Post Conviction Brief

[missy1974]

I'm putting my response to proudfootz over here, I didn't want KZ tweets thread to get too far off topic again ;-)

BBM

That is what I am thinking, but I haven't any reliable clues. But there does seem to be a lot of discussion of RH's movements during critical time periods.

Welcome back proudfootz!

If Zellner knows who was driving that jeep, it's not in the brief.

As for RH's movements during critical time periods... Contrary to popular belief, I do try to look at both sides of this case, and part of that is reading on both subs on reddit, the SA not guilty (ticktock), and the SA guilty one. The last few days there is a prominent poster who insists that RH was at Teresa's on the evening of the 3rd and couldn't have been at SA's... I have actually gone back and looked in CASO and even pretrial testimony of RH's (for another reason lol) Wiegert and Lemieux were the officers that responded to the call, actually Lemieux first around 17:00, and she got Wiegert involved around 17:30. From there, CASO shows that Lemieux, Wiegert, Dedering were making calls, putting TH into the system (we know this happened around 6:30pm that evening because of the logs and when Manitowoc were requested to get involved). According to Ryan's cell phone records, he called Cingular around 5:20-5:30 (3rd call to them). I can't find any evidence that RH was at TH's house around that 7-8pm time on the 3rd when SA went to Menard's.

I am not sure what to think of the new theory of the blood, RH getting it from SA's sink. But the more I'm reading and looking into it, I am seeing where KZ is saying it's "possible". She doesn't have to prove it, she just has to give a viable alternative suspect with motive, and fit her theory into the rest of the story.

Something interesting that I just looked up... Zellner tweeted: Experts experiments confirm SA's trial attorneys correct about blood being planted but incorrect about how it was done. #MakingAMurderer on December 4th. She didn't even receive the blood samples until December 6th. http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Receipt-for-Exhibits.pdf Looks like she was testing the "sink blood" theory before she even got the samples. Maybe they knew that it may not be enough to test? Everyone is assuming that they tested the samples, it didn't come out favourably so she had to switch theories, I no longer think this is the case. JMO

 

[missy1974]

That's what I thought. Thanks for the refresher.

No problem! It's been a bit of information overload with everything to read the last few days and I was so busy this past week (KZ could have dumped this when I had more time haha) If you are fairly new to the case, the information available to us at this point must seem even more overwhelming!!! This is the go to site for all documents Avery/Dassey: http://www.stevenaverycase.org/ Or just ask, someone here should be able to give you the info

 

[Tippy Lynn]

Although I haven't commented I've followed this case. I think KZ's post conviction relief is interesting and the expert credentials in the affidavit's are extremely impressive. For me, McClary's affidavit puts a lot of things into perspective and it's extremely beneficial. There's no doubt RH & LE both had motive. IMO LE knew RH was involved and they gave him every opportunity available and open doors for him to incriminate SA for TH's murder. LE never thought their case against SA would be scrutinized- they thought his conviction would be a slam dunk, no questions asked.

 

[CoolJ]

I'm putting my response to proudfootz over here, I didn't want KZ tweets thread to get too far off topic again ;-)



Welcome back proudfootz!

If Zellner knows who was driving that jeep, it's not in the brief.

As for RH's movements during critical time periods... Contrary to popular belief, I do try to look at both sides of this case, and part of that is reading on both subs on reddit, the SA not guilty (ticktock), and the SA guilty one. The last few days there is a prominent poster who insists that RH was at Teresa's on the evening of the 3rd and couldn't have been at SA's... I have actually gone back and looked in CASO and even pretrial testimony of RH's (for another reason lol) Wiegert and Lemieux were the officers that responded to the call, actually Lemieux first around 17:00, and she got Wiegert involved around 17:30. From there, CASO shows that Lemieux, Wiegert, Dedering were making calls, putting TH into the system (we know this happened around 6:30pm that evening because of the logs and when Manitowoc were requested to get involved). According to Ryan's cell phone records, he called Cingular around 5:20-5:30 (3rd call to them). I can't find any evidence that RH was at TH's house around that 7-8pm time on the 3rd when SA went to Menard's.

I am not sure what to think of the new theory of the blood, RH getting it from SA's sink. But the more I'm reading and looking into it, I am seeing where KZ is saying it's "possible". She doesn't have to prove it, she just has to give a viable alternative suspect with motive, and fit her theory into the rest of the story.

Something interesting that I just looked up... Zellner tweeted: Experts experiments confirm SA's trial attorneys correct about blood being planted but incorrect about how it was done. #MakingAMurderer on December 4th. She didn't even receive the blood samples until December 6th. http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Receipt-for-Exhibits.pdf Looks like she was testing the "sink blood" theory before she even got the samples. Maybe they knew that it may not be enough to test? Everyone is assuming that they tested the samples, it didn't come out favourably so she had to switch theories, I no longer think this is the case. JMO

Maybe she wanted the blood for other reasons?
It really does look like she had moved passed the edta and age testing theories before she even received the blood.

I am not ruling out the idea that she may be 100% correct with how the blood was obtained out of the sink. It seems far fetched. But this case is far fetched. It is definitely possible.

ETA - I still can't believe they turned this evidence over to the custody of MW. Is it funny to them? Some sort of a joke? Unbelievable.

 

[Tippy Lynn]

I can't find anything stating if the nurse who did the groin swab was ever interviewed. If one of you know where I can find it will you point me to it? TIA

 

[CoolJ]

I can't find anything stating if the nurse who did the groin swab was ever interviewed. If one of you know where I can find it will you point me to it? TIA

I don't believe so. But she likely will be if there is a new trial. Lots of people will be questioned under oath if there is a new trial.

I hope there is a new trial. I don't think there will be, but I sure would like to see it!

 

[Tippy Lynn]

I don't believe so. But she likely will be if there is a new trial. Lots of people will be questioned under oath if there is a new trial.

I hope there is a new trial. I don't think there will be, but I sure would like to see it!

Thx!

Personally, I don't see how a new trial could be denied.

 

[missy1974]

I can't find anything stating if the nurse who did the groin swab was ever interviewed. If one of you know where I can find it will you point me to it? TIA

Nope, I can't find that she was interviewed.


From the brief page 70, pdf page 86:

Significantly, Nurse Fritsch's documentation of taking swabs from Mr.
Avery excludes any mention of taking groin swabs. A well-qualified nurse following
acceptable standards of charting would never fail to document taking the groin swabs
unless she were instructed not to document taking the groin swabs by Agent Fassbender
or Inv. Wiegert. (Forensic Evidence Checklist, attached and incorporated herein as P-C
Exhibit 26, STATE 2875, 2877).

A picture of the above charting can be seen here: http://imgur.com/a/0KJ2W (these are pictures that a local took at the courthouse and posted to the FB page) I wonder if they tried to interview her and weren't able to? I know that SA could consent to the release of his health information, but with him being in custody and search warrants, etc, I think there may be laws preventing her from speaking to his attorney about it? I guess it doesn't mean that she didn't speak "off the record" though.

 

[missy1974]

I don't believe so. But she likely will be if there is a new trial. Lots of people will be questioned under oath if there is a new trial.

I hope there is a new trial. I don't think there will be, but I sure would like to see it!

Why don't you think there will be a new trial? I think with what we see in the brief, a new trial might be warranted, but I don't see an exoneration at the moment. With a new trial, she will have access to any and all evidence, which I guess if she gets results that would exonerate him at that point... there would be no need for a trial, so maybe you are right LOL

 

[proudfootz]

Thx!

Personally, I don't see how a new trial could be denied.

On page 170 Zellner discusses how KK's unethical behavior (especially thye press conference featuring the so-called 'confession' attributed to Brendan) deprived Steven of his right to a fair trial.

On page 178 Zellner asserts that KK's continued unethical behavior is a problem for a new trial:

Mr. Kratz's Ongoing Character Assassination Destroys Mr. Avery's Ability to Ever Receive a Fair Trial

408.Mr. Kratz has recently published a book about the Avery case entitled The Case Against Steven Avery and What "Making a Murderer" Gets Wrong. He has also appeared on various television shows to promote his book. Mr. Kratz's book and media appearances describe in vivid detail how he claims Mr. Avery sexually assaulted his ex-wife, his former girlfriend , his niece, and his babysitter; his horrific torture of a cat; and a variety of other violent criminal acts.

Steven deserves a new trial, but can't get a fair one due to KK's poisoning everyone's mind against him.

 

[dexter75]

Although I haven't commented I've followed this case. I think KZ's post conviction relief is interesting and the expert credentials in the affidavit's are extremely impressive. For me, McClary's affidavit puts a lot of things into perspective and it's extremely beneficial. There's no doubt RH & LE both had motive. IMO LE knew RH was involved and they gave him every opportunity available and open doors for him to incriminate SA for TH's murder. LE never thought their case against SA would be scrutinized- they thought his conviction would be a slam dunk, no questions asked.

You nailed it!
LE THOUGHT their case would never be scrutinized...
IMO LE didn't really THINK things through to well when they decided to frame Avery the first time, and they sure as hell didn't think things through the second time around either.
I won't go on about it but will say I can't help but to wonder with just a little bit of digging & the right experts....
What would be uncovered if R.Hostetlers case was reopened & combed through??

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[Tippy Lynn]

You nailed it!
LE THOUGHT their case would never be scrutinized...
IMO LE didn't really THINK things through to well when they decided to frame Avery the first time, and they sure as hell didn't think things through the second time around either.
I won't go on about it but will say I can't help but to wonder with just a little bit of digging & the right experts....
What would be uncovered if R.Hostetlers case was reopened & combed through??

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

You're right....LE didn't think it through the 1st time around either. The arrogance and above the law mentality surrounding this case is off the charts!!

Wait, what am I missing....who's R. Hostetler?

 

[Tippy Lynn]

Nope, I can't find that she was interviewed.


From the brief page 70, pdf page 86:

Significantly, Nurse Fritsch's documentation of taking swabs from Mr.
Avery excludes any mention of taking groin swabs. A well-qualified nurse following
acceptable standards of charting would never fail to document taking the groin swabs
unless she were instructed not to document taking the groin swabs by Agent Fassbender
or Inv. Wiegert. (Forensic Evidence Checklist, attached and incorporated herein as P-C
Exhibit 26, STATE 2875, 2877).

A picture of the above charting can be seen here: http://imgur.com/a/0KJ2W (these are pictures that a local took at the courthouse and posted to the FB page) I wonder if they tried to interview her and weren't able to? I know that SA could consent to the release of his health information, but with him being in custody and search warrants, etc, I think there may be laws preventing her from speaking to his attorney about it? I guess it doesn't mean that she didn't speak "off the record" though.

Thx! It's strange the groin swab wasn't documented in the chart. I wish I knew what the nurse has to say about it or how she remembers the events playing out that day.

I hope we get to see the entire flyover footage. Since the full flyover footage wasn't released to the defense I'm guessing the RAV isn't in the footage. I can't wait to hear their explanation for that.

 

[Jaiddie]

You're right....LE didn't think it through the 1st time around either. The arrogance and above the law mentality surrounding this case is off the charts!!

Wait, what am I missing....who's R. Hostetler?

:wagon:
Hi, Tippy! Ricky Hochstetler was a 17 year old kid who was killed in a hit and run in Manitowoc and there were (and I believe still are) rumors that someone in LE may have been involved and therefore there was a cover-up in that case as well. There is a thread here on this forum that pertains to that case.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?317087-Ricky-Hochstetler-Case-Records

 

[CoolJ]

Why don't you think there will be a new trial? I think with what we see in the brief, a new trial might be warranted, but I don't see an exoneration at the moment. With a new trial, she will have access to any and all evidence, which I guess if she gets results that would exonerate him at that point... there would be no need for a trial, so maybe you are right LOL

I don't think there will be a new trial because I don't think the state wants the truth being told in full. I think the state will fight right til the end but will concede one a new trial is set.

 

[dexter75]

I don't think there will be a new trial because I don't think the state wants the truth being told in full. I think the state will fight right til the end but will concede one a new trial is set.

One thing is for sure
It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out now that the truth is coming to light.. ( as the truth always does you know )

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[Jaiddie]

More photos of new exhibits from the brief have been posted from someone who has access to the Manitowoc courthouse.

New Exhibits June 12 https://imgur.com/gallery/JMRyo

New Exhibits #2 June 12 https://imgur.com/a/0P2FH

For the first link at bottom you have to click "load 11 more images" and second link at bottom click "load 20 more images" to get the photos in their entirety. I found quite a few things to be quite interesting. For instance, SB at first set up an appointment to speak to KZ then later canceled that meeting on the grounds that he had spoken to a lawyer (which I 100% understand and agree with in these circumstances btw) but then refused to give up the lawyer's name for some reason. Another interesting thing is that KZ seemingly has the proof that RH DID call TH voicemail on Nov 1. # 57 on image below:

https://i.imgur.com/LGg1d6X.jpg

"57. Ryan Hillegas Phone Records confirming his over-all call pattern, His receipt of 22 unknown phone calls on 11/4/05, prior to the discovery of Teresa Halbach's vehicle on the Avery property, confirming his 6 second 11/1/05 call to Teresa Halbach's voicemail, and his call to Brad Czech." :fishy:

 

[Jaiddie]

Also found interesting some of JR's affadavit from the brief:

http://i.imgur.com/iTLgb8N.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/wOzTJQ4.jpg

I see a theme that LE seemed to be doing (just as we all have suspected) as JR specifically states, "I remember them asking me if I was sure I saw what I said I saw. It seemed to me they weren't satisfied with my statement about the fire. Specifically, it seemed to me that they wanted me to change my story to include a larger fire."

Well that surely illustrates how ST various statements went from the fire being "3 ft. tall" to "10 ft. tall" after several interviews with LE, hmm? Am I wrong in thinking that this is PROOF that LE tried (and mostly succeeded...JR is just one of the ones that caught on to what they were doing and asked them point blank what they wanted him to say, thereby calling their bluff) to change witness's statements to fit their narrative? And therefore, is this not considered proof of misconduct?

 

[dexter75]

Also found interesting some of JR's affadavit from the brief:

http://i.imgur.com/iTLgb8N.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/wOzTJQ4.jpg

I see a theme that LE seemed to be doing (just as we all have suspected) as JR specifically states, "I remember them asking me if I was sure I saw what I said I saw. It seemed to me they weren't satisfied with my statement about the fire. Specifically, it seemed to me that they wanted me to change my story to include a larger fire."

Well that surely illustrates how ST various statements went from the fire being "3 ft. tall" to "10 ft. tall" after several interviews with LE, hmm? Am I wrong in thinking that this is PROOF that LE tried (and mostly succeeded...JR is just one of the ones that caught on to what they were doing and asked them point blank what they wanted him to say, thereby calling their bluff) to change witness's statements to fit their narrative? And therefore, is this not considered proof of misconduct?

IMO it is absolutely proof of misconduct.
Sitting back watching the dominoes fall...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[Tippy Lynn]

:wagon:
Hi, Tippy! Ricky Hochstetler was a 17 year old kid who was killed in a hit and run in Manitowoc and there were (and I believe still are) rumors that someone in LE may have been involved and therefore there was a cover-up in that case as well. There is a thread here on this forum that pertains to that case.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?317087-Ricky-Hochstetler-Case-Records

Hi Jaiddie, thanks for the link!!! [emoji4]