DV victim? Creep with a capital C.

I believe the Avery's were totally weird and probably scary people to the "normal" population. The equivalent of untouchables under the old caste system. They are a staple of American small town lore. They even run a huge junkyard. They are not educated nor savvy. They're all a bit "off". It's easy to see them as guilty. But the two Avery brothers involved in DV with their wives doesn't translate to murder to me, especially by SA. None of them apparently ever assaulted a stranger or non-family member. Not that it makes them good, it just is not as easily translated to this type of crime against a stranger. I didn't catch the whole saga of the gun incident-but didn't it involve another Avery, a cousin or something who was married to the sheriff and it was provoked by something-can't remember what. I don't doubt that the Avery's committed crimes. But I'm at all convinced SA did this crime.

I can imagine the locals were aghast at the SA lawsuit for, what, 36million? I'm sure that angered a lot of people, not only LE. I obviously don't know what did happen here but I don't trust the investigative and adjudicative process in this case.

I am not convinced by anything! I hear ya.

But if Barb said it, and then gives an explanation - why wouldn't that be in the documentary ? That's my point. To exclude that she ever said it or at least note she said it and then state why it's not reliable etc -- that's not suspicious to you ?

An example is the teenage girl that said brendan was crying. that got mentioned in the documentary and then that she later recanted. right ? That's an example of the documentary giving an explanation for evidence that points towards the police narrative.

Now... with barb's statement, they didn't even bring it up. For all we know, she would still state it as truth today. right ? If that is the case, then what do you think ?

But to exclude it, that's not giving the full story, that's being deceptive.

 

[matou]

I kind of find that hard to believe, but stranger things have happened.

I think it's possible that someone (steve or any number of other people who weren't investigated) killed teresa, and the police planted evidence because they couldn't connect Steve but believed he did.

Bob/Scott ? are you sure they didn't ? they both alibi'd each other. - easy access to junkyard
Chuck ? sexual assault history - easy access to junkyard
Earl ? sexual assault history - easy access to junkyard
Ex boyfriend - had password to her voice mail and admitted going through them
roommate ? Was the one that gave the camera to the lady who found the vehicle and maybe instrumental in point them at the vehicle ?

I find all of these more plausible than here committing suicide. Also, didn't they say 2 shots in the skull ? How does that happen ? can you shoot yourself in the head twice ? not sure about that, but I'd question it.

Was her skull recovered (and will bullet holes visible)? I thought she was found as cremains.