Phone Calls and Phone Records

[Tawny]

Can someone link me to where it states for a fact that a VOICEMAIL was left by SA at 4:35 asking Teresa where she is? As far as I know, that was a tale made up by Kratz to say it was SA's way of trying to create an alibi.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Can someone link me to where it states for a fact that a VOICEMAIL was left by SA at 4:35 asking Teresa where she is? As far as I know, that was a tale made up by Kratz to say it was SA's way of trying to create an alibi.

So you are saying there is documentation showing there was really no voicemail ever left by him at that time? Did the defense attorneys in his trial prove that to be false? Who testified that he never made the voicemail at 4.35? It has been 10+ years so I have a difficult time remembering particular testimony by some who testified.

TIA

IMO

 

[Tawny]

So you are saying there is documentation showing there was really no voicemail ever left by him at that time? Did the defense attorneys in his trial prove that to be false? Who testified that he never made the voicemail at 4.35? It has been 10+ years so I have a difficult time remembering particular testimony by some who testified.

TIA

IMO

Um. What.

How in the world would there be documentation of something that never existed? Do you have documentation that a voicemail DID exist?

 

[BigCityAccountant]

So you are saying there is documentation showing there was really no voicemail ever left by him at that time? Did the defense attorneys in his trial prove that to be false? Who testified that he never made the voicemail at 4.35? It has been 10+ years so I have a difficult time remembering particular testimony by some who testified.

TIA

IMO

It was reported all over the news right after she went missing. If you look at the old thread here from 2005, it is mentioned several times. Not sure if had been proven in court or not.

 

[Sinsaint]

It was reported all over the news right after she went missing. If you look at the old thread here from 2005, it is mentioned several times. Not sure if had been proven in court or not.

Not to slit hairs but... My phone logs time any call from the moment I dial. I've called many of my children's missing phones and found that their phone doesn't even ring until my phone is on the third ring. By then I'm already listed as ten seconds in and no one has even picked up yet. 13 probably wouldn't even get you through the "Hi! You've reached Teresa blah, blah, blah... I'm unavailable right now. Please leave..." On the other hand, her calls after Avery's averaged 50 seconds. THOSE calls would presumably, based on time, result in voice mails being left. I'm hard pressed to see how he left any voice mail for her based on the 13 seconds.

 

[bessie]

So you are saying there is documentation showing there was really no voicemail ever left by him at that time? Did the defense attorneys in his trial prove that to be false? Who testified that he never made the voicemail at 4.35? It has been 10+ years so I have a difficult time remembering particular testimony by some who testified.

TIA

IMO

This is from a 2007 news report of the trial proceedings.

"Halbach's phone records show she got one call from Auto Trader on Halloween morning and a second call about 2:27 p.m., said Laura Schadrie of Cingular, Halbach's cell phone provider. The second call lasted five minutes, suggesting she was alive then."

"Halbach's phone records show she got a call from Avery at 4:35 p.m. that lasted 13 seconds but she couldn't tell if it was answered or went into voice mail, Schadrie said."

 

[Madeleine74]

He may have tricked her into thinking she was going to be meeting with his sister, who was the owner of the van that was being sold. He twice used *67 when he called and the number she was given to call was his sister's number. Whether she believed that or not I don't know, but those are the facts in terms of the phone calls.

 

[missy1974]

I just posted this in another thread and thought it would be of more interest in this thread. (so many threads LOL)

Day 1, page 128 ... opening statements:

5 What we do know is that someone sees her

6 later. And Steven Avery calls her later, as a

7 matter of fact, from his cell phone. Again, he

8 calls her cell phone at about 4:35 that

9 afternoon. Why, because he thought, I have got

10 another car I would like to sell. I might as

11 well, if she's still around, or if she can swing

12 back, I might as well have her shoot that one

13 too.

14 But he doesn't get an answer from her,

15 doesn't answer the phone, when he calls at 4:35.

16 He sticks around.

So that is as close as we are going to get to an explanation. Strang goes on to say that Jodi called a land line phone at 5:30 and 9pm. There is another answer, yes he did have a land line, which I think most of us assumed since Jodi had to call collect and you can't call a cell collect.

 

[MysticJynx]

1. To what extent are the 3 phone calls important in ascertaining Steven Avery's guilt?
2. What are the implications of using *67?
3. What are your thoughts/theories on the last 13 sec, non *67 call?

I find it weird that on SA's bill it says that call at 4:35 the call lasted 00 seconds. However on TH's bill it states that call was 13 seconds long. Is this odd? How do you think this happens?

 

[Sinsaint]

It was reported all over the news right after she went missing. If you look at the old thread here from 2005, it is mentioned several times. Not sure if had been proven in court or not.

So we should assume Avery called her and left a message asking why she never showed up to create doubt she was ever there. Then he does interviews on television saying she was there. If he had left a "Hey, why didn't you show up yet?" message he wouldn't have done interviews admitting she had been there.

 

[missy1974]

I find it weird that on SA's bill it says that call at 4:35 the call lasted 00 seconds. However on TH's bill it states that call was 13 seconds long. Is this odd? How do you think this happens?

I think it was on reddit where I read a theory that .... he called ,it went right to voicemail so he hung up, (0 seconds on his end?), on her end because it connected to the VM, it took 13 seconds to disconnect? I can't think of any reason it would record differently like that... then again.... we don't have the actual records, we have a word document to look at LOL

 

[MysticJynx]

I think it was on reddit where I read a theory that .... he called ,it went right to voicemail so he hung up, (0 seconds on his end?), on her end because it connected to the VM, it took 13 seconds to disconnect? I can't think of any reason it would record differently like that... then again.... we don't have the actual records, we have a word document to look at LOL

But the one that didn't connect at 2:35pm doesn't reflect on her bill. I don't know maybe a human error typing out the document we see.

 

[Sustained]

If Avery wants to continue to charge law enforcement with malfeasance, provide concrete proof of that claim. If Avery wants to claim that his two brothers were the "real" murderers, provide tangible evidence of their involvement. Avery's task becomes even more daunting when you include logic into the legal equation. Who requested that Halbach photograph a vehicle on the Avery compound? Who called Halbach's place of business not once, but twice using Star 67? Who called Halbach's place of business a third time AFTER Halbach was murdered and asked why she didn't show up for the photography session? Wasn't that caller the SAME person who admitted to local reporters AND Nancy Grace that Halbach DID show up for the photography session?

Was there testimony in court that Avery called Auto Trader @ 4:35 PM on 10/31 and asked why TH did not show up ? I thought he had called TH to see if she could come back and photograph another vehicle the Avery clan had for sale ? Do you know for a fact if Steven used *67 on the majority of his calls on other days ?

 

[Murtagh21]

SUSTAINED: The Star 67 ruse was presented in detail during closing arguments and, if memory serves, testimony about those three calls (e.g., two Star 67 calls and singular call at 4:35 PM) was provided by the receptionist who worked for Halbach's employer. Avery used his sister's name as the contact person during those two Star 67 calls, and the ruse was corroborated by Halbach's call to her employer stating that she didn't know the exact location of the Avery photo shoot. Halbach had been out to the Avery residence 5 times in the past, so why did she state that she had no idea where the photo shoot was located? Logic dictates that Halbach had no idea where Avery's sister lived on the Avery compound.

In regards to Avery's prior calls to Halbach's employer, he never used Star 67 when requesting Halbach to photograph a vehicle on his property. It's important to note that from 10/31/05 to 11/5/05, the vehicle Halbach photographed remained in the SAME LOCATION on Avery's property. Avery never moved that vehicle to the section of the compound where other cars were for sale. The whole purpose of that photo session was to sell that vehicle at the Avery compound, yet Avery decided to keep it apart from where other vehicles had been photographed for Auto Trader magazine.

 

[Sustained]

SUSTAINED: The Star 67 ruse was presented in detail during closing arguments and, if memory serves, testimony about those three calls (e.g., two Star 67 calls and singular call at 4:35 PM) was provided by the receptionist who worked for Halbach's employer. Avery used his sister's name as the contact person during those two Star 67 calls, and the ruse was corroborated by Halbach's call to her employer stating that she didn't know the exact location of the Avery photo shoot. Halbach had been out to the Avery residence 5 times in the past, so why did she state that she had no idea where the photo shoot was located? Logic dictates that Halbach had no idea where Avery's sister lived on the Avery compound.

In regards to Avery's prior calls to Halbach's employer, he never used Star 67 when requesting Halbach to photograph a vehicle on his property. It's important to note that from 10/31/05 to 11/5/05, the vehicle Halbach photographed remained in the SAME LOCATION on Avery's property. Avery never moved that vehicle to the section of the compound where other cars were for sale. The whole purpose of that photo session was to sell that vehicle at the Avery compound, yet Avery decided to keep it apart from where other vehicles had been photographed for Auto Trader magazine.

The 4:35 call was placed directly to Teresa's cell phone, not the receptionist @ Auto Trader. And as far as having the van out on the road leading to the Dassey and SA's homes, so what ? In actuality, he made it easier for Teresa to pull in and take some quick pics, rather than having to go back deeper into the salvage yard. Proves nothing ....

 

[Murtagh21]

SUSTAINED: Thanks for clarifying the context of the 4:35 call. Speaking of context, the FACT that the vehicle that Avery wanted to sell remained in the SAME location for 5 days, is just a small piece of a much larger puzzle. Again, Avery is attempting to use a photograph placed in Auto Trader magazine as a way to sell that vehicle, yet he doesn't move that vehicle to the appropriate location? It is similar to his moving Halbach's vehicle a stone's throw away from the crusher, yet he ultimately decides to take the plates off the car, lock the vehicle, and cover it up with yard debris.

The Netflix documentary makes a concerted effort to "prove" that Avery's blood was planted in 6 locations inside Halbach's vehicle. They give a half-hearted effort in playing fair by including the testimony of Deputy O'Conner and Detective Remiker in regards to protecting the scene where Halbach's vehicle was found. What the audience is unaware of is that prior to the forensic team arriving at the Avery compound, FOUR officers were in charge of protecting that particular crime scene.

In addition to O'Conner and Remiker, Sergeant Orth and Lieutenant Hermann guarded Halbach's vehicle. To a man, they testified that NO person entered Halbach's vehicle prior to the Calumet County forensic team arriving at the scene. The vehicle was locked when Pam Sturm and her daughter Nikole first discovered the vehicle and Halbach's key had not yet been discovered.

The LOCKED vehicle is then transported to a garage in Madison, photographs are taken of the outside of the vehicle on the 6th, and then the forensic team has to open the vehicle without the use of a key in order to photograph the inside of the car on the 7th. Logic and chain of custody proves that no rogue officer or officers had access to the inside of that LOCKED vehicle PRIOR to the discovery of Avery's blood inside that vehicle.

 

[Sustained]

SUSTAINED: Thanks for clarifying the context of the 4:35 call. Speaking of context, the FACT that the vehicle that Avery wanted to sell remained in the SAME location for 5 days, is just a small piece of a much larger puzzle. Again, Avery is attempting to use a photograph placed in Auto Trader magazine as a way to sell that vehicle, yet he doesn't move that vehicle to the appropriate location? It is similar to his moving Halbach's vehicle a stone's throw away from the crusher, yet he ultimately decides to take the plates off the car, lock the vehicle, and cover it up with yard debris.

The Netflix documentary makes a concerted effort to "prove" that Avery's blood was planted in 6 locations inside Halbach's vehicle. They give a half-hearted effort in playing fair by including the testimony of Deputy O'Conner and Detective Remiker in regards to protecting the scene where Halbach's vehicle was found. What the audience is unaware of is that prior to the forensic team arriving at the Avery compound, FOUR officers were in charge of protecting that particular crime scene.

In addition to O'Conner and Remiker, Sergeant Orth and Lieutenant Hermann guarded Halbach's vehicle. To a man, they testified that NO person entered Halbach's vehicle prior to the Calumet County forensic team arriving at the scene. The vehicle was locked when Pam Sturm and her daughter Nikole first discovered the vehicle and Halbach's key had not yet been discovered.

The LOCKED vehicle is then transported to a garage in Madison, photographs are taken of the outside of the vehicle on the 6th, and then the forensic team has to open the vehicle without the use of a key in order to photograph the inside of the car on the 7th. Logic and chain of custody proves that no rogue officer or officers had access to the inside of that LOCKED vehicle PRIOR to the discovery of Avery's blood inside that vehicle.

Once again, the chain of custody means absolutely nothing on the RAV4 when it was found on the Avery lot. If blood evidence was planted, it could have easily been done overnight under the cover of darkness before Pam Sturm "found" it and when the Avery's were up at the cabin in Crivitz.

Oh, and how do we know the key found in Avery's bedroom was not the SPARE key and someone else had the working set TH was using ?

 

[BigCityAccountant]

If you're going to keep stating that he called her and left a message asking where she was after she left as fact, then we have nothing more to discuss. That is a myth, there is no verification, it was something Kratz threw out there as a theory to explain that call which, for all we know, was him calling to ask her to come back another time to take photos of another vehicle. We don't know why that call was made.

Do you believe Schmitz was attempting to "disguise" who he was by giving another name when he made the appointment?

From Strang's opening statements from the trial transcripts:

Steven Avery calls her later, as a
7 matter of fact, from his cell phone. Again, he
8 calls her cell phone at about 4:35 that
9 afternoon. Why, because he thought, I have got
10 another car I would like to sell. I might as
11 well, if she's still around, or if she can swing
12 back, I might as well have her shoot that one
13 too.
14 But he doesn't get an answer from her,
15 doesn't answer the phone, when he calls at 4:35.
Page 128

 

[MysticJynx]

Agreed. That has never really been explained. I thought of that a while back....just going off of what was either reported or in the 2005 thread. me=:lamb:

From Strang's opening statements from the trial transcripts:

Steven Avery calls her later, as a
7 matter of fact, from his cell phone. Again, he
8 calls her cell phone at about 4:35 that
9 afternoon. Why, because he thought, I have got
10 another car I would like to sell. I might as
11 well, if she's still around, or if she can swing
12 back, I might as well have her shoot that one
13 too.
14 But he doesn't get an answer from her,
15 doesn't answer the phone, when he calls at 4:35.
Page 128

4:35pm Steve calls Teresa w/no *67 feature and her bill reflects a 13 second call, however his phone reflect the call not even going through at 00 seconds.
*Exhibits 362, 360 and 381

This says to me that he did indeed call her at 4:35pm and when he on his line got her VM he hung up, her line continued to pick up a the voicemail outgoing message, that was probably at least what 13 seconds long?

Also Opening statements are just a guide of what the parties intend to show the jury as evidence, to meet their openings claims. These Openings and the Closings are not evidence.

 

[missy1974]

I was just reading this testimony and commenting on the testimony thread of day 2. The Account number that was on that slip was just made, because the receptionist DP didn't bother to look into the name address and number as she clearly knew he was a reoccurring customer since she testified that he wanted the same photographer as BEFORE, she decided to just appoint it another account number a new one. And on that note she knew as maybe her reoccurring customers did that she was the ONLY photographer for that area. Only making appointments on Mondays. He also did not ask for TH by name. So really how did she know, other than the area code of the number he gave that he was even talking about TH? DP claims she did not know this customer.

ahhh yes, I stand corrected!
I just read your post over there.... I have a question, not necessarily for you LOL I think I'm on information overload! LOL

If she left the message on BJ's answer machine and on the message she said she could be there around 2 or later and just needed to know if that worked, who called her back to let her know that the time would work? His first call to her was after 2pm right? so until that call, she didn't have confirmation that the time was good.... I'm leaning towards the 3:30ish time starting to sound way more plausible. (I have been debating this in my mind lol)