In a 1,272-page motion for postconviction relief,
Kathleen Zellner lays out her evidence,
fighting for what she says is justice for Steven Avery.
Zellner argues the finding of this new evidence
means Avery is entitled to a new trial.
Kathleen Zellner did not return phone calls,
instead tweeting, "10,909."
It's the number of days Avery has spent in prison,
including an overturned rape conviction
in which he spent 18 years behind bars.
The Wisconsin Department of Justice
says it is confident Avery's conviction will stand.
The State believes, as with Mr. Avery's prior motions,
this one also is without merit
and will be rejected once it is considered by the court.
The department continues to send condolences to the Halbach family
as they have to endure what they call, "Avery's ridiculous attempts
to re-litigate his guilty verdict and sentence."
The former district attorney who helped convict Steven Avery
of Teresa Halbach's murder in 2005
says the latest motion for a new trial
by Avery's attorney is "a shame."
Avery's attorney accuses prosecutor Ken Kratz
of ethical violations and fabricating evidence.
Ken Kratz joins us from CrimeCon,
the first ever crime convention there.
Ken, I'd like to get your reaction to those documents
that were just filed on Wednesday claiming new evidence
and suppression of past evidence to now try and free Steven Avery.
What do you say to that?
Kathleen Zellner, the attorney for Steven Avery,
had a really difficult position.
She had gotten some test results back
that didn't support their position very well at all.
And so, really, all she had left was to blame others for the crime.
Unfortunately, she chose the ex-boyfriend of the victim in the case,
placing the blame on him without any kind of evidence at all.
And for the family, and for those of us that worked so hard
not only to get the conviction,
but to get some kind of closure for the family,
we think it's absolutely deplorable.
The postconviction petition is sort of a guide
for trying to get the case back to an evidentiary hearing.
So, what I've done is, I've set up the structure
that I want to work within,
but I never stop trying to find new evidence.
I'll be doing that when I'm going to the court
for, you know, the evidentiary hearing.
We'll be doing that during the evidentiary hearing.
We'll be doing that after the evidentiary...
If we don't win at the evidentiary hearing,
we will just keep going.
Because when you have somebody who's innocent,
you don't just sit back and say,
"Well, that should do it," you know?
Until you've got it completely figured out...
And that's why I'm...
I focus so much on who committed the crime.
A lot of attorneys think that's crazy, they'd never do that.
But you have to be that committed to someone's innocence
and to the unfairness of the trial they got.
- Synced & corrected by MementMori - -- www.addic7ed.com --
Keep in mind,
what courts analyze on these postconviction cases is,
what did this jury hear, what were they told,
because that's the evidence that they convicted him on.
And so, that's the evidence that we're trying to undo.
So, they're stuck with, "This bullet went through her head."
They can't, you know, backtrack
and say it went through some, you know, fleshier part
where it maybe wouldn't pick up bone but might still have her DNA.
Yes.
We can win this, we can get the conviction vacated,
just on the fact there's no bone and there's wood on this fragment.
But I want to actually see if we can
create a similar looking fragment.
So, we're gonna try to shoot through the exterior of the garage,
through red paint, with some .22 pistols,
and then I want to take those fragments to Microtrace.
Because I think we'll pick up wood in those,
and we may pick up the red paint,
so then we'll know how they got it.
When I sent the pictures out to Luke Haag, our ballistics expert,
he said that on the holes he's seen on the garage,
those are exit holes.
Exit holes. On the inside of the garage?
- Yeah. - OK.
So, it means that those holes, if they're bullet holes,
were created by somebody standing outside the garage shooting in.
You know, Jim said it looked like somebody went on the west side,
they picked up the fragment from behind that panel,
and then they just took it over
to the east side and laid it on the floor.
This is Exhibit 247.
That is my gun. I can remember it by the scratches back here.
- OK. You're sure of that? - I am sure of that.
And where did you keep it when you lived there?
On the gun rack that was on the wall in the bedroom.
OK. Did you ever use that gun on the property?
I fired that gun at chipmunks
and I fired that gun at targets all over the lot.
I mean, I could've been standing at the back end of the lot,
down by the far end of the lot.
I fired it all over the yard.
What would you be shooting at?
More often than not, targets.
But targets of opportunity were gophers.
Did you ever fire that gun in the area of the garage?
I fired it all around the garage. I fired it all around the lot.
Can you give me any kind of estimate
of how many times you would've fired that gun in front of you
on that one-acre parcel?
Maybe five or six bricks,
which are 500 in a brick.
Twenty-five, three thousand times.
So, this is the board. I want to look at this.
That's one of the ones that he thought was an exit hole.
- That one's good. - OK.
- OK.
So, it looks like there was a thin panel board.
Then we've got, behind it, the foamboard.
They want samples from inside here.
Because he can identify the wood, he said.
Sure.
There's casings all over in here.
- If I shoot through down here... - Yep.
So, we need the paneling, we need the foam...
Because it could've ricocheted off anything.
- That's not bad shooting. - No, not at all.
Wow, I hit all in one little square.
So, did it come through?
- Came through this wall. - Oh, yeah.
Look, it came through the panel.
It looks like it went through this.
In the plywood?
Nope. You have to check each individual one.
One, two, three, four, five, six.
I think that one might be stuck.
It didn't puncture, it looks like.
Which means it's gotta be on the ground somewhere.
Where are the rest of them? Is this one of them? Look.
Shine that light on this one for a minute
so I can just look at it and see what it picked up.
See that little... It's kind of a reddish color,
like it picked up the paint.
Cool.
I'd just like to recover more of the fragments.
- Yeah. - Well, there's two in the wood there.
- It looks like there are six... - We can push them out.
That's probably what they did, don't you think?
Yeah.
Just see one and pry it out.
I don't think it stuck, I think it may
have hit the plywood and then dropped.
Yeah.
So, that's the way the entrance hole looks on it.
- You see it? Look at that. - Yeah.
It hit the plywood and dropped.
Look how damaged that is just from...
- That's crazy, isn't it? - Yeah.
Look at the wood. Wow. That's the paneling.
Look at that. That looks just like our bullet.
There it is.
- There's one. - OK.
Here's the wood.
Doesn't that look similar,
the color and everything, to FL?
The way the wood is just sitting on there.
Yeah.
What would be helpful
is if we could do some type of side-by-side with FL.
Let's see if I can pull up both.
- So, here is... - Ours.
- One of ours. - OK.
One of your exemplar shots. And here is FL on the left.
And here, this gives a little perspective.
You've got wood sitting right on top of lead,
and here you've got wood sitting right on top of lead.
On the FL bullet, you do have this...
this build-up of...
- Wax? - Some sort of material, yeah.
Yeah.
There's a lot of information here,
and I think that perhaps you could start to explain some of it.
I mean, the different types of wood,
the red flakes, the waxy material...
And maybe the first answer
is that this waxy material is from a bullet examination,
a ballistics examination.
But it is interesting, though,
that you've got some wood that's on top of the waxy material
and some wood that's not.
So, let me save this so that we...
- OK. - We can go back to it if we need to.
It's fascinating how it picked all of that up.
And that's the beauty of trace evidence,
is that we don't just pick up, I mean, random materials.
We pick up materials that something's been in contact with.
And a lot of times, whereas DNA can tell you...
answer one question of "who,"
trace can oftentimes give you information about other questions,
such as "how" or "in what order."
You know, even some information about time sometimes.
And if we were to go, then, and pull off these individual particles,
which are, you know, fairly small,
but we can pull these off and there's enough information in these
to start to identify information about the genus
and maybe even the species of the wood types.
And then we can look at the reference samples,
the boards that you've pulled out of the
garage that you fired through,
and possibly tie this together.
Somebody just took a bullet fragment from the wall
and put it under the compressor.
But they had to put DNA on it.
So, I decided I wanted to figure out
what were the sources of Teresa's DNA.
We know that the DNA on FL,
there's only 8.6 nanograms,
which is a miniscule amount for blood.
And it rules out skin cells from the inside of the scalp
because there'd be many more.
There'd be a much higher number.
So, then the question becomes, "Well, where did that DNA come from?"
So, I started looking at the different items
that were taken from Teresa Halbach's residence,
and there was a specific request by Mark Wiegert
that the officers pick up items that could have DNA on them.
The thing that's strange about what happens with those items is,
unlike the rest of the evidence
from her place that's picked up that day
that goes into an evidence locker at Calumet,
this makes its way back to Avery's property
and it's repackaged.
So we've got DNA on the bullet
that's much more consistent with ChapStick DNA...
than blood or the inside of the scalp.
I believe that what happened is that
ChapStick was removed with a swab,
because we can see cotton fibers on the bullet...
and the ChapStick was put on the bullet.
Yeah, this is the woman to know.
- Barbara. - I'm sorry. Nice to meet you.
Where are you from?
- I'm from Madison. - OK.
We're from Minnesota, so...
OK. It's nice to meet you.
- What's your name? - Megan.
Nice to meet you.
Free Steven Avery! Free Brendan Dassey!
There's a killer on the loose, guys!
Do you want to learn more about the Avery and Dassey case?
Just a couple of minutes, I could show you some things.
Please sign the Barbara Tadych Law.
Interrogating a child without a
lawyer present or parent present.
Justice for Teresa Halbach!
Save a child's life.
I want to pass out these petitions for the Barbara Tadych Law
so no minor under 16 will be interrogated without a parent present
or a lawyer or guardian.
That's the goal today.
Gotta get all of these handed out,
all of them gone by the end of the day.
This is the best way to raise awareness about this, basically.
More people need to know.
I mean, what happened to Brendan shouldn't have happened.
The petitions and the affidavits are all on Kathleen's website.
You're a supporter. You've got more support than you think you do.
I hope Kathleen Zellner, after she just put her brief in Friday,
destroys the whole case and Steven gets cleared
and they both come home.
That's what I hope. It'll happen.
Free Steven Avery! Free Brendan Dassey!
- What do you want? - Justice!
- When do you want it? - Now!
- What do we want? - Justice!
- When do we want it? - Now!
- What do we want? - Justice!
- When do we want it? - Now!
- What do we want? - Justice!
- When do we want it? - Now!
We were each in our separate offices
on the same conference call,
and I happened to glance at my computer
and up pops the email notification,
and I clicked on it, and one word popped out:
"Affirmed."
That's all I read.
I jumped out of my seat,
I sprinted across the office to Steve's office.
She knocked on my door and she said,
"You gotta get off the phone. We won!"
In the two-to-one decision, a federal appeals court panel in Chicago
upholds a judge's ruling
to toss out Dassey's first-degree intentional homicide conviction.
It's 128 pages long. I've read through what I can.
Bottom line, the federal judges say
that Dassey's confession was coerced.
A three-judge panel of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals
ordered the State to retry Dassey within 90 days or set him free.
It's just a beautiful opinion.
Judge Duffin's opinion floored us.
But the opinion by Judge Rovner was even more incredible.
There were phrases in this opinion that I was jealous of,
that I thought, "Why didn't we classify
this interrogation that way?"
And the one that struck me the most was "death by a thousand cuts."
Because when I watched that interrogation the very first time,
that's how I felt.
It's almost like they were experiencing
the interrogation along with Brendan.
It's almost like they were inside that room with him.
OK. Come on, buddy. Let's get this out, OK?
To me, the lesson here is that
the kinds of tactics that were used,
when used against somebody of Brendan's age
and with Brendan's disabilities,
they produce an involuntary confession.
And that's the missing piece that the State has failed to recognize,
and the state courts failed to recognize,
every step of the way.
Not once did the state courts ask themselves,
"How would a 16-year-old have understood
these words being said to him?
How would a 16-year-old with limitations like Brendan's
understand the words being said to him?"
That special care that the Constitution requires
was absent from the state court decision in this case.
The 7th Circuit concluded not just that the state court was wrong
in the way it handled Brendan's case,
but that it was so unreasonably wrong
that no other reasonable judge could've ever agreed with them.
The State of Wisconsin has already issued a statement
saying that they will take it as far as they can
to keep Dassey behind bars.
Tonight, after receiving
multiple requests to pardon Dassey,
Governor Walker says it's in the best interest
to let the courts handle it.
If he's ultimately innocent, or there's complications,
that should be handled by the courts,
and that's the process they've taken.
Attorney General Brad Schimel has 90 days
to figure out what he will do next.
The Wisconsin Department of Justice
adding that they send their condolences
to the Halbach family.
We went out last night,
and, um, Barbara was all smiles and everything else.
She said, "Soon, my boy will be home."
When Brendan was supposed to come home on Thanksgiving,
you know, they were all ready to go pick him up,
and then they weren't allowed.
You know, the State fought it to that point.
And I'm thinking that's the same this time around.
Mm-hmm.
It's frustrating that a person sitting in prison...
You got a judge that says that the...
the thing was coerced, or whatever you want to call it,
and that was dropped, or whatever,
and then the kid is still sitting there.
And then the State still wants to fight it.
What's left? They don't got no other evidence against the kid.
Nothing. Why are they fighting it?
So many twists and turns. Where does it go from here?
Well, look, the Wisconsin authorities now have to make a decision.
There are one of three things they can do.
Number one, they can go to the full 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Remember, only three judge decided this.
You've got the opportunity to say,
"We want the whole court to review it."
The other thing they can do is appeal to the US Supreme Court.
I don't think the US Supreme Court is gonna hear this.
And the other thing they could do,
which is what I think that they should do,
is drop this.
We don't have nothing to do with this,
and the judges are starting to see this now.
We got some good judges who can see
that Brendan's been coerced and been set up.
You know, they try to coerce everybody to say whatever it is.
You know, as long as it fits their stories, it's good.
And the federal courts are starting to realize
that there's something wrong.
In my experience, when you have several defendants but one crime,
when a case begins to collapse for one defendant,
it has benefits of collapsing the other case.
And having a federal court of appeals,
one step below the US Supreme Court,
concur that this confession was involuntary,
but go further and talk about
the factual underpinning of this case...
And the court described it as "a litany of inconsistencies."
"Shirts that changed color,
fires that began and ended at different times,
bloody crime scenes without a trace of blood remaining,
metal handcuffs that left no marks on the bed post.
Dassey's story changes, he backtracks,
officers try to pin him down on time frames and details,
but they are like waves on the sand.
Even the State has trouble telling its
version of the timeline of the story
in any cogent manner
due to the fact that it changed with each re-telling."
What you see between the majority and the dissent that was written,
the dissent, I think, is premised on the view
that Dassey is absolutely guilty.
The dissenting judge, Judge Hamilton, says,
"Dassey's confession appears to have been
the product of a guilty conscience,
coaxed rather gently from him
with standard, non-coercive investigative techniques.
Even assuming, however,
that the majority's interpretation is plausible,
our job as a federal court reviewing
a state conviction under 2254
is not to consult scholarly literature
in search of new best practices."
Really? Why not?
Why would you not be availing yourself
of what experts have determined about false confessions?
The State ought to consider the fact
that something could happen to Brendan Dassey in prison
because other inmates tend to be very jealous.
I mean, my clients, even when they know they're gonna be released,
don't tell people.
This case, with the publicity, a lot of other inmates know
that he has a good chance of going home and they don't.
So, every single minute
that someone like Brendan Dassey is in prison
is a threat to their life.
And so, leaving him in there
when there's absolutely no excuse for it,
their case has collapsed, they lost,
um, they need to just step up and take responsibility
for the pathetic case against him
and let him out.
Breaking news.
Today, Brendan Dassey's attorneys filed a motion
to have their client released from jail immediately.
And this after yesterday's decision by an appeals court panel
affirming a federal judge's ruling to overturn Dassey's conviction.
The lawyers today say that Brendan Dassey
has spent 4,137 days in prison,
in violation of the Constitution of the United States.
What we're asking the court to do is to let him out
while the lawyers continue to fight over his case,
to not make him wait behind bars
while the legal wrangling continues.
Last fall, the 7th Circuit basically said,
"Hold on, let's not let him out of prison yet.
Let's let this appeal proceed."
You know what? This appeal has proceeded.
So, we filed our motion as soon as we possibly could,
saying, "Unlock those prison doors. Let him out.
He has waited seven months for this appeal to proceed.
Now it's done. It's time."
People keep on asking me
if I'm gonna move out of Wisconsin
after I get out.
Yep.
Yeah, the only thing I put on there is, like,
"We'll have to see once I get out."
Yeah.
Don't answer that question.
Yeah, because I can't say
that I'm gonna move over and away
because I probably won't be able to leave Wisconsin.
Right.
Unless I get permission.
Right.
It's kinda stupid.
Yeah, especially for someone that's innocent,
they shouldn't have you going through that.
Yeah.
What can you tell us about Mr. Dassey?
Nothing. You can't even have a camera in here.
Oh. OK. Is he gonna be released today?
Well, they didn't tell me that.
In the last 30 minutes,
the State moved to keep one of Wisconsin's
most notorious convicted killers
behind bars.
In today's filing, the State argued
Dassey should remain behind bars,
saying his release would jeopardize public safety.
Dassey's attorneys say they already have a transition plan for him
to move back into the community if he should get his way.
There was a chance that Brendan Dassey
could've been released today
from Columbia Correctional,
but the State filed a motion only a half hour before the deadline
that prevented that from happening today.
In the motion, the State says it plans
to appeal Dassey's overturned conviction,
and therefore he should stay behind bars
while the process plays out.
Dassey's lawyers say they will file
a formal reply to the State.
Now his lawyers say that he should be released
by the end of the day tomorrow,
but that decision lies in the hands of the courts.
We will continue to bring you all updates on this developing story.
Submit.
Let's see if it's been accepted.
- OK. Filed. - It's done.
Congratulations.
Thank you.
That's it.
Now the waiting.
OK.
Good night. Thanks.
- No problem. See you tomorrow. - See you later.
Defense attorneys for
Brendan Dassey have filed a response
to the State's motion seeking to keep Dassey in prison.
In today's filing,
Dassey's attorneys call the State's effort an extraordinary step
to prevent releasing an unconstitutionally incarcerated man,
despite two written opinions overturning his conviction.
Kasia Majerczak.
OK. What's Kasia's number, do you know?
Hey, Bob.
Yeah, I just saw it.
So, we are gonna go call Barb right now.
Alright, so...
And that breaking news is in the Dassey case.
The convicted killer will remain behind bars for now.
The State Department of Justice argued that Dassey
should remain behind bars during the appeal process,
and the court agreed.
Attorney Schimel, what's your next move?
Well, our next move, we'll seek a review
by the entire 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.
It's called an "en banc" review of all the judges, there are nine.
And, um, that will...
Filing that motion will stay the proceedings
from the three-judge panel, and we'll wait that out.
Um, you get...
The panel is given to you randomly
and you don't know what you're gonna get.
We drew...
We drew a panel that we knew was gonna be
a tougher one to prevail in front of.
But ultimately here,
do you think this will end in a new trial for Brendan Dassey?
Well, I don't. And we... If...
If I thought that...
the federal district court was right in their decision,
we wouldn't be pursuing the appeal.
But we think the judge got it very wrong.
- Talking about the coercion... - Right.
- That interview with Brendan at that time. - Right.
What happened in this case
were fairly typical law enforcement methods of interviewing people.
And certainly being in a law enforcement interview is coercive
just to some... to any degree.
But it has to be something that overbears someone's will,
and we don't believe it got to that.
Hopefully, we'll get some finality to
this soon for Teresa Halbach's family.
The State has petitioned
the full 7th Circuit Court of Appeals
to rehear arguments in the Brendan Dassey case.
The State wants the full court to hear arguments
because they say that the panel has rewritten the rules
for juvenile interrogations.
The State argues the ruling conflicts
with other appeals court findings and the Supreme Court.
Attorneys for Dassey are asking
the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals
to deny the State's request to the full court for a rehearing.
En banc rehearing is something that is rarely granted.
You can just see people fighting and fighting.
I mean, Brendan's confession should've been thrown out by Wisconsin.
It's just a complete embarrassment.
Kachinsky and Kratz. I mean...
Unbelievable.
So, now it's on a world stage and they're frightened,
so what are they doing?
They're just clinging to this absolutely implausible story
that was cooked up a long time ago.
So...
It's quite an amazing thing to live through.
Hey, buddy!
There's a mosquito in here.
Get him?
I dunno.
Oshkosh by gosh.
We're not going by that gas station.
Huh?
What?
What did you say?
- Huh? - What?
What am I looking for?
There. There's my license.
Hey, I didn't bring my wallet.
Come on!
Now what?
Are you sure?
You think I can I get in?
I don't know if they'd let you in.
I'm gonna try it.
Here. Waupun, 13 miles.
Thank God.
We're coming, Steven. Sooner... Sooner or later.
Or later, not sooner.
- Which one is it? - Right here.
- Next one? - Right here.
Whoa!
Hello?
Horrible.
Yeah, it's too long of a drive for me.
Allan forgot his driver's license up north,
his wallet and everything up there.
Yeah.
Now I gotta take my shots before I go in there,
and then I gotta eat something in there.
Because I can't bring my needle in there.
- Hi. - How you doing?
I'm good. How are you?
Hanging in there.
Move your hand.
Come on. I got the door.
Don't rush me.
- Yeah... - Come on, one more.
You can do it.
Are you gonna hang onto me, though?
I might as well get back in the car.
- No, no. - I'm getting nervous.
Up. Come on. Come on, raise it.
Let me put the other leg there again.
- Yeah. - Come on, now. Up.
Now, pull on that car. That's it.
God, I don't want you to fall down.
At least Dolores will get in there to see Steve.
My greatest worry is...
that me and Mama don't pass away...
before Stevie gets out.
Because it can happen.
When we get to see Steven,
he gives us all a big hug.
Please raise your right hand.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you shall give
in the matter now before the court shall be the truth,
the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
- Yes, I do. - Please be seated.
Please state your name and spell your last name for the record.
Bobby Dassey. D-A-S-S-E-Y.
What we're undoing is the prosecution case.
The prosecution's case was:
Teresa came to the property, never left the property,
and the car never left the property.
That's the theory.
And that theory is completely wrong.
So, that's the way we're gonna undo it.
But in that process of unraveling it,
then it takes you back to how...
Who testified for the State to support this theory?
Bobby, on October 31st, 2005,
do you remember anything unusual that happened
at about 2:30 that afternoon?
A vehicle had droven up and started taking pictures of the van.
Let's back up just a minute.
Um, what did you see?
I seen a vehicle pull up in our driveway.
And how do you know that it was about 2:30 in the afternoon?
'Cause I was going hunting that night,
and that's the time I wanted to get out.
Alright.
Tell the jury what you saw then.
Uh, I seen Teresa Halbach get out of the vehicle
and start taking pictures.
After seeing her taking any pictures, did you see her do anything?
She started...
Before I got in the shower, she actually
started walking over to Steven's trailer.
When looking at Exhibit number 61,
could you point to the window that
you looked out and watched things from?
That window there.
- The leftmost window on the trailer? - Yes.
About what time do you think that you left to go hunting?
Probably, twenty to three, quarter to three.
Quarter to three?
Mr. Dassey, when you walked out to your vehicle to go bow hunting,
did you notice if Teresa's vehicle was still in the driveway?
Yes, it was.
- It was? - Yeah.
- Did you see Ms. Halbach? - No.
- See any signs of her at all? - Nope.
Bobby Dassey was the number one witness for the prosecution
in convicting Steven Avery.
Bobby Dassey was lying.
I have an affidavit from another witness
who says that Bobby Dassey told them,
"Teresa left the property. I saw her leave."
With this new witness...
let me put it this way...
he would never have wanted to do this.
Bobby had told Bryan that he saw Teresa leave.
And Bryan has consistently said, since 2005,
"Bobby told me he saw Teresa leave."
Bryan should've been called by the defense
as a witness to impeach Bobby.
That would've been huge,
because then the jury could've focused on,
"Well, wait a minute. Bobby Dassey, why would he say that?
Why wouldn't he just say, 'Yeah, I saw her leave, too'?"
The only reason I can think of that Bobby Dassey would lie
would be if the prosecution pressured him into lying.
So, if they said to him, "Look, it's either gonna be you or Steven,
and Steven has already told us
you're the last person that saw Teresa.
So, you either agree with that and we're going after you,
or you tell us a different story."
And so, you'd have the prosecution pressuring Bobby.
We've already answered that question
because we went to Bobby and we asked him, "Were you pressured?"
And Bobby told us, "No, I wasn't pressured.
This is what happened."
Really, this is what happened?
We re-interviewed Bobby Dassey last week,
and my investigators said during the interview
he was buttoned-down,
meaning he would not reveal anything.
He was just wanting to know what we knew, what we were doing,
what we were up to,
until they mentioned
that we had the hard drive of the computer.
And they said he was...
unbelievably rattled by that.
We should grab the computer.
The searching guys, I wonder if they did.
The police went out with a search warrant.
They got the Dassey computer.
They got the hard drive.
They got a forensic examiner,
Detective Velie,
to look at what was on there.
And then Fassbender wrote up about a paragraph.
But we have got our own forensic examiner,
and we have found...
thousands and thousands of images
that could have only been accessed by Bobby Dassey.
Torture, bondage, pedophilia.
Nightmare stuff.
And a fascination with death.
Many, many bodies of drowned girls,
decapitated girls,
things like that.
I mean, this is astounding, OK?
This is what we've narrowed down
to what they consider to be the deviant images.
And this is not someone going on there for an hour a day,
this is compulsive, obsessive.
Hundreds of hours.
Thousands and thousands of photographs.
The trial attorneys, Dean Strang and Jerry Buting,
were never given Detective Velie's forensic report.
That report would've greatly assisted the defense
in their Denny motion efforts,
because they had Bobby on their list,
but they didn't have anything on him.
And, you know, it's well established
that there's a link between violent porn and homicides.
And so, they could've used that.
So, that's a huge Brady violation.
We're learning a Wisconsin
convicted murderer's case will continue.
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals
will rehear the arguments
in the Brendan Dassey case.
Today, the appeals court released a decision
granting the State's request for en banc,
meaning it will go before the full court.
First, a federal judge in Wisconsin,
then three appellate judges in Chicago,
have ruled Brendan Dassey should be free or retried,
decisions now up in the air
after a rare ruling to take another look at the case,
this time with all of the appeals judges present.
The court's order did not give any reasons for the grant.
It simply stated that en banc review was granted
and that Judge Rovner's opinion was vacated.
This, basically, moves us back in time
to a place before this case was ever argued
and asks us to reargue it again.
It's as though it never happened.
You know, when we won,
and when we won again,
um, I think that Brendan, after both those wins,
began to get excited about the prospect of coming home.
So, you know, we're gonna do our best to...
to bring that hope back to Brendan and his family.
Um...
But he's cognizant of the fact that things have changed.
Brendan is going to have a very difficult time
prevailing on his case as it stands now,
and it's not any poor lawyering on Northwestern's part.
It's the AEDPA statute.
It is the death knell of federal habeas law.
And they did it to get rid of pro se prisoner petitions,
but they gutted the habeas writ.
And everybody knows that that does this work.
You don't want to... You can't win these things in federal court.
You'd be better off to come back
a million times on successive petitions
with the trial court and the state court
than you ever would to darken the door of the federal courthouse.
The State looks like they don't want
to give up with Brendan.
They want to keep on going.
Even if it is the truth,
you know, that we're innocent,
they're gonna still keep on fighting.
And the federal courts, they already threw it out,
you know, once in Milwaukee.
If it was anybody else, he would've been out already,
right from Milwaukee.
They would've kicked him out.
And then the 7th Circuit threw it out.
And now they want more judges.
But as long as it's this case, they'll keep on fighting it.
You know, if the evidence ain't there, what you gonna do?
You know, let this innocent man
keep on sitting in prison for something he didn't do?
He could be taking care of his mom and having a good ol' time
instead of being locked up.
And she gotta go and see him all the time.
You know, that's hard.
I work on the line...
breakfast, dinner, and supper.
The inmates will come in. You know, we serve all of them.
It's not a bad job, but it could be a lot better.
I'd rather be making breakfast and dinner and supper
for my ma and my dad, where I belong.
My brothers are having a hard time,
and they always tell me it's my turn.
My ma needs my help pretty bad.
And I feel sorry for Teresa's family, what they have to go through.
Teresa can't be in peace because she knows there's something wrong.
She'd want the real person locked up.
All of this is supposed to be for justice...
and Teresa,
and she didn't get it yet.
And that's not fair to her or her family.
I try to stay real strong.
I don't want to feel no bitter, no nothing.
What the State did to me,
I don't have to accept that I'm an inmate or offender.
I don't think of that.
You know, I'm just a human being that got kidnapped.
- Synced & corrected by MementMori - -- www.addic7ed.com --