Brendan Dassey's Habeas Corpus Petition Granted

[Limaes]

Duffin overturned the conviction and stated BD's constitutional rights were violated. So, according to the law, he is now considered innocent. I am not a lawyer but to me, that means "not guilty".

Duffin's decision states he believes BD confessed involuntarily. His decision is not final and at this present time that decision has been stayed so I'm not sure why you are claiming he is not guilty in the eyes of the law.

 

[Limaes]

One doesn't need a law degree to know you are correct, COOLJ, knowing the definition of " overturn " http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/overturn would be helpful I ( for those who might not know what it means )

Might be helpful to look up the definition of stayed too.

 

[Karinna]

Duffin's decision states he believes BD confessed involuntarily. His decision is not final and at this present time that decision has been stayed so I'm not sure why you are claiming he is not guilty in the eyes of the law.

I would think because BD's involuntary confession was deemed as coerced, so not true and can't be considered? Why would the Judge overturn his conviction otherwise?

 

[Karinna]

So the State should be filing their brief today in the Seventh Circuit. I am not expecting them to ask for an extension, considering they wanted Judge Duffin to rule quickly on the Supplementing the record motion, and their reason was because they needed to file by October 19th.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/0p3omr9ifyjsqub/32-main.pdf?dl=0
Respondent also respectfully requests this Court to expedite the motion and dispose of it before October 19, 2016, the date by which the State must file its brief-in-chief in the Seventh Circuit. Therefore, the State proposes that this Court order Dassey to file his response to this motion, if any, by October 12, 2016

I have to go to work but will be watching for it Have a great day websleuthers!

ETA: It's also BD's birthday!

Hope you have a wonderful day too missy.
And i hope Brendan has a nice day and will be celebrating at home soon with his family.

 

[CoolJ]

Duffin's decision states he believes BD confessed involuntarily. His decision is not final and at this present time that decision has been stayed so I'm not sure why you are claiming he is not guilty in the eyes of the law.

So the latest decision is not final, but the original verdict of guilty IS final? Sounds like you are picking and choosing who and what you want to believe?

The guilty verdict has been overturned. He is now presumed innocent.<modsnip>

 

[missy1974]

The States Appeal
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-c...States-Appeal-and-Short-Appendix_10-19-16.pdf

Separate Appendix to the Appeal
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-c.../Separate-Appendix-to-States-Appeal-Brief.pdf

I have read up to the first 2 paragraphs of the "Introduction". I'm already shaking my head. JMO

 

[missy1974]

I am on page 9 of the appeal... page 15 of the document.


All of the words quoted above come from Dassey&#8217;s confession.3

3. The narrative recounts details from Dassey&#8217;s confession in the most likely timeline,
consistent with the other evidence presented at trial. Infra pp. 19&#8211;20. It is possible that some
parts of the story are out of order. For example, it is not certain whether Dassey and Avery
tied up Halbach before, SA 69, 114, or after, SA 72, they stabbed, cut, and choked her. It is
also not clear whether Avery backed the jeep into his garage after they carried her body out,
SA 87, or if the jeep was already in the garage, SA 116. And when precisely Dassey initially
left Avery&#8217;s trailer and returned home, see R.19-35:5&#8212;before coming back to complete the
crimes&#8212;is not certain. Dassey most likely left before raping Halbach, given that Avery had
been interrupted (he was &#8220;sweaty,&#8221; SA 58) and &#8220;want[ed] to keep on doing it.&#8221; SA 60.

BBM ~ there was absolutely no evidence to back up BD's "story", none! No blood in the trailer, no marks on the bedposts (were there even bedposts at the foot of the bed?), no handcuffs with TH's DNA, not a drop of blood of TH's in the trailer or garage.

 

[dexter75]

I am on page 9 of the appeal... page 15 of the document.


All of the words quoted above come from Dassey&#8217;s confession.3

3. The narrative recounts details from Dassey&#8217;s confession in the most likely timeline,
consistent with the other evidence presented at trial. Infra pp. 19&#8211;20. It is possible that some
parts of the story are out of order. For example, it is not certain whether Dassey and Avery
tied up Halbach before, SA 69, 114, or after, SA 72, they stabbed, cut, and choked her. It is
also not clear whether Avery backed the jeep into his garage after they carried her body out,
SA 87, or if the jeep was already in the garage, SA 116. And when precisely Dassey initially
left Avery&#8217;s trailer and returned home, see R.19-35:5&#8212;before coming back to complete the
crimes&#8212;is not certain. Dassey most likely left before raping Halbach, given that Avery had
been interrupted (he was &#8220;sweaty,&#8221; SA 58) and &#8220;want[ed] to keep on doing it.&#8221; SA 60.

BBM ~ there was absolutely no evidence to back up BD's "story", none! No blood in the trailer, no marks on the bedposts (were there even bedposts at the foot of the bed?), no handcuffs with TH's DNA, not a drop of blood of TH's in the trailer or garage.

Pardon my asking, my dear friend..but was there ever a TEAM..an ACTUAL " FORENSICS TEAM " ..or whatever that county has, who went into this TRAILER and actually COMB the place for BLOOD, HAIRS, SKIN, DNA, ( " sweat " or otherwise ) FIBERS from TH's infamous JEANS/CLOTHES, etc.??
You know? Thoroughly investigated ALL that was " confessed "

 

[missy1974]

Pardon my asking, my dear friend..but was there ever a TEAM..an ACTUAL " FORENSICS TEAM " ..or whatever that county has, who went into this TRAILER and actually COMB the place for BLOOD, HAIRS, SKIN, DNA, ( " sweat " or otherwise ) FIBERS from TH's infamous JEANS/CLOTHES, etc.??
You know? Thoroughly investigated ALL that was " confessed "

I would have to go back into the documents to find out exactly who collected what.... but eventually, they literally took the wall panelling, baseboards, carpet and of course other things, but still no DNA from TH. The only thing that had any hint of DNA was the "magic bullet", and even that should be questioned. IMO

:wave: dexter.... nice to "see" you

 

[dexter75]

The States Appeal
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-c...States-Appeal-and-Short-Appendix_10-19-16.pdf

Separate Appendix to the Appeal
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-c.../Separate-Appendix-to-States-Appeal-Brief.pdf

I have read up to the first 2 paragraphs of the "Introduction". I'm already shaking my head. JMO

My blood is boiling..as they compare case after case..making it seem as though " Brendan had it so easy. We did NOTHING wrong here "
PFFFFT...makes me wonder how in the HELL the other youngins were treated & how PATHETIC it is that these lawyers feel that actions at the time were justified..JMO

 

[dexter75]

I would have to go back into the documents to find out exactly who collected what.... but eventually, they literally took the wall panelling, baseboards, carpet and of course other things, but still no DNA from TH. The only thing that had any hint of DNA was the "magic bullet", and even that should be questioned. IMO

:wave: dexter.... nice to "see" you

I thought so...smh!! Good to see you too!!:wave::wink:

 

[missy1974]

Throughout the interview, the investigators used primarily broad, open-ended
questions and let Dassey tell his story until they sensed that he was being dishonest
or was withholding something. E.g., SA 31. Then they stopped, told Dassey they
thought he was leaving something out, told him &#8220;it&#8217;s ok&#8221; or they &#8220;already knew&#8221; what
happened, and encouraged honesty. E.g., SA 36&#8211;37. The investigators backtracked
and used leading questions to walk through the story Dassey had already told, up to
the point they wanted to focus on. Once there, they again encouraged honesty. E.g.,
SA 37. When Dassey admitted a new piece of the story, the investigators reverted to
open-ended questions, allowing Dassey to provide more details until they again
sensed something missing. E.g., SA 39. The investigators repeated this process multiple
times until they had the whole story.


This is how they explain feeding Brendan the information.... ya know like this open-ended question: All right, I&#8217;m just gonna come out and ask you. Who shot her in the head?

 

[dexter75]

I wasn't talking about precedents with other cases as far as citing how the law was applied in those cases. I'm talking about using Kevin Fox's wrongful conviction for example, as evidence in this case. KF will have no bearing on the court's decision.

I had to read this twice to be sure I was reading this correctly.
Why would anyone, or... the court for that matter....think KF would have " bearing " or use KF's wrongful conviction as evidence?

 

[Limaes]

So the latest decision is not final, but the original verdict of guilty IS final? Sounds like you are picking and choosing who and what you want to believe?

The guilty verdict has been overturned. He is now presumed innocent. <modsnip>

I have stated previously that regardless of what Duffin's decision was, it wasn't over. If he overturned the conviction, the State would appeal. If his decision was not in BD's favour, his attorneys would appeal. So no, it is not over. It is not me who is picking and choosing what I want to believe.

 

[dexter75]

Might be helpful to look up the definition of stayed too.

I was commenting to CoolJ, re; overturned conviction. I apologize if you took that personal, again, Limaes.
Stayed, stayed.. YES, I do believe I know the definition. ( answering since you suggested it, to ME ) Last I thought, it means everything is pretty much on HOLD.
As it stands, BD was found guilty, that verdict was " overturned " because in Duffin's eye's Brendan's rights were violated, his " confession " was coerced. As of now the " stay " is to keep him there until the appeal process is finished.

I'll leave this here for those that might not know..( I'm helpful that way )
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/stay

 

[Limaes]

Pardon my asking, my dear friend..but was there ever a TEAM..an ACTUAL " FORENSICS TEAM " ..or whatever that county has, who went into this TRAILER and actually COMB the place for BLOOD, HAIRS, SKIN, DNA, ( " sweat " or otherwise ) FIBERS from TH's infamous JEANS/CLOTHES, etc.??
You know? Thoroughly investigated ALL that was " confessed "

The trial transcripts contain some interesting information. For example, at BD's trial, investigators explained that they found literally thousands of hairs in SA's trailer. It would have taken them years to test them all let alone find one that still had the root attached to make it testable. Even more interesting is that many were found in his vacuum and carpet cleaner.

 

[dexter75]

Throughout the interview, the investigators used primarily broad, open-ended
questions and let Dassey tell his story until they sensed that he was being dishonest
or was withholding something. E.g., SA 31. Then they stopped, told Dassey they
thought he was leaving something out, told him &#8220;it&#8217;s ok&#8221; or they &#8220;already knew&#8221; what
happened, and encouraged honesty. E.g., SA 36&#8211;37. The investigators backtracked
and used leading questions to walk through the story Dassey had already told, up to
the point they wanted to focus on. Once there, they again encouraged honesty. E.g.,
SA 37. When Dassey admitted a new piece of the story, the investigators reverted to
open-ended questions, allowing Dassey to provide more details until they again
sensed something missing. E.g., SA 39. The investigators repeated this process multiple
times until they had the whole story.


This is how they explain feeding Brendan the information.... ya know like this open-ended question: All right, I&#8217;m just gonna come out and ask you. Who shot her in the head?

Open ended questions my:behind: UGH...Makes me wannauke:

 

[Limaes]

I had to read this twice to be sure I was reading this correctly.
Why would anyone, or... the court for that matter....think KF would have " bearing " or use KF's wrongful conviction as evidence?

I ask myself that all the time. Why do SA & BD supporters bring up cases of wrongful conviction? You only have to go back a couple of pages on this thread. There is one post containing about dozen names including KF. It is a pointless exercise, imo. It has nothing to do with the evidence in this case.

I feel very sorry for Teresa's family that her murder is being used as a platform for wrongful convictions. I'm all for those who are wrongfully convicted being exonerated. I am against this case being used as the platform. The evidence, imo, dictates that they were both lawfully convicted.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

The States Appeal
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-c...States-Appeal-and-Short-Appendix_10-19-16.pdf

Separate Appendix to the Appeal
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-c.../Separate-Appendix-to-States-Appeal-Brief.pdf

I have read up to the first 2 paragraphs of the "Introduction". I'm already shaking my head. JMO

IMHO, it seems to me like they are just rehashing the same old stuff. Conveniently, leaving out parts of his confession that don't fit "their" narrative. Oh, that would be the parts in which "they" believe he lied. You know the change of story, time and time again was left out~~just included the parts that fit their narrative.

I wonder what his confession would sound like if it was read based off only his first statements? Maybe, I'll go back and do that and post it here.

 

[dexter75]

IMHO, it seems to me like they are just rehashing the same old stuff. Conveniently, leaving out parts of his confession that don't fit "their" narrative. Oh, that would be the parts in which "they" believe he lied. You know the change of story, time and time again was left out~~just included the parts that fit their narrative.

I wonder what his confession would sound like if it was read based off only his first statements? Maybe, I'll go back and do that and post it here.

OMG..BCA, My hubby and I were discussing this very idea:loveyou:
Interesting to see for sure!!