Let's talk about the cat ...

[shadowraiths]

As I've previously stated, it takes a certain kind of person to douse a cat in gas and oil, and toss it on a fire. And that sort of person is, for the most part, not a nice person. So, rather than focusing upon that, I want to focus upon what was revealed in the following report. Which, thanks to Jaiddie, caught my eye. So, I had to go find it. It's on the steven avery document site, of course.

In the youtube video, the commenter was pointing out inconsistencies that he noticed in Ken Kratz recent interview... which were many.

However, I want to use this thread to focus specifically upon the cat incident.

That said, here's the screen cap of the case:

Judgement of Conviction 1982 Animal Cruelty

Judgement of Conviction 1982 Animal Cruelty​

Please carefully read the above. I, personally, have a very strong opinion, now that I've actually had the opportunity to read what is in the court record as opposed to the two versions (Avery and Kratz). However, before commenting, I am quite interested in hearing other's take, and seeing if they see what I see. And no, am not trying to be tease. Just want to see if others see it before I post what I'm seeing...

Hope that makes sense and thanks in advance!

 

[missy1974]

I'm not sure what you are "seeing" shadowraiths. When this was first released, the only things that stood out to me was.... #1 Peterson was involved #2 it's similar to TH, or what they wanted to be believed... burned in the bonfire.

The only other thing I found interesting was.... Peter Dassey was there.

will be interesting to see what you are "seeing" I re-read it twice... thinking I was missing something LOL

ETA: I guess I also wonder why Jerry Yanda "reported" it to the dept.... basically tattled on himself lol who does that?

 

[LifeCitizen]

I wondered who reported the cat incident!

Avery and Peterson go way back then.

lol Missy, apparently Yanda haha.

 

[missy1974]

also interesting to note..... I checked the court records. Jerry L. Yanda was not charged for this, although he was a party to the crime according to the report.... and well, according to himself, cuz he tattled on himself LOL geesh, was this a set up too? LOL

 

[LifeCitizen]

More chlorine needed in the gene pool around 'dem parts. lol.

I actually feel mean saying that, but jesus what a mess. That's one of the biggest reasons I don't think SA did it- he just doesn't have the smarts to have made it look like he was framed and to me, I think it looks like someone framed him.

 

[katydid23]

It makes me think he was guilty of killing her. Anyone who could douse their pet cat in gasoline and throw them in the fire---they are capable of anything.

He never denied doing this, as far as I know.

 

[missy1974]

I don't want to be dismissive of the cat incident... because I think that animal abuse can be a sign of some serious mental issues, and some of these people later do become violent criminals.

That being said... I have also seen people that really do see cats as a nuisance... and even rodent like, they don't see them as pets. It could be that I'm from an area that we have lots of farms/farmers. I also work at a livestock auction place... I see farmers all the time... and I have a bunch of cats there (I call them my herd haha). The farmers that come in... and the majority of the workers there (who for the most part come from a rural or farming backgrounds)... don't see them as cute little furry creatures, for the most part, they see them as a nuisance (which just irritates me). I have named all the cats and kitties.... and they keep mice out of my kitchen, so the workers don't go near the cats now... but from what I have heard, it's not always been that way and in the past they had been quite mean to them. They don't dare do it with me around now because I have made it quite clear that I will report them (cuz I'm a Biotch like that LOL) I guess my point is.... I don't think all the workers where I work are killers, or are going to be killers. At least I hope not.

I think what SA and his buddy did was awful. I don't think because it happened it means he was going to be a killer. I don't see that his buddy Jerry turned into a killer.... at least he has not self reported to Peterson that he has ... yet ;-)

 

[BigCityAccountant]

I think I know what you are referring to Shadowraths. It shows that it was recorded with the Manitowoc County Clerk on...
December 5, 2005. That would be after SA was arrested for TH's murder. However, if you look at the bottom of the page it states it was recorded with the Manitowoc County Clerk on November 23, 1982.

I also noticed Vogel was the prosecutor. Wilda was the storage room clerk. Ah...Gotcha moment? Barb's former ex-husband(s) were involved as well as Ken Peterson as well as a Lt. James Meidl. Looks like 2 former ex-husbands of Barbs were responsible for getting themselves off the line as well as getting SA put in prison. Then again, ST could be seen as embellishing his story as he went along. I see a pattern.

 

[Sarah]

Not sure what you're seeing shadowraiths - but interested to hear about it!

Quite some history there linking key players in TH's case, but for me there's also an interesting dynamic being revealed between the participants.
Seems like Dassey and Yanda had no problem reporting on SA's actions after the event, but neither thought it was a good idea to stop him / talk him down while it was happening.
It's not as if it all happened so quickly that they didn't have time. SA "suggested burning a cat", they started the fire, went to get the cat and then poured gas on it.

More questions than answers from me on this one :
Were they too afraid/intimidated by him at the time to say 'no' or 'maybe this isn't such a good idea'?
Was it all a bit of 'fun' at the time and SA was a convenient scapegoat to take the blame after it had happened?
Was there some other motive for egging SA on and letting him drop himself into a conviction?
And finally, what impact did that incident have on future relationships between the families?

 

[Madeleine74]

Horrible on every level. Sadistic, cruel, evil.

Animal cruelty should be a felony, with long prison sentences.

No excuses.

 

[Angiebla]

It makes me think he was guilty of killing her. Anyone who could douse their pet cat in gasoline and throw them in the fire---they are capable of anything.

He never denied doing this, as far as I know.

I couldn't get past the cat incident. I watched the first documentary, and about 10 minutes in they talk about it. I stopped watching it.

As a vet tech and animal lover, I couldn't help but not like the guy after that. I'm sorry, but I'm really sensitive when it comes to animal/child abuse.

 

[TheDuchess]

When I first saw your post title I was going to come on here and say that I am really sick and tired of talking about the cat, who died 34 years ago. But after reading your post, I am intrigued to hear what you see on there. Here are my observations:

1.) The penalty for the cruelty to animals was a maximum sentence of 9 months and/or $10K. Seeing as SA had no money at the time, it would appear as though they pretty much threw the book at him, since he served 7 months, from my recollection.
2.) I never realized that they actually sat and watched the cat burn to death. I've also read several different variations of the story, from SAs to Kratz's to the motion to enter it into evidence, etc...
3.) They state that Peter Dassey is simply a concerned citizen with no ulterior motive, however, he was at some point SAs brother in law and then ended up marrying SAs ex wife
4.) Who is this Yanda guy and was he married to Barb at some point? I know Barb's name was Janda at some point. Is it a typo or something?

 

[Sinsaint]

I have a different take on this. My son's uncle (Dad's side who I'm no longer with so no reason to make excuses for him) threw gas on pregnant cow and lit it on fire when he was 20, 21 maybe. Cow and calf both survived. Anyway, he went to jail for that along with B&E of the local high school and vandalism. That was back in '96.

He got out and cleaned up his act. He's married, has two children and runs his own farm/deer/wild animal sanctuary now. He raises deer, has taken in fawns that lost their mothers along with other animals that need taken care of that our local SPCA cannot take in. He has farm animals mostly but it's not uncommon for him to have ducks with broken wings or legs running around. My son jokes that when you pull into his uncle's driveway you feel like Evan Baxter because the animals flock to you. They do this because the guy who was convicted of animal cruelty loves and cares for them so well. Some wild animals can never go back to the wild since it would be too dangerous for them after so much human contact or injuries that would leave the animal helpless so he just keeps them. Three or four years ago the police found an animal hoarder... We are talking cats, dogs, a potbelly pig, lizards, turtles, birds, etc. Some animals the SPCA couldn't take in ended up with him.

Point is, he did a terrible thing. He paid for his crimes and turned his life around. I guess he was lucky because he got that opportunity. We have no idea if Avery would have redeemed himself.

 

[Madeleine74]

I hope there will be legislation in the future in each state to make the torture of animals a felony with serious consequences, not just a light prison sentence or a slap on the wrist. For animal lovers it's as bad as the torture of a child. Both are defenseless beings and hurting either is unconscionable.

 

[TheDuchess]

I hope there will be legislation in the future in each state to make the torture of animals a felony with serious consequences, not just a light prison sentence or a slap on the wrist. For animal lovers it's as bad as the torture of a child. Both are defenseless beings and hurting either is unconscionable.

As much as I abhor the cruel treatment of animals I completely reject the idea that it could ever be equated with the cruelty to a child. Animals are not humans. And to try to give an animal the level of status as a human simply lessens the value of a human life. I think that 7 months in jail for a first time offense is pretty significant. I wouldn't call that a slap on the wrist by any measure.

ETA killing an animal is not murder as much as some would love to have it be that but we eat animals. Also I've seen people get off far easier for cruelty to humans than SA did with the cat.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[missy1974]

shadowraith ~ are you going to let us in on what you read in there? LOL

 

[Madeleine74]

Murdering a child will get you life in prison and very possibly the death penalty in states that have it. As it should.

Torturing an animal should get you many years in prison, not just months. Not life in prison, not several decades, but it should be a felony, absolutely, with appropriate punishments that attach to a felony. IMO.

People with drug charges get more years in prison. Yet I can think of nothing more abhorrent than the torture and killing of a defenseless being.

 

[Sinsaint]

Murdering a child will get you life in prison and very possibly the death penalty in states that have it. As it should.

Torturing an animal should get you many years in prison, not just months. Not life in prison, not several decades, but it should be a felony, absolutely, with appropriate punishments that attach to a felony. IMO.

People with drug charges get more years in prison. Yet I can think of nothing more abhorrent than the torture and killing of a defenseless being.

There's a slippery slope. People who are animal hoarders are charged with animal cruelty because usually the animals are not cared for properly. That said, the vast majority actually love their animals and have no intention of harming them.

This past Christmas a guy in my county was charged with cruelty to animals. His crime? His dog had cancer and he couldn't afford the vet bills. He shot the dog twice in the head to put the dog out of it's misery. Prior to that the dog was well cared for.

A few years ago a pit bull came into my yard where my youngest two children were playing. The dog got in between me and my kids and I couldn't get to them. I started screaming. My brother ran over with a gun fully intending to shoot it if charged anyone. The police showed up and said he was lucky he hadn't shot the dog because it's illegal to injure or kill "domesticated" animals.

Which leads to another issue. Deer, bear, turkey, squirrels, etc. are routinely hunted down and shot. Cows, pigs, lambs have their throats slit while alive as part of the butchering process. Chickens have their heads chopped off.

Which animals do you grace with protection from cruelty? Farm animals no but domesticated animals yes? If so why should a pig on a farm have less protections than a pig living in someone's house? What about wild animals? You can shoot a wild deer but not a domesticated one? Aside from cats and dogs, should we protect hamsters, gerbils, lizards, snakes...?

 

[shadowraiths]

Sorry for taking longer than intended. My response has turned out to be quite long. So, I will post in two parts. The first part today, and the second part, when I am finished writing it, to include links, of course.

In any event, onward into the fray!

The big "but" regarding the cat incident is that I originally felt Steven Avery minimized it. Which in turn, plays an extremely important role with regard to his underlying psychology as it relates to the potential of being a killer.

However, after reading this report over, several times over, in fact, there are so many incongruences!

His codefendant, Jerry Yanda, reported the incident. So, he just what? Waltzed into the Two River's PD, to let them know? Because why? And then there's Peter Dassey who helpfully corroborates the incident. And finally, there's Kenneth Petersen, himself.

Petersen was a 33 year old officer with the Manitowoc County Sheriff's department back in 1982, when he was informed by the Two Rivers PD regarding said incident.

And this bit is extremely important. Why?

For starters, the idea that someone killed a cat by burning it to death is understandably horrific. The claim that it was doused in oil and gas makes it an order of magnitude worse. Except. That is all it is. A claim.

This is not to discount that a cat was burned alive, rather question the events as reported by Jerry Yanda (who was conveniently not convicted) & Peter Dassey.

That is, imnsho, Kenneth Petersen's view of Avery as public enemy #1, was cemented the day he learned of the cat incident. This is not to say he was unaware of other Avery legal problems, however, this was the one that cinched it for him.

Now, add to the above, he is also the very man who arrested Avery for the false rape conviction. And, who knew about the 1995 call, as revealed in the Dr. Phil episode (@1:40). And, he testified in the pre-trial hearing that he wasn't really sure Avery was innocent for the rape (Making A Murderer, episode 4 @ 42:26).

This same said man stated to the media, paraphrased, "if they wanted to get rid of Avery, they could have just killed him" (Making a Murderer, episode 4 @ 35:26). And, in that same episode, he stated that Avery would "kill again."

In other words, by 2005, he's totally steamed. Here's a guy, Avery, who not only has his rape conviction overturned but has the audacity to sue the Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department?

Even so, this really isn't about Kenneth Petersen, as a single individual, per se.

Rather, it is to point out that his views epitomize the department he worked for, and eventually became leader, of. And this was a department that long viewed Steven Avery as an anathema to Manitowoc county. So strong were these "shared" beliefs, that they were more than happy to frame an innocent man in 1985, while allowing the real rapist to continue preying upon, and raping, women.

Simply put, I am of the quite strong opinion that Manitowoc County Sheriff Department internalized Avery as the county's pariah. That he ran his cousin (and wife of part-time MCSD deputy), Sandra Morris, off the road, and brandished a shotgun, confirmed their view that the guy was bad news, and worth taking out. Even if it meant framing (literally, ala the framed sketch) him for the 1985 rape that he did not commit.

Now, fast forward to 2005. Having found other supporting documentation, I will cover the 2005 bit in part 2. The key in this part is to consider the long-standing mentality of the MCSD as it pertains to Steven Avery, as a whole.

Whew, that was long. Hopefully I didn't just add to the confusion.

Footnotes:

1. I am sure I read the cat report before. There's just so much out there. Importantly, I was not yet familiar with the various names!

2. For the tl;dr folk. Think of it like this. I am of the very strong opinion that MCSD is cultish when it comes to Steven Avery.
​

 

[missy1974]

thanks for sharing shadowraiths.... that is pretty much what I got out of it too, and I appreciate you laying it out in the way you have... there has been so many documents released, but I think when it is all taken in as a whole... it really has cemented the idea that Manitowoc County Sheriff's dept really had a 'hate on' for him.

I don't understand why some people think that if the leaders of the department felt this way about him or his family, how that doesn't trickle down and somehow it has an influence on the whole department.

I have seriously considered that they were 'watching' him, waiting for him to make the wrong move. Remember how Jodi felt they were watching her all the time? and once she got picked up because she passed SA at the court house or something like that (it was in the documentary). I think it was the MCPD that was watching Allen back in 1985.... so it's not like it's not realistic to think that they (PD or SD) watch convicts/people they are concerned about. JMO


You might be interested in reading this pretrial motion as well shadowraiths. Peterson in this pretrial motion still says he has "doubts" about SA's innocence of the rape. And also interesting... he was out of town the week TH went missing.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Motion-Hearing-2006Jul05.pdf