Steven Avery: Guilty of Teresa Halbach's Murder?

[BigCityAccountant]

From everything I've read, the alibi theory/narrative is predicated on the prosecution's timeline. Bobby Dassey sees Teresa taking pictures at his uncle's residence at 2:30 PM, he takes a shower, and then sees Teresa and his uncle walking towards his uncle's residence between 2:40-2:45 PM. Phone records demonstrate that after 2:41 PM, Teresa's phone is never used again. Blaine Dassey sees his uncle place a plastic bag into a burn barrel, he subsquently sees fire coming from inside the barrel at 3:46 PM, and he doesn't see Teresa's vehicle on the premises. Avery then calls Teresa's cell phone at 4:35 PM.

The prosecution postulates that if Teresa was alive between the hours of 2:42 PM and 3:46 PM, she would have had her cell phone with her and she would have used it in some form or fashion. The fact she had not used her phone by 4:34 PM raises the question as to Avery's rationale for leaving a 13 second voice mail message? If Avery wanted to schedule another appointment, why not broach the subject with Teresa when she was on his property? I believe he felt safe calling her cell phone two hours after she arrived at his property. Avery had already destroyed the cell phone in his burn barrel, so he knew that law enforcement could never prove the context of his voice mail message.

IMO, Avery initially thought he could use this 4:35 call as a way of distancing himself from Teresa. For whatever reason, he decided not to mention the 4:35 call to investigators and he went with the following narrative... She came to my property, she took pictures of the van, she give me an Auto Trader magazine/bill of sale, and then she drove away a little while later. Avery had to think fast because he had no idea when Teresa would be reported missing. Ergo, the destruction of her body/personal belongings, cleaning the garage with bleach, and moving/obscuring her vehicle in a matter of hours.

Let me first start out by saying, I think SA is guilty. Although, I think there is a problem with the timeline. I don't think she got there before 3:00 pm, my guess is about 3:10pm. She made a call to Zipperer's at 2:13 pm as she was lost trying to find the house. GZ's wife confirms she left a message on their answering machine. That would means she was in the area of the Zipperer's at that time. If it took her a few minutes to take the pictures of the Zipperer's car, then she wouldn't be done until closer to 2:30pm (most likely when she talked to her office) It would take anywhere from 15-20 minutes to get to the Avery property once the GZ pictures were taken. That brings us to 2:45pm to 2:50pm. But---she never received confirmation from B Janda that they were going to be home--so why would she go there. We know she did. But if you look at her cell phone records, the ICell's that are closest to her house all start with 211, but when she calls Zipperer's she is in ICell 219. The very last call she is again in ICell 211, which to me means at one point she was headed home. If that is the case, at 2:41pm when SA calls, she could have very well turned around and went back to the Avery property. We know from his phone records--she didn't answer the call, but we don't know--if she had a change of heart--and decided to turn around and go to Avery's, where she assumes the 2:41pm restricted call came from B Janda. After all, she had received a restricted call at 2:24pm that she did answer, where the call could have dropped due to poor cell service. So, if that is the case, by 2:41pm she was about 10-15 minutes south of GZ, and that would have been a a 35 minute ride back up to Avery's place. 2:41pm + 35 minutes puts her at Avery's property about 3:05pm or 3:10pm. That is consistent with the statement by the bus driver, who claims to have seen her there at 3:30pm.

http://stevenaverycase.com/steven-avery-phone-call-records#sthash.bE1ER5SJ.dpbs

 

[Brookita478]

Could school have been released early per chance because of Halloween?
We sometimes have early dismissal days here because of holidays, professional days, sports etc. maybe an early dismissal made the bus drivers timeline off?

 

[Sinsaint]

Could school have been released early per chance because of Halloween?
We sometimes have early dismissal days here because of holidays, professional days, sports etc. maybe an early dismissal made the bus drivers timeline off?

I haven't read the transcripts of testimony of the bus driver but other people have commented that the bus driver admitted she could be wrong about the day she saw Teresa taking pictures.

 

[missy1974]

Could school have been released early per chance because of Halloween?
We sometimes have early dismissal days here because of holidays, professional days, sports etc. maybe an early dismissal made the bus drivers timeline off?

I thought the same thing weeks ago! LOL From the school district website I found that they have "early release" on Wednesday's. I really don't feel like looking it up again because I had to use the way back machine, so you will have to take my word for it ;-)

 

[Brookita478]

I thought the same thing weeks ago! LOL From the school district website I found that they have "early release" on Wednesday's. I really don't feel like looking it up again because I had to use the way back machine, so you will have to take my word for it ;-)

Lol. We have early release on Mondays. My kids walk home and tney have surprised me a couple times walking in at 2. It's easy to forget.

 

[Murtagh21]

SUSTAINED: The duration of Avery's 4:35 PM voice mail message was resolved on Day 12 of the trial. Buting initially tried to argue that the duration was 0 seconds, but after some witness clarification, it was determined that the duration of Avery's message was 13 seconds.

 

[ElleElle]

It was a 0 second phone call on his end which means that theory isn't based on fact.

If she is in a no-cell tower tower zone, her phone would not ring and go directly into voicemail.

 

[missy1974]

SUSTAINED: The duration of Avery's 4:35 PM voice mail message was resolved on Day 12 of the trial. Buting initially tried to argue that the duration was 0 seconds, but after some witness clarification, it was determined that the duration of Avery's message was 13 seconds.

yeah, his bill was really weird LOL it was something like .12, which actually meant 12% of a minute (which is 7.2 seconds lol), not 12 seconds. It was goofy LOL

 

[Murtagh21]

SOURCE: Avery Trial Day 12 Beginning on page 218

KRATZ: After 2:41 p.m., on the 31st of October, has Ms Halbach's phone ever again, as this exhibit shows you, receive or send a phone message?

DOHRWARDT: No

KRATZ: So the 4:35 call, specifically, do you see that on there?

DOHRWARDT: Yes.

KRATZ: Says 13 seconds; is that right?

DOHRWARDT: Yes.

KRATZ: But do you see a cell tower that's associated with that?

DOHRWARDT: No.

KRATZ: What does that tell you?

DOHRWARDT: That tells me that the duration was spent in voice mail.

 

[Sustained]

SUSTAINED: The duration of Avery's 4:35 PM voice mail message was resolved on Day 12 of the trial. Buting initially tried to argue that the duration was 0 seconds, but after some witness clarification, it was determined that the duration of Avery's message was 13 seconds.

And what did that 13 second voicemail say ?

 

[missy1974]

And what did that 13 second voicemail say ?

ask Ryan or Mike? hehehe

 

[ElleElle]

ask Ryan or Mike? hehehe

Touche!

 

[BigCityAccountant]

I thought the same thing weeks ago! LOL From the school district website I found that they have "early release" on Wednesday's. I really don't feel like looking it up again because I had to use the way back machine, so you will have to take my word for it ;-)

So are you saying you think the timeline placing her at Avery's at 2:45pm is correct?

 

[missy1974]

So are you saying you think the timeline placing her at Avery's at 2:45pm is correct?

IMO I'm not convinced by Bobby Dasey or the bus driver/propane guy.

Propane guy just remembers seeing an SUV that was similar though, so he could have, and it wasn't TH's. Or he could have and it was TH's.... but he didn't see the driver.

I also don't know if I can believe Dawn from AutoTrader LOL

So in the end, I'm left not really knowing when she was there. I do not even know if I am convinced she was at Zipperer's before or after Avery's.

Yep, I don't have a clue LOL

 

[Sinsaint]

SOURCE: Avery Trial Day 12 Beginning on page 218

KRATZ: After 2:41 p.m., on the 31st of October, has Ms Halbach's phone ever again, as this exhibit shows you, receive or send a phone message?

DOHRWARDT: No

KRATZ: So the 4:35 call, specifically, do you see that on there?

DOHRWARDT: Yes.

KRATZ: Says 13 seconds; is that right?

DOHRWARDT: Yes.

KRATZ: But do you see a cell tower that's associated with that?

DOHRWARDT: No.

KRATZ: What does that tell you?

DOHRWARDT: That tells me that the duration was spent in voice mail.

That only means her phone went straight to voicemail... 13 seconds of "Hi. You've reached Teresa. Please leave...." Avery's phone registered a 0 second call, meaning while her phone went through the normal diatribe he hung up.

 

[dexter75]

I already told ya giiirrrl,
it's gonna be a doozie of a case once KZ has it all figured out, IMO.
:busted:

IMO I'm not convinced by Bobby Dasey or the bus driver/propane guy.

Propane guy just remembers seeing an SUV that was similar though, so he could have, and it wasn't TH's. Or he could have and it was TH's.... but he didn't see the driver.

I also don't know if I can believe Dawn from AutoTrader LOL

So in the end, I'm left not really knowing when she was there. I do not even know if I am convinced she was at Zipperer's before or after Avery's.

Yep, I don't have a clue LOL

 

[ilovewings]

I am convinced he committed the murder; and that he intimidated his nephew into participating. I also think the police wanted to be darn sure that he was convicted, so helped out with some evidence. The main concern at this point for me is what I feel is unfair tactics with Brendan.

I agree with your thoughts and unfair tactics with Brendan

 

[dannysbroom]

That is what I am wondering too, makes No sense

 

[LifeCitizen]

Hi everyone, I'm a newbie here and to this case and like many others have just binge watched Making a Murderer.
I love true crime and a case hasn't grabbed me quite like this one for ages- the last case that grabbed me was the Sylvia Likens [cold] case.

This one is a real mystery- a guy who has already lost 18 years of his life for a crime he didn't commit in small town America, incest, an inbred backwards family, questionable evidence, crooked cops, changed testimonies, lying on the stand, - I'm fascinated!

I felt like I knew Avery was innocent [framed] after watching. So I came online and have been looking at this and that- transcripts, YouTube interviews etc. And now I don't know who killed poor Teresa.

I voted 'undecided,but believe a new trial is in order'.

I guess where I'm at is- I don't know if SA did it, I think the whole freaking family are weird with very low IQ's.
I don't think SA is a nice a person as the doco paints him- who runs someone (a relative even) off the road and points a gun at them (even if it wasn't loaded)? I've also seen bits of letters he wrote where he's acting like a psycho and threatening to kill someone (iirc his ex wife, but I could be wrong).

I'd like to know more about the creepy brothers Earl and Charles.
Bobby Dassey and Scott Tadych interest me too.
The ex boyfriend Ryan seemed edgy in court and I found myself not liking him from the few minutes I saw him on the stand. First thoughts were, wow she was way too good for him but hey, love is blind. lol. Also, him organising the search plays on my mind.

I think at this stage, the onlything that makes me think it wasn't SA is his attorneys. I really liked both of them. I didn't like Kratz at all, and wasn't surprised when the sexting scandalcame up.
Strang and Buting have spent countless hours with SA- I kinda trust that they would know if he was guilty. They've spent hours with him, witnessed his body language etc. As an armchair sleuth, I haven't.

There's so much we as the public don't know, but first hunches- it was maybe someone (or someones) in the Avery family and they set SA up.

 

[Madeleine74]

Hi everyone, I'm a newbie here and to this case and like many others have just binge watched Making a Murderer.
I love true crime and a case hasn't grabbed me quite like this one for ages- the last case that grabbed me was the Sylvia Likens [cold] case.

Welcome to your new crack addiction! ;-D

Strang and Buting have spent countless hours with SA- I kinda trust that they would know if he was guilty. They've spent hours with him, witnessed his body language etc.

They were hired by SA and were paid hundreds of thousands for their services. Providing a vigorous defense for their client is their ethical responsibility. They might believe he's innocent or they might have their doubts, but they surely don't know unless their client confessed to them, as they weren't there while the crime was committed. I heard most defense attorneys never ask their clients if they did it (source: verified attorneys AZlawyer and GritGuy). Strang and Buting's professional responsibility was to advocate for their client to the best of their ability, and that they did and quite well.