Like the title says, my name is Tom Kertscher and I covered the Steven Avery trial for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

I broke the story in 2003 that Steven Avery would be released from prison after 18 years. Avery was on the phone with me when he was arrested in connection with the murder of Teresa Halbach.

You can see an archive of Journal Sentinel Avery trial coverage here. You can follow me on Twitter here for updates and insight as the Avery saga unfolds.

Everything they have thrown at the wall has been demolished, with the exception of the paper boy whom Zellner already proved lied in his affidavit. It's over. It's actually been over for a long time, but this just puts the official seal on it. Trying to claim Avery still has a prayer is like the Black Knight claiming it's merely a flesh wound.

On 11/05/05, a search warrant is issued for the Avery property after the Rav4 is found.

Karen Halbach's apparent statement to police states that, "Halbach stated that her daughter was driving a 1999 Toyota Rav4, dark blue in color" in a warrant.

CASO investigation

• Pam mentioned "bluish-green" 3 times in her phone call to Pagel and Wiegert.

• Nikole Sturm calls the car "blue/green" in her statement.

• Steven Schmitz tells Wiegert that Teresa drove a "blue" SUV

• Bobby's statement by Dedering has him mentioning a "teal or blue SUV" 3 times.

Manitowoc investigation

• Steven tells Remiker Teresa drove a small green SUV, and confirmed it was a Rav4 when asked.

• Remiker is informed of a "green or dark blue" Rav4..by Pam and Nikole Sturm.

At the trial

• During opening statements, Kratz talks about Bobby Dassey seeing a teal, or blue or green SUV

• When Kratz questioned Schmitz, he made sure to ask if the car was "bluish-green" in his questioning.

• Mike Halbach describes the car as "bluish-green".

• Ryan is asked about the car, states it is "blue-green in color", twice in the same sentence.

• Pam Sturm mentions "bluish green" twice during testimony, even making that cockeyed, hand wiggle motion that was odd.

• Curtis Drumm, asked about looking for the car, is asked about a teal, or blue or green SUV like a Rav4 seen, by Kratz.

• Nikole in testimony, talks about seeing the bluish green SUV when they found it.

• Bobby Dassey is asked about seeing a teal or blue SUV by Kratz.

• Jason Orth described in testimony about approaching a green or blue Rav4

Crime Lab techs

• Ertl calls the Rav4 "blue"..no color mystery.

• Stahlke called the Rav4 "blue"..no color mystery.

• Cpl. Wendorf at the crime lab takes possession of a "blue 4 door Toyota Rav4"..no color mystery.

Interviews

• 11/05/05 with O'Neill. Avery says the SUV is green.

• 11/06/05 O'Neill questioning Brendan asks him "Was that green Toyota vehicle by your house?"

• 02/27/06 (station) Wiegert asked Brendan about the Rav4. "Green and in good shape"

• 03/01/06 Fassbender asks Brendan again about the Rav4. Exact same wording. Brendan says "green, like a greenish-blue"

Where in the HELL am I going with this?

Check this out from Pam Sturm's call to Pagel and Wiegert.

CALLER: For Teresa Halbach. We have found a RAV4. What color specifically was her RAV4? And do You have a VIN number?

She specifically asks what color Teresa's car was?? Shouldn't she know that as part of the search party? Would her or Nikole really NOT be walking around with a copy of a flier on her in case she needed to check details? No, instead, she calls Pagel..whose phone number "Ryan just happened to give to her"..

Now, get ready for the answer..

DISPATCH: It was green

Green?? All this talk of "blue" and "bluish-green" and "teal"...and it's green?

Also, do you see what just happened there? The dispatcher just talked about the Rav4...in the past tense. As if they know already, that Teresa's Rav4 is destroyed. Maybe that's a stretch, but the prosecution (and Calumet County) for some reason REALLY wants us to know that her car is teal, or bluish-green. Not dark green or green. Marinette calls it green. Everyone in Manitowoc calls it green, as I will show you in a moment..but for some reason, after finding the Rav4 on 11/05...the color suddenly changes to "bluish green", "teal" or "blue". Weird!

Isn't it odd that 3 crime lab guys state the car is blue. Without any confusion?

For further reasons to find this curious..Look at Teresa's "missing" flier here.

http://imgur.com/ysWmsuY

How does a Rav4 go from being dark green in the hunt for Teresa to blue when the crime lab guys are going over it? Didn't you think it was odd that I posted all of this, leading off saying Karen Halbach states her daughter drove a "dark blue" Rav4, yet the family and friends create a flier that says "Dark Green"? That's because that warrant is actually for DNA from all those on the property...on Nov. 7th, the day after the "blue" Rav4 arrived at the crime lab.

Also, remember that "dark blue" Rav4 that Karen Halbach said her daughter was driving? Curious how a "dark green" Rav4 ended up listed as evidence seized in Manitowoc's investigation caselog dated Nov. 3rd. "Oh it's a typo? Why bother going back to correct the date or the frigging color of the car!??"

http://imgur.com/WFxi8G4

Tie all this in with a tarp over it when it's not raining, but uncovered when it is, and a VIN # that was apparently damaged or altered in some way, and oh boy..gives you goosebumps.

One more thing that might give you a little of the "hmmmm's"...look at the photo of Teresa by her car. Then look at the photo from the side in the crimelab. Back and forth them a lot of times. Now look at the muffler pipe. The one in the pic of her by the car..the muffler hangs down lower and the pipe is much longer. These photos were taken at the exact same angle. Granted, she could have gotten her muffler replaced...but her Carfax does not show that work done.

Investigation continues.

https://youtu.be/EdjnvVBECcA

Every Dean Strang interview conducted by mainstream media over the past week or so (that I've seen) has mentioned to him that he has become a sex symbol and asked him for his opinion on it. Every time, the question makes him very uncomfortable as the interviewer laughs about it.

This is completely unacceptable and has to stop right now. It distracts from the huge importance of the matters being discussed, it detracts from what he has to offer as a great legal mind and someone with first hand experience of the Avery trial, and it needs to be directly called out as insulting and inappropriate. I know that this subreddit is being watched by the media, so here's a message to all of you out there who will have the fortune to interview these people:

Cut it out.

Around the 46 minute mark they show a clip of Bobby Dassey saying that he didn't see TH leave, then flips to a statement made by Bryan Dassey saying Bobby told him that he was TH leave so SA couldn't have killed her.

Then all Kathleen says is, well the only reason Bobby would lie on the stand is if the prosecution pressured him. Like she makes a whole conspiracy up about how if Bobby says he didn't see her leave, then the cops would come after him. Then she says when she asked Bobby if he was pressured she says that he said he wasn't pressured.

Then the whole computer stuff. Like yeah it's not my taste but everyone's got kinks bro. And she goes, uh well violent porn links to violent homicides or some bull like that. And i'm sitting here like, well doesn't the stuff SA did with animals link to violent behavior too? But you're trying to use that excuse on Bobby and it's not fair to say that about SA.

I don't think I could buy enough glue to huff to buy into this stuff Kathleen.

Why is it ghastly that TH bones were given back to her family? Why are people laughing, clapping and cheering that because of this, SA should be released? Can someone tell me how this exonerates Stevie? Is everyone going jump for joy about the State wanting to and giving the Halbach family their daughters bones and Stevie happens to walk free for this?

Seems the Halbach family once again are getting wounds opened up and they can't seem to just lay their daughter to rest and have some peace.

They do not owe you onscreen tears.

They do not owe you alibis.

They do not owe you interviews.

They do not owe you a damn thing.

Your search for entertainment in their suffering is beyond sick, and many of you owe them apologies.

That Zellner knows she can't win this appeal with what she currently has. Like other recent appeals she has lost had to voluntarily dismiss, the current appeal is without merit. Because if she could win, then she would have filed a brief to win the appeal now instead of requesting to go on another side quest back to circuit court.

I just finished watching the documentary yesterday and I thought I'd check Reddit out to see what people were theorising about it. I'm baffled by the amount of people absolutely convinced of his innocence after watching a 10 hour documentary.

My feeling immediately afterwards was that there should be an appeal (I find out there certainly will be now Kathleen Zellner has taken this case on).

But I can't help thinking that 12 jurors who spent six weeks listening to evidence from the prosecution and defence deserve more credit than they are given. We just watched 10 hours of TV and started researching after viewing the events through the prism of his innocence as presented by the documentary makers.

Do people here think the jury was rigged? Or that the jurors were weak/stupid/unable to grasp information?

The fact that he was innocent of one crime does not preclude him being innocent of another.

Although corruption is obviously a real thing, I find the extent of evidence planting to be a little fantastical, they planted the car, blood, bones, a bullet from Avery's gun, the key etc

In collusion with the FBI and forensic technicians they conspired to alter what DNA results they had?

I have even seen a poster on here question whether the Halbech family willingly donated her bones to frame Steven Avery!

Avery was clearly a victim of police corruption in the 80s but I found myself pondering the possibility that on the day the Avery Bill passed (the same day as Halbech went missing), he considered himself beyond the reach of the law and somewhat untouchable.

I could ramble on but my only point really is that I think there is probably an equally compelling case for his guilt. The fact that he was entangled in seeking compensation clearly muddies the waters and gives apparent motive for further police corruption.

The best that can come of the publicity is an appeal that gets to the truth of the matter. But we cannot know that truth until then.

I was, like millions of people, on the side of Steven Avery. Then I watched convicting a murderer. Without a doubt he murdered Teresa Halbach, with Brennan Dasseys help. I owe Ken Kratz an apology for ever thinking less of him as a person, or lawyer. The creators of “making a murderer” should be ashamed of themselves.

There is much subterfuge surrounding this case so perhaps it is time to get back to basic facts. These are simple facts and not anything that could have been conjured or otherwise manufactured by one or more persons "framing" him.

Avery had a cut on his finger that could be the source of the blood in Rav4.

Avery took that afternoon off from work and has no alibi for the time during which the crime was committed.

Avery's girlfriend and house mate was in jail at the time.

Avery had a bonfire that night.

Avery was the last known person to see Halbach alive.

Avery purchased handcuffs and leg irons prior to the crime.

How is it that each of these "coincidences" fit the crime? Could the "framers" have been so fortunate to have all these things happen, like winning the lottery?

Or is Avery guilty and you have all been duped by some not so clever editing and a broken down old lawyer looking for some final glory before her face completely freezes up.

Genuinely interested in this.

CaM appears to have torn a new one in many of the fallacies believed by truthers. And it isn't done yet.

Do any previous truthers have the balls to admit they were wrong? We were probably all truthers for a brief period after having watched MaM Season 1. Then most people did a little bit of reading and almost instantly realised...

To those of you who do still believe in his innocence, I'd love to know if deep down you do actually realise his innocence is impossible, or whether perhaps you are deluded.

It's truly nice to see civil servants who did a phenomenal job investigating Teresa's murder, and those that prosecuted her murderers, getting to enjoy their retirements. Securing the convictions of Teresa's murderers that have withstood every possible challenge, from the courtroom to the media, is a true act of public service, and these fine people deserve their retirements. I can't help but wonder how many more victims Steven would have if he still had access to his favorite targets, women and children.

Job well done!

Guys it’s over , it’s 100 percent Steve and Brendan guilty of murder .They did it .

Are you a free thinker who looks at both sides and makes a fair judgement with no bias towards either side? Then consider my points.

People need to start looking out for Brendan instead of Steve. He should have taken the plea deal.

Brendan was a young kid with learning difficulties that made a mistake. Maybe in the moment he didn’t fully realise the consequences of his actions- likely due to his IQ but also because Steve probably threatened his life. If Steve is guilty then Brendan may have been forced to lose his virginity, think about that.

CONFESSION KEY INFO

Brendan says ‘He asked me if I wanted a girlfriend... He wanted me to get some pussy’

‘I said I wasn’t aged’ - 49:40 - 🔴confession video https://youtu.be/NYOaIDxirHE

People don’t lie about losing their virginity from raping someone.

Brendan also says something very telling. He says Teresa was ‘Asking Steven why he would do something like that’ - Brendan said this at 51:17 https://youtu.be/NYOaIDxirHE

Teresa was disgusted that Steven would be so sick to bring his underage nephew into the room to rape her.

🔴I urge people to go watch his confession mark 49:40 - THIS is the most IMPORTANT part in the whole confession. Where the bedroom is discussed. https://youtu.be/NYOaIDxirHE

Cops know these things because he has told them off camera already. That is why they keep saying ‘We know what happened’ and ‘Tell the truth’. They want it on camera.

Everything he says makes sense from the guilty standpoint. Lying about her clothes to cover for the fact he saw her without clothes- cops even say ‘Don’t guess... anytime you don’t remember you say that alright...yeah don’t make anything up’- They suspect he is lying because they are trained to understand body language of lying suspects. - At 14:30 https://youtu.be/NYOaIDxirHE

He lies that he saw her on the porch because he doesn’t want to admit he saw her in the bedroom. He also mentions the garage first instead of when he got the mail and knocked on the door because he is excluding his own involvement.

🔴At 13:49 in P1 video he says he sees Steve and Teresa talking on the porch. https://youtu.be/NYOaIDxirHE

🔴At 30:36 in P2 video of the confession he then tells cops he lied earlier and he DIDNT see her or Steven on the porch. He admitted he lied! Said he saw her jeep in the garage but she wasn’t on the porch. Wonder where she was? Hmm https://youtu.be/rJt6j5E1y_s

Also explains why Blaine didn’t see them on the porch and we know she couldn’t have been on the porch because she got there between 2 and 2:45. Bobby says he saw her around that time and we know that Brendan got home between 3:30-4:00. Thats also how cops KNOW he was lying in the first place about seeing her leave.

Just for one second, think about the fact that the police might be the good guys here. Maybe they are trying to help Brendan get something horrible off his chest? They know more lies wont help his conscience.

Kayla said Brendan was ‘forst’ and took it back on the stand, likely because if she didn’t then she knew Brendan would go to prison too.

She says in her letter she HATES Steven. This was originally told to a school counsellor where in usual circumstances things that are said are CONFIDENTIAL. However, if things are told to counsellors that include information about crimes or murderers then they will tell police. This letter was then written to the police from Kayla.

‘Brendan told me that he saw body parts in the fire’ - This must have been scary for a young kid like Brendan and so he told his cousin about it.

Her letter- https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/41m7fi/kaylas_written_statement_about_brendan_march_7/?source=images

For that reason I think Brendan has served his punishment of 12 years already and IF he is honest again, he deserves to get out. If he continues to lie then I believe the courts will never let him out.

Makes me sick that people cannot see that Brendan was doing the moral thing by confessing. I also feel let down that (edited currently) over 3 THOUSAND people have seen this post and not chosen to like. I am DISAPPOINTED in humans.

More willing to believe a documentary narrative and are too lazy to actually go and watch his confessions again and again and again and try to understand exactly what is taking place.

If Avery did it then he obviously isn’t going to confess, cops are sometimes hard to trust but Brendans confession is the ANSWER to all questions.

If you have rewatched his confession then its clear that he excludes his involvement up to 49:50 and then is guilt tripped into confession.

In P2 video of the confession he then clears up his previous lies and tells cops he saw her jeep in the garage but NOT her. Cops question him again because they know it doesn’t make sense that he said he saw her on the porch.

https://postimg.cc/image/55gdak499/

We see from CASO 1115-1115 that the "possible human" bones were accessed by Gahn, Fallon, Weigert and Hawkins, then taken to Wieting Funeral Home by Weigert and Hawkins. Wieting Funeral Home is the place that handled TH's funeral. Hawkins says that the packaging materials were retained and then stored in a secured vault. Sounds like they were being pretty careful about securing the chain of custody.

Funeral directors are licensed and regulated. So in the interim between the bones being handed over to the Funeral Home, when they were in the custody of agents of Calumet Country, and when they were buried, and again considered to be in the custody of Calumet Country, they were in the custody of a licensed funeral director, and the chain of custody was unbroken.

We don't know what happened to them after that. But we do know that TH's other remains were buried. But if the funeral home held them until they were buried, then the chain of custody was never broken. The bones were not destroyed. Statute 968.205 was not violated.

Can we all agree at least that the documentary was very heavily skewed in favor of the defense? I mean to the point where its inarguable that there was only one side of this case presented? If your only knowledge of the case came from the series I could see why youd think all the awful things about the prosecution, and the MCSO. But if youve done any further research at all you'd have to see how heavily biased the series is.

Dear Jerry Buting,

A year ago, you went on Dr. Phil and claimed:

It's simply false that (Steven Avery) has this long history of women that he's been abusive to...

Jerry, please stop...

• Stop dismissing the fact that Steven frequently physically abused his ex-wife (which he admitted to in 1993).

• Stop making excuses for Steven using his kids to send numerous death threats (in graphic detail) to his ex-wife:

  "You saw these letters that he wrote to his ex-wife where he's very angry... but that's because he's gone through a divorce and she's then said 'I'm not going to bring your children to visit you'. Imagine this guy, he's in prison wrongly convicted, and she's now refusing to take the kids there. Of course he's angry!"

• Stop disparaging Steven's cousin claims that he was stalking and sexually harassing her.

• Stop waving away the fact that Steven ran his cousin off the road and threatening her with a loaded rifle (convicted in 1985).

• Stop minimizing Jodi's allegations of domestic violence which have been corroborated by numerous Avery friends & family.

• Stop ignoring allegations that Steven molested 13-year-olds.

• Stop belittling women who claim Steven threatened them, like you did on national TV with his ex-fiancee:

  You know I can't comment on some woman who- who- who's never met anybody, who writes to them in prison, and decides she wants to marry them. You know she's got some issues of her own...

• Stop brushing off detailed claims from multiple women that Steven Avery raped them.

and last, but certainly not least:

• Stop rejecting the fact that Steven Avery murdered a defenseless woman.

It is clear that Steven Avery has a "long history of women that he's been abusive to", and to claim that it's false is an insult to women everywhere and a disservice to the whole movement encouraging women to speak out against abuse.

Show some dignity, Jerry.

I understand you have a former client (whom you still profit off of), but you also have a wife and daughter.

Jerry Buting, be a better man.

Love,

watwattwo

p.s. an abject apology from you is deserved, but not expected

REPORTER: And... and I think I heard, uh, that the... the language "made my skin crawl" from one of the judge's today. Looking at that video. Um, talk about that.

AG SCHIMEL: I've seen the videos, and they don't make... what makes my "skin crawl" is knowing the things that happened to Teresa Halbach, not... not that this young man is uncomfortable talking about it and reliving it. Teresa's family relives this every day.

The state's response really puts the absurdity of Judge Wood's "made my skin crawl" comment into context. She watched and listened as Dassey provided investigators with the horrific details of how he and his uncle raped, murdered, and incinerated a young woman... and what makes her "skin crawl" is not Teresa begging for her life, but rather the SCOTUS-sanctioned interrogation methods used to elicit that confession?!

The book reveals how he beat her viciously over 18 months together, and once tied her to the bed and wanted to video himself raping her.

She told cops on another occasion he battered and strangled her in a fury when he found out she'd been out without telling him, knocking her unconscious then dragging her outside and threatening to shoot her dead.

The evidence was ruled inadmissible at his 2007 trial for killing Teresa, a photographer whose charred bones were found near Avery's scrap yard in Wisconsin, US, in 2005.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8628815/steven-avery-making-a-murderer-ex-teresa-halbach/

"I want you to know that, that we work on this every day, and all day, for you"

Laura Riccardi, to Steven

https://youtu.be/bTFAW8hGlrs?t=2746

Congrats to the 28 redditors who answered my question correctly.

Do totally independent journalists usually say they're working "for" their murder suspect subjects? Curious....