I think we're saying the same thing.

quote:

---

Re-read the transcript from 2 pages back that I had linked earlier in the thread that someone brought back up. Doesn't take long. I just re-read that whole transcript.

That one seems pretty honest of Brendan. I think that might be the most accurate account of what actually happened, but I do think Brendan was probably keeping himself out of bits and pieces of it.

Glad I read that in full instead of skimming. Discusses him seeing parts of her in the barrel, Steve telling Brendan that he stabbed her in her car, she tried to fight him off in the car scratching him, him taking the car out to the pit(different from the burn barrel), etc.

---

I read a transcript you posted (more then 2 pages back) where he talked about seeing her toes, forehead, belly, etc. in the fire. Is that the one you are talking about? I read it on my phone while at an appointment, but I didn't see where he said anything about the barrel. Is there another interrogation you are speaking of?

quote:

---

The Producers of the show were on the Today show this morning and said a juror from the murder trail came to them and said Avery was not proven quilty. They said the police rail roaded him and that they voted guilty because they feared for their life. Juror also said they would be willing to say openly what happened. Wow. Just Wow.

---

WOW.

while interrogators were playing their guessing game with Brendan trying to get him to tell them what happened to her head, he randomly guessed "cut her hair off"...before finally guessing she was shot after more creative coaching.

WTF!?...the hair cut story brings this to "put the lotion in the basket" status!

This kid just wanted to watch wrestlemania, and would say whatever he thought they wanted to leave. He was too stupid/scared to articulate that on the stand, and when asked why lie, he just said "i dont know"....which was likely his downfall with a jury that ignorant about their role.

quote:

---

quote:

---

---

If you don't want to watch the video, the filmmakers say a juror came to them and said they believed that Avery was innocent, but convicted because they feared for their personal safety. They believe Avery should get a new trial and it should not be in Wisconsin.

---

Quoting my self so you can see the video and the TL;DR if you missed it this morning.

well that certainly corroborates the story from the juror in film that left early due to family emergency

The State of Wisconsin already screwed up once when they did not assign blame in the first wrongful conviction. Assuming things continue the way they appear to be headed again an the State whitewashes this again (VERY big assumption at this point), how bad would it have to be to get USDOJ involved?

Yeah I might have misread it. I thought it was barrel, but looking back I guess he said the fire pit.

quote:

---

Yeah I might have misread it. I thought it was barrel, but looking back I guess he said the fire pit.

---

My theory was trying to explain, in part, why there were bones in the quarry, barrel, and fire pit. His testimony doesn't help my theory out too much.

So the quarry, the fire pit, and the barrel are all 3 separate places?

Wasn't the barrel near the fire pit, or next to it, or used in conjunction with it? All behind Steve's house?

That is my understanding. Here is a map:




So my theory was that he killed her at the "quarry pile", tried to burn her there, but couldn't sit out there all day. And so stuck the remains in a barrel with a shovel and took it to the burn pit to burn some more. I read that you need 1500-2000 degrees or (maybe and) a long time to burn a body that well.

That doesn't jive with a few things Brendan said in that testimony. He made it sound like she was pretty much intact. And that Avery dragged her there in a sled or something. But They supposedly found pieces of hip bone at the quarry (I could be wrong), so that does not sound very intact.

Another thing... I get the impression that they did not identify those bone pieces at the quarry to belong to her. But reading an anthropologist post about it on Reddit, he said that an anthropologist could identify the bones as belonging to a human "with near 100% accuracy". So going off of that, I'm making an assumption that they belong to her.

As far as I can remember, the documentary never explicitly said "a test was performed and confirmed bones from all 3 sites belong to Teresa Halbach".

I assuming we know for sure that they are her bones? Or did his lawyers simply think that "hey, these could be ANYBODY's bones" wasn't a reasonable defense?

Yeah, since there was nothing presented to dispute the identity of the bones, I assumed that testing had been properly done to confirm it.

I seem to recall a statement about being shot in the head 11 times. Was this confirmed? I got the impression the skeleton was far from complete.

Well that is certainly new evidence. Holy smokes. Jury intimidation charges?

quote:

---

Yeah, since there was nothing presented to dispute the identity of the bones, I assumed that testing had been properly done to confirm it.

I seem to recall a statement about being shot in the head 11 times. Was this confirmed? I got the impression the skeleton was far from complete.

---

There were 11 shell casings found in the garage. That's where the 11 came from.

WHAT IF

The ballistics expert found Teresa's DNA and the DNA of someone else who may have handled the bullet.

Would it somehow be better (less immoral) in her eyes to remove that DNA and add hers to the report? So on the stand she could testify that Teresa's blood wasnt the only DNA on bullet, and that it was contaminated durring a teaching session, instead of a Manitowoc cop handling it.

Is it random for a very environmentally sensitive piece of evidence to be used as a teaching session, or were students brought in to corroborate the story and refute foul play?

Way too many holes in the discovery of bullet and testing.

Any chance his sweat and DNA could have found its way to the hood latch by someone taking his undergarments from his bedroom during those 8 days and rubbing them on the car?

Brainstorm random stupid ideas?

quote:

---

Any chance his sweat and DNA could have found its way to the hood latch by someone taking his undergarments from his bedroom during those 8 days and rubbing them on the car?

Brainstorm random stupid ideas?

---

My understanding is yes. You can transfer in such a way.

If I was a juror on that jury I'd be coming out now with stories "explaining" my decision now as well. Though it's clear the not guilty on the destruction of the remains does imply a compromise verdict of some sorts.

My guess is the DNA on the hood latch is his and he lifted the hood for some reason. She'd been there a few times so you could argue he'd checked the battery or something at times. Who knows.

quote:

---

If I was a juror on that jury I'd be coming out now with stories "explaining" my decision now as well. Though it's clear the not guilty on the destruction of the remains does imply a compromise verdict of some sorts.

My guess is the DNA on the hood latch is his and he lifted the hood for some reason. She'd been there a few times so you could argue he'd checked the battery or something at times. Who knows.

---

That's true. He could say that while she was there, she complained to him about a rattle under the hood, so he opened it to help look for something loose. Boom, explained away.

Only problem is that Brendan mentioned him opening the hood and disconnecting the battery.

Not to say Brendan is right or just imagined it because he said lots of things that didnt happen.

quote:

---

Only problem is that Brendan mentioned him opening the hood and disconnecting the battery.

Not to say Brendan is right or just imagined it because he said lots of things that didnt happen.

---

Nothing he says matters at all because he is the single worst witness ever.

They can't introduce his story to the jury because they won't put him on the stand.

This should be interesting.

quote:

---

This should be interesting.

---

And of course my internet is down. Hopefully I can find it on a website tomorrow

Watching Brendan Dassey's trial right now, I feel like I'm going to throw up, kid is obviously innocent.

quote:

---

Watching Brendan Dassey's trial right now, I feel like I'm going to throw up, kid is obviously innocent.

---

Meh. I don't necessarily believe he's innocent. I do absolutely think he should have been found not guilty and he shouldn't have been allowed to stand trial

Ken Katz on Megyn Kelly:

- he states unequivocally that she was raped and also shot in the garage. What? There's zero evidence that she was raped other than Brendan's confession

- claims Brendan's jeans had bleach stains and they bleached the garage to clean up

quote:

---

quote:

---

Watching Brendan Dassey's trial right now, I feel like I'm going to throw up, kid is obviously innocent.

---

Meh. I don't necessarily believe he's innocent. I do absolutely think he should have been found not guilty and he shouldn't have been allowed to stand trial

---

If Breandan's story was true there would be tons of physical evidence.

Brendan's story could be untrue, and he could also still be involved in the crime and/or cover up. It could have happened differently than his "confession".