04/16/07 - Day 1 Trial (Brendan Dassey)



STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT BRANCH 3 STATE OF WISCONSIN, PLAINTIFF, JURY TRIAL TRIAL DAY 1 Case No. 06 CF 88 vs. BRENDAN R. DASSEY, DEFENDANT.
DATE: APRIL 16, 2007
BEFORE: HON. JEROME L. FOX Circuit Court Judge
APPEARANCES: KENNETH R. KRATZ Special Prosecutor On behalf of the State of Wisconsin. THOMAS J. FALLON Special Prosecutor On behalf of the State of Wisconsin. NORMAN A. GAHN Special Prosecutor On behalf of the State of Wisconsin. MARK R. FREMGEN Attorney at Law On behalf of the defendant. RAYMOND L. EDELSTEIN Attorney at Law On behalf of the defendant. BRENDAN R. DASSEY Defendant Appeared in person. TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS Reported by Jennifer K. Hau, RPR Official Court Reporter (Reconvened at 9:07 a.m.)
THE COURT: Court will call the case of State of Wisconsin vs. Brendan R. Dassey, 06 CF 88. Appearances, please.
ATTORNEY KRATZ: The State appears by Calumet County District Attorney Ken Kratz, also appearing is Tom Fallon from the Department of Justice, Norm Gahn from the Milwaukee County D.A.'s Office, all appearing as special prosecutors.
ATTORNEY FREMGEN: Attorney Mark Fremgen and Attorney Raymond Edelstein appear with Brendan Dassey.
THE COURT: At this point I'd ask the clerk to swear the jury in, please.
THE CLERK: Would the jurors please rise? Please raise your right hands. (Jurors sworn.)
THE COURT: Counsel, I'm going to give some preliminary instructions for the record. We have previously discussed these and, uh, both sides agree to the instructions to be given today; is that correct, Mr. Kratz?
ATTORNEY KRATZ: Yes.
THE COURT: Mr. Fremgen?
ATTORNEY FREMGEN: Yes, Judge.
THE COURT: All right. Before the trial begins, there are certain instructions you should better have to understand your functions as a juror and how you should conduct yourself during the trial. Your duty is to decide the case based only on the evidence presented and the law given to you by the Court. Do not let any personal feelings of bias or prejudice against any such things as race, religion, national origin, sex or age affect your deliberations. Do not begin your deliberations and discussion of the case until all the evidence is presented and I have instructed you on the law. Do not discuss this case among yourselves or with anyone else until your final deliberations in the jury room. We will stop or recess from time to time during the trial. You may be excused from the courtroom when it is necessary for me to hear legal arguments from the lawyers. If you come in contact with the parties, lawyers, or witnesses, do not speak with them. For their part, the parties, lawyers, and witnesses will not contact or speak with the jurors. Should you be exposed to any reports or communications from any source concerning the case during the trial, you should report that information to the jury bailiff. The Court is aware that many of you've been exposed to publicity concerning this case before you were selected to serve as a juror. Each of you has committed to base your verdict only on the evidence introduced during the trial. It is of vital importance to the parties and the sanctity of the court process that you remain true to this commitment. Anything you may see or hear outside the courtroom is not evidence. You are to decide the case solely on the evidence offered and received at trial. Evidence is, first, the sworn testimony of witnesses, both on direct and cross-examination, regardless of who called the witness. Second, the exhibits the Court has received. And, third, any facts to which the lawyers have agreed, or stipulated, or which the Court has directed you to find. Attorneys for each site -- side have the right and the duty to object to what they consider are improper questions asked of witnesses and to the admission of other evidence which they believe is not properly admissible. You should not draw any conclusions from the fact that an objection was made. By allowing testimony or other evidence to be received over the objection of counsel, the Court is not indicating any opinion about the evidence. You jurors are the judges of the credibility of the witnesses and the weight of the evidence. You are not required to, but you may take notes during the trial except during the opening statements and closing arguments. The Court will provide you with materials. In taking notes, you must be careful that it does not distract you from carefully listening to and observing the witnesses. You may rely on your notes to refresh your memory during deliberations. Otherwise, keep them confidential. Your notes will be collected by the jury bailiff after each day's session and kept in a secure place until the next day of trial. After the trial, the notes will be collected and destroyed. You will not have a copy of the written transcript of the trial testimony available for use during your deliberations. You may ask to have specific portions of the testimony read to you. You should pay careful attention to all the testimony, because you must rely primarily on your memory of the evidence and testimony introduced during the trial. To assist you in evaluating the evidence, I will now read to you portions of the specific jury instructions for the offenses with which the defendant is charged. I will read them to you in their entirety at the close of the evidence. Count 1. Count 1 of the Information charges the defendant with first degree intentional homicide, as party to a crime to the crime. Section 939.05 of the Wisconsin Criminal Code provide that whoever's concerned in the commission of a crime is a party to that crime and may be convicted of that crime although that person did not directly commit it. The State contends that the defendant was concerned in the commission of the crime of first degree intentional homicide by either directly committing it or by intentionally aiding and abetting the person who directly committed it. If a person intentionally aids and abets the commission of a crime, then that person is guilty of the crime as well as the person who directly committed it. A person intentionally aids and abets the commission of a crime when acting with knowledge or belief that another person is committing or intends to commit a crime, he knowingly either assists the person who commits the crime, or is ready and willing to assist, and the person who commits the crime knows of the willingness to assist. To intentionally aid and abet the crime of first degree intentional homicide, the defendant must know that another person is committing or intends to commit the crime of first degree intentional homicide and have the person -- and have the purpose to assist the commission of that crime. Before you may find the defendant guilty of first degree intentional homicide as a party to the crime, the State must prove by evidence which satisfies you beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant directly committed the crime of first degree intentional homicide or intentionally aided and abetted the commission of that crime. All jurors do not have to agree on whether the defendant directly committed the crime of first degree intentional homicide or aided and abetted the conunission of the crime. However, each juror must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was concerned in the conunission of the crime in one of those ways. First degree intentional homicide, as defined in 940.01 of the Criminal Code of Wisconsin, is committed by one who causes the death of another human being with the -- the intent to kill that person or another. Before you may find the person -- the defendant guilty of first degree intentional homicide, the State must prove by evidence which satisfies you beyond a reasonable doubt that the following two elements were
present: Number one, Brendan Dassey caused the -- the death of Teresa Halbach, or aided and abetted another in causing the direct -- the death of Teresa Halbach. "Cause" means that the defendant's acts were a substantial factor in producing the death. Number two, Brendan Dassey acted with the intent to kill Teresa Halbach, whether he did so directly or aided and abetted another. "Intent to kill" means that the defendant had the mental purpose to take the life of another human being, or was aware that his conduct was practic -- practically certain to cause the death of another human being. While the law requires that the defendant acted with intent to kill, it does not require that intent exists for any particular length of time before the act is committed. The act need not be brooded over, considered, or reflected upon for a week, a day, an hour, or even a minute. There need not be any appreciable time between the formation of the intent and the act. The intent to kill may be formed at anytime before the act, including the instant before the act, and must continue to exist at the time of the act. You cannot look into a person's mind to find intent. Intent to kill must be found, if found at all, from the defendant's acts, words and statements, if any, and from all the facts and circumstances in this case bearing upon intent. Intent should not be confused with motive. While proof of intent is necessary to a conviction, proof of motive is not. Motive refers to a person's reason for doing something. While motive may be shown as a circumstance to aid in establishing the guilt of a defendant, the State is not required to prove motive on the part of the defendant in order to convict. Evidence of motive does not, by itself, establish guilt. You should give it the weight you believe it deserves under all of the circumstances. You're satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt at the conclusion of the trial that the defendant directly committed both elements of first degree intentional homicide, or that the defendant intentionally aided and abetted the commission of that crime, you should find the defendant guilty. If you are not so satisfied, you must find the defendant not guilty. Count 2 charges the defendant with mutilating a corpse, also as a party to a crime -- to the crime. Section 939.05 of the Criminal Code of Wisconsin, provide that whoever is concerned in the commission of a crime is a party to that crime and may be convicted of that crime although that person did not directly commit it. The State contends that the defendant was concerned in the commission of the crime of mutilating a corpse by either directly committing it or by intentionally aiding and abetting the person who directly committed it. If a person intentionally aids and abets the commission of a crime, then that person is guilty of the crime as well as the person who directly committed it. Person intentionally aids and abet the com -- abets the commission of a crime when acting with knowledge or belief that another person is committing or intends to commit a crime, he either knowingly assists the person who commits the crime, or is ready and willing to assist, and the person who commits the crime knows of the willingness to assist. To intentionally aid and abet the crime of mutilating a corpse, the defendant must know that another person is cormnitting or intends to commit the crime of mutilating a corpse and have the purpose to assist the commission of that crime. Before you may find the defendant guilty of mutilating a corpse as a party to the crime, the State must prove by evidence which satisfies you beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant directly committed the crime of mutilating a corpse or intentionally aided and abetted the commission of that crime. All jurors do not have to agree whether the defendant directly committed the crime of first degree, uh -- or uh, mutilating a corpse or aided and abetted the commission of the crime. However, each juror must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was concerned in the commission of the crime in one of those ways. Mutilating a corpse, as defined in Section 940.11 (1) of the Criminal Code of Wisconsin, is violated by one who mutilates a corpse with intent to conceal a crime, or avoid apprehension, prosecution, or conviction for a crime. Before you may find the defendant guilty of this offense, the State must prove by evidence which satisfies you beyond a reasonable doubt
that the following two elements were present: Number one, Brendan Dassey mutilated the corpse of Teresa Halbach, or aided and abetted another in mutilating the corpse of Teresa Halbach. Number two, in mutilating the corpse of Teresa Halbach, or in aiding and abetting another in mutilating her corpse, Brendan Dassey acted with the intent to conceal the crime. This requires that the defendant acted with the purpose to conceal a crime. You cannot look into a person's mind to find out about intent. Intent must be found, if found at all, from the defendant's acts, words and statements, if any, and from all the facts and circumstances in the case bearing upon intent. If you are satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt at the conclusion of the trial that Brendan Dassey directly committed both elements of this offense, or that Brendan Dassey directly aided and another -- aided and abetted another in the commission of the crime, you should find the defendant guilty. If you are not so satisfied, you must find the defendant not guilty. Count 3 charges the defendant with first degree sexual assault by use or threat of a dangerous weapon, also as a party to a crime. Section 939.05 of the Criminal Code of Wisconsin provides that whoever is concerned in the commission of a crime is a party to that crime and may be convicted of that crime although the person did not directly commit it. The State contends that the defendant was concerned in the commission of the crime of first degree sexual assault by either directly committing it or by intentionally aiding and ab -- and abetting the person who directly committed it. The person intentionally aids and abets the commission of a crime, then that person is guilty of a crime as well as the person who directly committed it. Person intentionally aids and abets the commission of a crime when acting with knowledge and belief that another person is committing or intends to commit a crime, he knowingly either assists the person who commits the crime or is ready and willing to assist, and the person who commits the crime knows of the willingness to as -- to assist. To intentionally aid and abet the crime of first degree sexual assault, the defendant must know that another person is committing or intends to commit the crime of first degree sexual assault and have the pers have the purpose to assist the commission of that crime. Before you may find the defendant guilty of first degree sexual assault as a party to a crime, the State must prove by evidence which satisfies you beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant directly committed the crime of first degree sexual assault or intentionally aided and abetted the commission of that crime. All jurors do not have to agree whether the defendant directly committed the crime of first degree sexual assault or aided and -- and abetted the commission of that crime. However, each juror must con -- be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was concerned in the commission of the crime in one of those ways. First degree sexual assault, as defined in Section 940.225 (1) (b) of the Criminal Code of Wisconsin, is committed by one who has sexual intercourse with another person without consent and by use or threat of a dangerous weapon. Before you find the defendant guilty of this offense, the State must prove by evidence which satisfies you beyond a reasonable doubt that
the following three elements were present: Number one, the defendant had sexual intercour -- course with Teresa Halbach. Number two, Teresa Halbach did not consent to the sexual intercourse. Number three, the defendant had sexual intercourse with Teresa Halbach by use or threat of a dangerous weapon. This requires that the defendant actually used or threatened to use the dangerous weapon to compel Teresa Halbach to submit to sexual intercourse. If you are satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that all three elements of first degree sexual assault have been proven, you should find the defendant guilty. If you are not so satisfied, you must find the defendant not guilty. In reaching your verdict, examine the evidence with care and caution. Act with judgment, reason and prudence. Defendants are not required to prove their innocence. The law presumes every person charged with the commission of an offense to be innocent. This presumption requires a finding of not guilty unless in your deliberations you find it is overcome by evidence which satisfies you beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty. The burden of establishing every fact necessary to constitute guilt is upon the State. Before you can return a verdict of guilty, the evidence was -- must satisfy the -- you beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty. If you can reconcile the evidence upon any reasonable hypothesis consistent with the defendant's innocence, you should do so and return a verdict of not guilty. The term "reasonable doubt" means a doubt based upon reason and common sense. It is a doubt for which a person can be given uh, for which a reason can be given arising from a fair and rational consideration of the evidence or lack of evidence. It means such a doubt as would cause a person of ordinary prudence to pause or hesitate when called upon to act in the most important affairs of life.
A reasonable doubt is not a doubt which is based on mere guesswork or speculation.A doubt which arises merely from sympathy or from fear to return a verdict of guilt is not a reasonable doubt.A reasonable doubt is not a doubt such as may be used to escape the responsibility of a decision. While it is your duty to give the defendant the benefit of every reasonable doubt, you are not to search for doubt, you are to search for the truth. The lawyers will now make opening statements. The purpose of an opening statement is to give the lawyers an opportunity to tell you what they expect the evidence will show so that you can better understand the evidence as it is introduced during the trial. I must caution you, however, that the opening statements are not evidence. Mr. Kratz? Juror Covington, were you able to hear me when I gave these instructions?
JUROR COVINGTON: Yes.
THE COURT: All right. Let's proceed.
ATTORNEY KRATZ: Can everybody hear me okay? As our tech guy comes up here, I wanted to say good morning. Thank you for the service that you have offered in this case. Uh, you are from Dane County. You're not a Manitowoc County jury, and so it's a great inconvenience, I know, for all of you to sit and listen to this very important case. But let me assure you that this process, the process that you've been going to in the next couple of weeks, um, may include one of the most important decisions, uh, that you're ever going to have to make. Uh, it is a, uh -- a daunting task for citizens to go through, uh, but it is, uh, obviously important not just to Mr. Dassey, but to the, uh, Halbach family, to the friends of the family, uh, of Teresa Halbach, to the citizens of Manitowoc County, uh, where we currently, uh, are holding this trial. Uh, the trial, itself, or my opening statement, itself, uh, is not intended to be evidence. The Judge already told you that. Um, but it will be a little bit lengthy, uh, in that we have to take what, uh, may be six or seven weeks of testimony into a trial, uh, and at least in this case fit it into about three days, uh, worth of testimony. And much of the evidence in this case is not contested, uh, will be stipulated to, meaning agreed to, uh, and so you, the jurors, since you don't have the same basis of knowledge that the lawyers do, uh, you have to be told the background and a lot of those facts, and so I'll be doing that in my opening statement as well as having some witnesses testify, uh, about that, uh -- about that as well. Uh, you will notice around the courtroom are, um, screens, uh, which, um, do, in most regards, um, have the, uh, text or photos or the videotapes that you'll be watching. Uh, they are meant to assist you and give you different places to, uh -- to see those things, and so I wanted to encourage you to do that as well. Let me also remind you that this is not, um, a closed system in that you can't, uh, participate. Uh, the one way that you can participate, uh, is if one of you needs a break for some reason. Uh, I need to let you know that if you need a break, uh, either, if you're, um, not concentrating well enough, or you just need a -- a regular, uh, kind of other kind of break, just raise your hand, all right? Get my attention or the Judge's attention, and we'll take a break. And, certainly, during this opening statement, you'll get at least one, and perhaps two, breaks, uh, so that you're able to remain fresh, you're able to, um, listen to the very important statements that myself and the defense will be giving in this opening statement. All right? First thing I want to talk about is an introduction of the prosecution team. That is, the people that are sitting at or near this table. My name's Ken Kratz. It's the first chance I've had to address each of you. Uh, I am a district attorney. I'm the D.A. of Calumet County, which is the county just east, uh, of Manitowoc, of, uh -- excuse me, just west of Manitowoc, uh, where we are, uh, right now. Uh, and I am the lead counsel. Nothing special about that term. It just means that, uh, I have, uh, coordinated the, uh, investigation and prosecution of this case, uh, and will be assisting in the presentation of the case as well. Um, Mr. Fallon, who you already heard from, is an assistant, uh, district attorney. Um, Mr. Fallon, uh, works for the Department of Justice in Madison. Uh, he's the gentleman in the middle, and, uh, will be another prosecutor in this case. And, finally, Mr. Gahn is a Milwaukee County Assistant District Attorney. Uh, Mr. Gahn will be presenting the parts of the case, you'll notice, where Mr. Gahn has expertise. Uh, that is in DNA evidence, uh, and in the sciences and some of the other places. So I at least wanted to let you know why we're involved. We, by the way, are helping, we're doing a favor, if you will, for Manitowoc County. Uh, the three prosecutors that have been assigned responsibility for this, uh, important case and the case involving Steven Avery, uh, which were the same prosecutors, the same prosecution team, uh, assisted Manitowoc in, um -- in the efforts of the prosecution. Two lead investigators were involved in this case. Uh, they are, um, Mr. Mark Wiegert, who is the gentleman in the glasses. Mr. Wiegert is an investigator with the Calumet County Sheriff's Department. And Mr. Tom Fassbender, who is seated next to him, works, again, for the Department of Justice, Division of Criminal Investigation. You're going to learn in this case that several hundred law enforcement officers were involved. Um, that the personnel and the search efforts in this case were, uh, overwhelming. In fact, you're probably going to learn that this was one of the largest, if not, the largest, at least by resources, investigation, criminal investigation, homicide investigation in Wisconsin history. And because of the scope of this case, because of the size of this case, it required investigators to coordinate or to make sure that everything was done, uh, not only properly, but leadership, uh, and direction was, uh -- was certainly required in this case. If I could have, uh, just a minute. We're going to try to fix at least these two screens so that all of the, uh, text shows, but that doesn't mean I'm going to stop. I'm a lawyer so I can -- I can just keep, uh - - keep talking. Opening statements, as the Judge told you, are an opportunity to tell you what we think the evidence is going to show. But more than that, it's a, uh -- it's a roadmap. It's an overview. Since evidence comes in in bits and pieces, some people describe, uh, trials as, um, puzzles, jigsaw puzzles, if you will, and how evidence may fit into there. You need to know how each little piece of evidence in this two-week trial is going to fit into the big picture. Is going to fit into whether or not Brendan Dassey is guilty of the three offenses for, uh, which he has been charged. Uh, I've told you, and you know, and most of you, in fact, I think all of you, uh, have indicated in your questionnaires that you were at least somewhat familiar with the Steven Avery, uh, case. But you didn't hear the evidence in that case. Um, and some of that evidence, as I mentioned, may or may not be contested, but because of the importance of this case, it's still necessary to tell you the whole story. It's necessary to explain all of the physical evidence, as well as the evidence that may be directed towards, uh, Brendan Dassey, and some of that evidence, again, will be physical evidence and some is going to be statements. Uh, and so we intend, uh, to tell you about all of that, certainly, during this opening statement and, uh -- and during this process. The Judge told you that Mr. Dassey's been charged with three separate offenses; first degree intentional homicide, mutilating a corpse and first degree sexual assault. He told you the elements. That is, what it is the State has to prove. And we certainly intend to do that. All right. The first legal concept that I want to talk about is party to the crime. The Judge has instructed you that party to the crime is a, uh -- a concept, a -- a form of criminal liability, that, uh, is committed either when somebody commits a crime, themselves, or when they aid and abet the commission of the crime. Now, this is the law. Judge Fox will tell you what the law is. So whether you think this is a good idea or a bad idea, it's the law and you have to follow this law. And so the description or the explanation of, as an example, what aiding and abetting means, is important for you to know. The Judge has told you that a defendant can aid and abet the commission of crime, um, if he assists somebody who commits it or, importantly, and what you might hear in this case, as the evidence may show in this case, uh, quite a bit, is that the individual, in this case, Brendan Dassey, stood ready and willing to assist, and that the actor, in this case, Steven Avery, uh, was an individual who knew of Brendan's willingness to aid and abet. All right? Now, I'm telling you that this early in the case because this is an important concept. It's important for you to understand what the criminal liability is, and, again, whether you agree with or don't agree with that concept, with the concept of party to the crime, it's something the Judge tells you you have to accept and you have to adopt. I'm going to introduce you to a lovely young woman. This is Teresa Halbach. Ms. Halbach was 25 years old on Halloween of 2005. You're going to hear evidence in this case that Ms. Halbach was single. That Ms. Halbach was a college graduate. Ms. Halbach was a freelance photographer. She was a daughter. She was a sister. She was a friend. And she had her whole life ahead of her. You're also going to hear evidence that all of that came to an end on Halloween of 2005. This story, this case, begins at about 8:12 a.m. on Halloween Day of 2005 when the plan was set into motion to take this young woman's life. The plan was set into motion to rape, and to kill, and to mutilate this 25-year-old innocent, young woman. The investigation of this case begins when we learn that Ms. Halbach was reported missing on Thursday, the 3rd of November, 2005. She was a photographer. One of her contracts, one of the reasons, uh, that she was a photographer was she worked for a magazine. She worked for something called AutoTrader Magazine, which was a magazine that sells cars. It -- it, uh, put ads in the cars, and it requires photographers to go around and take pictures, uh, of those cars. Uh, and so learning about Ms. Halbach, or learning how she worked for AutoTrader Magazine, is important for you to understand about the investigation, because you will learn that the investigation, or at least the missing persons investigation, determined that the last place that Ms. Halbach was on the 31st was a place called the Avery Salvage Yard. Uh, this is a place located here in Manitowoc in a place called the town of Gibson. It's rural Manitowoc. It's kind of the northern edge, uh, of Manitowoc, uh, but it's a -- a junkyard, a -- a salvage business that has junked cars. Uh, and the, uh, other determination early on in this case was that a man by the name of Steven Avery made an appointment at 8:12 that morning to have Ms. Halbach come to that residence, or to come to that property, which was the Avery salvage property. I've alluded a little bit earlier about the case against Steven Avery, and you first need to know about the case against Steven Avery, the investigation, uh, that pointed towards Steven Avery being involved in this case. You may already know, and many of your jury questionnaires told us that you knew, at least some things about this man, about Steven Avery, that he had achieved some degree of notoriety in 2003 when he was exonerated, when he was released from prison for a 1985 sexual assault. You may know that Mr. Avery, or you'll hear in this case, that Mr. Avery was exonerated or set free because of something called DNA evidence. Because there was some DNA evidence from the '85 case that didn't match, uh, in that case, and that an analyst from the State Crime Lab, one particular analyst, found DNA on one piece of evidence, on a hair that was collected from the 1985 case, that didn't match. That didn't match Steven Avery. And so Mr. Avery was released. He was released from prison. Ironically, you will hear, that that- um, analyst from the Crime Lab, the DNA, um, specialist who exonerated Steven Avery, was a woman named Sherry Culhane. You're going to hear her name later on in this case, because Ms. Culhane, as evidence is developed in this case, happens to be the very same analyst that does the DNA, um, workup. That does all of the testing of the DNA case. All right. I'm going to -- Because the side screens are not quite as large, the bottom's cut off or the top is cut off, you're going to have to look behind me at least until we take our break when we fix, uh, these side screens. But this is the very first time, and the very first important photo that I want you all to look at. This is the Avery salvage property. The Avery Salvage Yard. It consists of about 40 acres of junked cars. It consists of four different residences. Four trailers on this peep - - piece of property. The Steven Avery trailer, which is located in the bottom left-hand corner of the screen, or which would be the northwest corner of the property. Right next to Mr. Avery's trailer is his sister's, uh, property. Her name at that time was Barb Janda. Also living with Barb at the time were her sons, four sons, all with the name of Dassey. Uh, they included, uh, the defendant, Brendan Dassey, uh, his brothers, uh, Blaine and Bobby and Bryan. They all lived on that property as well. Another trailer that's located on this property was the Allen and Delores Avery trailer. These were the grandparents of Brendan, or the mom and dad, if you will, of, uh, Steven and, uh, his sister, Barb. And also on the property was the -- his brother, Chuck's, trailer. So there's four residences. You can see of the buildings that are on this massive, um, um, property for them are businesses. You'll also notice on these, um, aerial photographs that there's lots of buildings. There's outbuilding, there's business buildings, there's, uh, a lot of sheds and those kind of things that, uh, you need to be familiar with as you hear about some of the searches and where some of the evidence, uh, is -- is found. All right? Well, the investigation takes a dramatic turn on-the morning of, -uh, Saturday, November 5, when, uh, two citizen searchers, uh, uh, Nikole and Pam Sturm, uh, when given permission to search the Avery salvage property, these 40 acres, uh, happened to find the picture that you've seen here. They happened to find Teresa Halbach's SUV. Uh, you'll notice, uh, Teresa Halbach's SUV is covered. It is concealed. Uh, there'll be testimony that it was intentionally concealed, uh, with branches of debris and this very large, um, hood for a vehicle. A--a -- a large, uh, either car or truck hood is -- is leaned up against it. Suffice it to say, though, that at 10:30 in the morning on the 5th of November, this case takes a very dramatic turn. You'll hear that the VIN number, that is the Vehicle Identification Number, when they're looking for Teresa, when the citizens are searching for Teresa, actually matches, uh, and so they know at that time that the, uh, vehicle is, in fact, the vehicle in question. Importantly, you'll hear evidence about where the vehicle was found. Ms. Halbach's vehicle was foun-d in the oppoffite corner of ooth the Avery and Dassey, uh, trailer. Uh, and, again, it's behind kind of a pond, but it's immediately adjacent to or close to a car crusher. Uh, that, uh, car crusher is equipment, you will hear in this case, evidence will show, uh, is the kind of equipment designed to crush cars. It kind of makes sense. It's -- it's called a -- a car crusher. But to make vehicles, um, very, very small, almost unidentifiable, and easily removed, uh, from the property. And you'll see why, and you'll hear why, uh, Teresa Halbach's vehicle is placed, uh, in that location. That is, that proximity to the car crusher. You'll also hear later on that night, after search warrants are obtained -- You'll hear what search warrants are. Search warrants are judicial authorization. Uh, that is, a judge tells law enforcement that you can go ahead and search a property for, um, evidence of a crime. Uh, and after those search warrants were obtained, you're going to hear that first evening that, uh, some K-9 units, what are called cadaver dogs, at least insentence -- insensitively called cadaver dogs, uh, dogs that are trained to find and detect human remains, um, they, in fact, uh, hit on, uh, the, um, vehicle of, uh, uh, Teresa Halbach, uh, alerting, indicating that there was either a deceased individual in the back of that car, or that there's human blood, uh, in the back of the car. You're going to hear evidence that this vehicle was loaded onto an enclosed trailer. It wasn't processed there at the scene. It was actually driven to Madison, to the Madison Crime Lab, for processing at that time. All right? Now, let me just tell you, again, this is a lot of information. This is, uh, days and days and days worth of, uh, testimony that, again, we're going to try to, uh, kind of fit into a short period of time because, uh, it's important to get to the crux of this case, uh, what we'll be able to show a little bit later. But on Saturday, residences and places are starting to be searched. All right? The first place, or at least one of the first places to be searched, is the trailer of, uh, Steven Avery. You'll hear from Agent Fassberiaer, and others that are involved in this search effort, that they want to find Teresa. Their first efforts -- And early on in this case, uh, even though they found her vehicle, Teresa hasn't been found yet. And so they're desperately looking for Teresa Halbach, hopefully, alive. They're hoping to find her on this property alive. And so you're going to hear of the law enforcement effort to search all of these residences, again, which include the trailer, which include the garage of Steven Avery, and other residences, including Brendan Dassey's, uh, home, uh, business, uh, properties, uh, on the property, uh, and also other, um, vehicles. In fact, all of the junked cars. Uh, you'll see photos of 4,000 junked cars. I hope at the end of this case you'll be able to appreciate just how many cars that is to search, each and every one of those cars, on at least two or three different occasions, by not only law enforcement, but volunteer firefighters and other, uh, citizen searchers. All right? Um, also, on, uh, the next day, that is on the 6th, that Sunday, the 6th of November, you 're going to hffar that every one of th: os-e junked cars is opened, is searched. Again, they're looking for Teresa Halbach's body. You're going to hear that a rifle, one of the two rifles that was in Steven Avery's residence was seized that Sunday. Uh, this rifle is a .22 caliber Marlin Glenfield semi-automatic, uh, rifle. You'll hear about the significance of this rifle, but you'll hear that it was actually hanging on the wall at least when officers found it -- hanging on a gun rack right on the wall in the bedroom of Steven Avery. You're going to hear about, uh, a phone message, uh, that was, uh, recovered. Uh, this phone message was recovered from Brendan Dassey's, uh, home. Uh, you're going to hear in this case -- and I know that I've advanced a little bit quickly for you, but when Steven Avery made the appointment to lure Teresa Halbach to the property, evidence will show that he used the name, B. Janda. His sister's name is Barb Janda. So using his sister's name, using his sister's phone number, or the call back number, uh, you're going to hear, uh, this or expect you'll hear this, uh, tape, this, um, uh, voice recording of Teresa, indicatihg that she gbt the message, uh, that, uh, the time that, uh, she would be able to come and take photographs of a van that was for sale was sometime after 2:00, uh, on that day. But, again, it was recovered and you'll be able too hear, um, that evidence. On Monday, uh, the 7th, the Crime Lab -- uh, and, again, it's a little bit better if you look at -- at this -- um, they make a startling discovery. Remember the SUV of Teresa was taken to the, um -- the Crime Lab for processing? They found male blood in six different locations in the SUV and they found a great deal of female blood in the back, or what's called the cargo area, of Teresa's, uh, SUV. These were the first results, uh, they had gotten. They didn't get any Dre DNA results back yet, but they could tell it was male blood, and they could tell that it was both, uh, female blood. You'll hear from investigators, from Mr. Fassbender, and even from some of the Crime Lab people, that when you find male blood and you find that amount of female blood, uh, in the back or in the cargo area of an SUV, it became very obvious on Monday, the 7th, just a couple of days into this investigation, that something terrible had happened. That a crime had happened. Criminal behavior, uh, was afoot, and that, uh, the search then began for what person or persons were involved in committing these crimes. Also, on Monday, you're going to hear about a burn barrel that was recovered from just outside of Steven Avery's, uh, residence. Uh, the Steven Avery and the Brendan Dassey, uh, residences, again, are next to each other, kind of between them, closer to Mr. Avery's house, is an Avery, um, burn barrel. Uh, this is another photograph to kind of give you a -- an idea of how close not only the burn barrel is to the Steven Avery trailer, but also, and more importantly, how close this burn barrel is to the van. This is the maroon van that Teresa Halbach, the evidence will show, was asked to come and take pictures of on Halloween Day on 2005, and so you'll hear about, uh -- about all of those things. The next day, Tuesday, uh, the 8th, you're going to hear that a thorough search was, um, performed of Steven Avery's trailer. Uh, and found in Steven Avery's bedroom was a key. This was a Toyota key. You will hear evidence that later this Toyota key matches the key of Teresa Halbach's SUV. It starts the ignition. It turns, uh, um, the ignition. The second important finding on the 8th was Teresa's license plates. These are found in a junked vehicle, uh, kind of on the path on the way to Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey's, uh, residence. And the third, and most chilling, discovery, uh, on the 8th, the evidence will show, is, uh, this burn area. Now, to give you an idea or an overview, again, of this corner, this quadrant, of the Avery property, again, the, uh, Dassey and Janda trailer, Steven Avery trailer, the van that was for sale, you'll be able to see that, uh, this burn area, uh, was found just a -- a few feet behind the garage of Steven Avery. You're going to hear evidence that within this burn area, um, obvious human bone fragments were found. You're going to hear that the Crime Lab came to process this scene, that arson investigators came to process the scene. They recovered, uh, at least on that first day, that is, Tuesday, the 8th, as many of the bones that they could recover from this obvious, um, uh, destructive, uh, area, this burn area, and the evidence will, uh, show that, um, uh -- how the bones were, uh -- were recovered and transported for identification and examination. You're going to hear that officers Remember, this is Tuesday. They had gotten there Saturday already. That officers weren't able to, um, recover or to even examine this area. Uh, either police officers, themselves, humans, or with the assistance of K-9s, cadaver dogs, or bloodhounds, or any kind of search dogs, were not able to, uh, inspect this particular area, um, because of a German Shepherd that was, uh, vicious and that was guarding that particular, uh, area. That particular burn area. This is a photo that just assists you and explains why it took until Tuesday to find these, um, human remains in that area. All right? We'll move a little bit more quickly into the following -- or into the balance of that week. Uh, the recovery of those bones, you will hear, were in very, very, uh, small, um, size. They were also very, um, degraded. They were charred. Um, but they were all examined, um, by a forensic anthropologist. We'll talk about that a little bit, uh, later in the case. But what you need to know on Wednesday is that they were able to say that they're human bones and that they're from an adult female. Uh, officers, obviously, at this point believe that this is the site of the mutilation and the disposal of Teresa Halbach. Later, on the next day, on Thursday, uh, this burn area -- this is a little computer-generated image of the burn area, uh, officers, um, are able to further excavate and, um, recover all the rest of the bones that, uh, are found in that area. And let me just take a -- a moment, uh, to tell you about these computer-generated images, uh, that you're going to see. There's a gentleman by the name of Tim Austin. He is a, um, employee with the Wisconsin State Patrol. Uh, Tim Austin was at the scene for, uh, at least seven of the days, uh, that led up to or included the processing of the scene, and Mr. Austin -- you're going to hear evidence he took at least 4,100 measurements and later created, uh, not only still images, uh, of the exterior of the property, exterior of Mr. Avery's, uh, garage, and trailer, and the burn area, and, uh, the Janda and Dassey areas, um, but also some of the interiors. Because you're not going to be able to go out there, because you're not going to be able to do a -- a scene visit, um, Mr. Austin created for you, uh, kind of a tour. Um, many of you might be familiar with at least with some kind of computers, virtual tours, that you're able to kind of tour the area and -- and get kind of a a -- a lay of the land, if you will, and you'll hear how accurate, uh, the depictions are. You're going to see it. You're going to see the virtual tour so that you get a better flavor or feel for where one item might be in relation to another. All right? So, uh, we also have for you these computer-generated images, um, that you'll see. Now, you heard about Sherry Culhane. You heard about her doing some DNA work in this case. Now, you're going to hear that Ms. Culhane received from law enforcement 180 items -- 180 items of evidence, uh, where officers asked that a DNA profile be developed. Uh, you're going to hear that that is the largest submission of evidence, ever, at the Wisconsin State Crime Lab, uh, and that the amount of DNA work in this case, uh, was absolutely overwhelming. Ms. Culhane, and although not as important, uh, in, uh, this case, uh, will still tell you about all of the profiles that she was able to develop. She'll tell you what DNA is, and it's a genetic fingerprint, and how you can make matches and all those kind of things. All right? With that having been said, though, you're going to hear that one of the bones that was recovered, one of the bones that was recovered in the pit, still had some tissue on it. So it had some muscle tissue on the bone. It wasn't completely burned. It wasn't completely degraded. This allowed Ms. Culhane, uh, to develop a DNA profile, uh, and, in fact, positively match this leg bone, uh, to the sample, to the exemplar, to the standard of Teresa Halbach. So after that, um, bone is examined, and after a DNA profile is established, there isn't any more question as to who this female skeleton is, this mutilated, um, fragmentary skeleton belongs to, and that is, with 100 percent certainty, Teresa Halbach. So the investigative timeline, that is, the first, um, eight or ten days of this case, um, includes -- These aren't going to help you because we have stuff on the bottom. So you're going to have to look forward. Again, I apologize for that. That will be fixed at, uh -- at the break. But on the 31st of October, um, Teresa Halbach is killed. You're going to hear about the tirneline of October 31. You're going to hear that at 8:12 in the morning on the 31st, Steven Avery lures or calls, um, AutoTrader Magazine, and Teresa Halbach is asked to come out to the scene. You're also going to hear she'd been there five times before, um, but always with the name of, uh, Steven Avery. Uh, at least I think that's what the evidence is going to show. But Mr. Avery used a different name, uh, that is, B. Janda, to get her to come out on that afternoon. You're going to hear at 11:43 that morning, so sometime just before noon, Teresa Halbach makes that call, that's recorded, to Brendan Dassey and Barb Janda's answering machine saying, I can come out. Uh, I'll be out there sometime after 2:00, uh, today. You're going to hear about the two stops she made before Steven Avery's and Brendan Dassey's residence. That is, at the Steven Schmitz residence about 1:30, and sometime between 2 and 2:30 at a woman by the name of JoEllen Zipperer's. Uh, the similar kind of stops. She stops, she takes pictures of the cars, she gives them an AutoTrader Magazine, a bill of sale, she completes the transaction before taking the photo for Auto Trader, and then she goes on to her next stop that day. Well, her next stop that day, uh, was that of, um -- at the Steven Avery salvage property. You're going to hear at 2:27 p .rn. a woman from AutoTrader, Dawn Pliszka, talks to, uh, Teresa Halbach. You're going to hear that during that conversation, um, Ms. Halbach says, I'm on my way. I'm on my way to the Steven Avery property. So when we talk about a tirneline, when was she there? About when does she get there? You're going to hear that the Zipperer residence is less than ten minutes from the Avery property. And if at 2:27 she says, I'm on my way, it can be no longer or later than 3:27 or about 3:40. Excuse me, 2:27 or about 2:40 in the afternoon, 20 to 3, that Teresa Halbach gets to Steven Avery's property where the photos are taken. You will hear evidence that she completes the transaction. She takes the photos of the van just like she's been asked to do. Uh, you will then hear, uh, in, unfortunately, graphic detail, what happens at Teresa Halbach after 2:40 in the afternoon. Let's go back to the investigation for just a minute, though. Teresa doesn't show up for work on the 1st or 2nd of, um, November. On the 3rd, the Halbach family and friends become understandably concerned, and they begin to retrace Teresa's steps. Where is Teresa? How can we find her? On the 4th, both the citizen efforts and the law enforcement efforts to find Teresa are kind of ramped up. Um, they do aerial searches, uh, they look at financial transactions, they check out her cell phone records, and which towers that her cell phone kind of ping off of, or bounce off of, and also you'll hear about the distribution of missing person posters at that time by citizens. You'll hear that on the morning of the 5th her vehicle is found at 10:30 in the morning by the Sturms. At about 2:00, investigators, uh, become actively involved in searching, or at least in obtaining search warrants, and then, uh, searching the property, and you'll then hear about the searches continuing. Uh, very quickly, on Sunday, the, um, firearms and garage is searched, and you'll hear about the evidence, uh, that is obtained. On the 7th, it becomes more full scale. Lots and lots, in fact, hundreds of law enforcement officers and volunteers and citizens become involved in the search of this massive 40-acre property. Uh, at that time all the junked vehicles, uh, are searched, and you'll hear about the discovery of the burn barrel. On the 8th, those three critical discoveries that we talked about, uh, that is, the Toyota key being found in Steven Avery's bedroom, uh, SUV plates are found at that time, and the burn area is discovered, which -- excuse me -- contains, uh, those human remains. The 9th becomes an important day. Steven Avery's arrested. Steven Avery's arrested for a weapons charge. On the 9th, he's interviewed. But what you'll also hear about the Steven Avery contact on the 9th, uh, is that officers take some photographs. They do a, uh, physical examination of Steven Avery, and they find a cut that you'll see in just a few minutes. On the 10th, the burn area is further, um, examined. On the key, itself, on the key that was found in Steven's bedroom, they find his DNA. We'll talk about that a -- a -- a little bit, uh -- a little bit further. On the 11th, um, the victim's blood, that is the female blood, from within the SUV Remember the big pool? Or the big, uh, stains in the cargo area in Teresa's, uh, SUV? Uh, those now match, uh, a soda can that Teresa had up in the front of the vehicle. It's then presumed, uh, to be that of Teresa Halbach's. So those are the first, uh, eight days or so of the investigation and what you need to know. Again, that's probably, you know, two-and-a- half or three weeks, or could be, of testimony that, in this case, we're going to try to fit into a layer of evidence, try to fit into about two days, maybe two-and-a-half days. So it's going to go quickly, but it's meant to give you a flavor of the size of this case, the scope of this case, uh, and also, to the credit not only of the Halbach family and to the memory of Teresa, but you need to hear it. You need to hear the whole story, uh, of the investigation. We talked about those DNA matches that, uh, Ms. Culhane developed at the, uh, Crime Lab. You're going to hear that Teresa's, um, blood, uh, is, in fact, later positively identified, positively matched, to a standard in the cargo and -- and panel, uh, area. The back cargo door. You're going to hear about, uh, blood having been actually flung, uh, onto that door. You're going to hear from a person by the name of Nick Stahlke, a blood spatter expert, as to how those kind of blood spatters, uh, can be left in a very violent, uh, kinds of -- uh, of episodes. You're going to hear her blood was found on the rear tailgate, uh, the door handle, and, again, on the -- on the soda can. Uh, Steven Avery's blood, uh, is found, like I told you, in six different places in the vehicle. Positive matches, uh, for Steven Avery, on the, uh, rear passenger door, near the ignition area, um, where Steven Avery's actively bleeding finger actually leaves some DNA, uh, in the ignition area. Also, in the front, that is the front passenger part, of the SUV, that is on the, uh, CD case and, uh, on both of the front seats. I told you before about the cut, the actively bleeding cut, on Steven Avery, uh, on the 9th. We will show you pictures, uh, of the remnants of that cut. It was healing, uh, but just how deep that cut was. And you can draw the conclusions, and, in fact, uh, it may or may not even be contested that his finger was actively bleeding on the 31st when he struggled with Teresa, uh, and when he, uh, loaded her in the back of, uh, uh, the vehicle, uh, and helped and dispose of the vehicle to, uh, conceal that particular crime. And, finally, you're going to hear evidence of the DNA of Steven Avery being found on Teresa Halbach's key. You're going to hear about how DNA is the same whether it's in your blood, whether it's in other bodily fluids, um, perspiration, skin cells, semen, uh, other kinds of places. It's the same genetic code. It's the same DNA that's found. And when Steven was handling, uh, that, uh, key, uh, he left his perspiration, he left his sweat on that key, and Ms. Culhane, excuse me, was able to develop a full profile. All right? Everybody take a deep breath, because we're now going to start talking about the reason that you're here. That was all of Steven Avery's case where the evidence that pointed -- excuse me -- to Steven Avery. Uh, this is going to be a time when the Judge is going to allow you to take a few minute break, your morning break. Excuse me. After you return, we will then tell you about what evidence it is that the State intends to show, uh, and why it is, uh, that the State intends to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that that man, uh, that Brendan Dassey -- excuse me -- committed the crimes of first degree intentional homicide, and sexual assult. So if we may, Judge, a -- a 10-or 15-minute --
THE COURT: Certainly.
ATTORNEY KRATZ: -- break at this time, and when you come back, uh, I will conclude my opening statement. Thank you, very much.
THE COURT: We'll recess for 15 minutes. (Recess had at 10:13 a.m.) (Reconvened at 10:32 a.m.)
ATTORNEY KRATZ: The screens have been fixed. The reason we're here is for Brendan Dassey. For the jury to consider Brendan Dassey's behavior. Uh, that is whether he participated in criminal behavior. The Judge instructed you that you're going to be able to take notes during the testimony in this case, during the presentation of -- of the evidence. Um, and as you take notes, um, it oftentimes is a suggestion from the lawyers, Mr., um, Fremgen or -- or Edelstein, whoever is giving their opening statement, may have suggestions, uh, for you as well. But in note taking, in taking detailed notes, which you're going to be able to use during your deliberations, the two questions at least that the State is going to ask, or present evidence, that's going to ask
you to answer are these: Number one, was he there? And, number two, did he help? Was he there? And did he help? On November 6, Brendan Dassey, right after this case began, right after the investigation began in this case, denied any knowledge of Teresa Halbach's death. Uh, indicated some version that he had seen his Uncle Steve talking with, uh, Teresa, but the investigators pretty much discarded that, because it wasn't consistent, it didn't fit with the timeline. Didn't fit with the evidence. Remember, Teresa got there about 2:40. You're going to hear evidence that Brendan didn't get off the bus from school until 3:45, a full hour after that meeting, after Teresa would have been talking out on a porch with, uh, Mr. Avery. And so Brendan was nowhere on the radar screen. He was nowhere, uh, a suspect. He was a -- a witness, like any other witness, who might have been on the property. That tends to change on February 27 when Brendan starts giving new details. He's reinterviewed, uh, based upon some, uh, other information that was obtained by Mr. Fassbender and Mr. Wiegert, and he then becomes a much more important witness. He's a witness at this point. He says he sees Steve standing near the fire. He sees body parts of Teresa Halbach in the fire. He helps put fuel on the fire to help kind of stoke up the fire, if you will. And Uncle Steve makes some admissions that, uh, Uncle Steve stabbed Teresa Halbach, but that also that Mr. Dassey saw some clothing. And, interestingly, he said he saw Teresa's clothing in a bag and he saw them in a bag in the garage. Well, as officers, you will learn, kind of reconstructed that February 27 statement. They started saying, as investigators do, well, wait a second, that can't happen that way. How can he describe Teresa Halbach's clothing if they're in a bag? Forensic interviews, you will hear -- you'll hear testimony from, uh, Investigator Mark Wiegert -- uh, are designed for witnesses. Witnesses give interviews, and forensic interviewing, uh, you will hear, um, some version of what's called the funnel technique. And I'm not going to bore you right now, because I'll let Mr. Wiegert bore you, uh, later with, uh -- with what the funnel technique is. The theory, though, is that witnesses when you're trying to get details, the evidence will show, is that you start with a free narrative. A narrative. Tell me everything you know about what happened in the case. And then it becomes more and more directed. Uh, you can ask direct questions, or more focused questions, or even, in the rare case, you can ask leading questions, to try to draw out of witnesses what they know about the case. That makes sense. It makes sense that you want them to tell you everything, but you're going to have to follow up with, um -- with questions. You're also going to hear, though, that there's a difference between interviews and interrogations. Interrogations are designed for suspects. They're not designed for witnesses. And you're going to hear in this case -- in fact, you're going to hear a lot in this case -- about interrogations, about the interrogative process, about the process of asking questions, and the process of obtaining truthful information from suspects. You're going to hear that confessing to a crime, and, in fact, the most serious crime is murder, but confessing to any crime is an unnatural act. It goes against a human's, um, feeling of self- preservation. Okay? That should make sense to -- to everybody, and the evidence is going to show that. That it is difficult to have somebody admit to a very, very serious, um, crime. And so there are techniques that are developed to encourage suspects. Again, these are interrogations, these aren't interviews. But to encourage suspects to provide truthful information. You're going to hear about those techniques, that those techniques include some kind of an accusation that the person's not telling the truth. And in every confession, every admission that Mr. Wiegert, and perhaps other witnesses, will tell you about, they always start with a denial. I wasn't involved in the case. You will then hear how confessions or admissions move from denials to admissions. It's called shifting from denials to admissions. You're going to hear about the stages where an individual will become in a very passive mode, will allow the investigator to do most of the talking. In fact, you'll hear about body language, and looking down, and -- and, uh, really kind of, uh, allowing the investigator to give their version about what happened. And you will see a point -- They'll describe a point that is, investigators will describe a point in every interrogation where this happens, but in Mr. Dassey's case, you will see a point where that first admission occurs. The first acceptance of some responsibility for being involved in the case. All right? Then the rest of the interrogation is drawing out as many details as you possibly can. Now, I told you that, um, moving from denials to admissions are unnatural. It's a difficult kind of thing to do, and there's two techniques in this case, and you'll see evidence in this case, um, that you'll hear a lot. The first-technique, uh, is something called expressing superior knowledge. Investigators oftentimes -- and if you think about it they have to they often times express that they know more than they do. Uh, that they have more information than they really have. You're going to hear evidence, you're going to hear testimony, when officers say things like, it's all right, we already know what happened, or words to that effect, in this case, you're going to hear that over and over and over again, it's all right, we already know what guilty people, that is, people who really do commit crimes, how they hear that very phrase, it's all right, we already know what happened, how they hear that differently than somebody who's innocent, or somebody who may not have committed a crime. All right? happened, understand that the officers will explain that that is a technique. It is a technique to encourage that unnatural act. To encourage the act of going from a denial, uh, to, uh, an admission. You'll also hear testimony about how So you can kind of figure it out yourselves. I mean, jurors, you'll be able to figure this out, and the evidence will help you with that, but guilty people, when they hear we already know what happened, will tend to make admissions. Innocent people, who weren't involved at all, who hear we already know what happened, will think, good, then you're going to know I wasn't involved, and so how it plays on, and you'll need to kind of understand that difference in the dynamic. The last, um, concept that you'll hear about, that I want to talk about in opening statement, is giving a suspect a reason to admit. We talked about that before. Uh, is a suggestion that they will feel better. That they will have some moral acceptance. All right? Some real or perceived better feelings about themselves if they get it off their chest. So whether you'll sleep-better, or you'll feel better, or you'll get it off your chest, or words to that effect, when you hear that in this case, know, and you'll hear evidence about, that this is a technique an interrogation technique -- and you'll hear a lot about that. Well, there's safeguards, too, that you're going to hear about. We don't just, uh, base your case on admissions or confessions of people, but you have to try to verify what it is that somebody says. And this screen explains some of those things that the testimony will show in this case. Can that person's statement be verified, or what's called "corroborated", through physical evidence or other known facts? Right? That makes sense. Number two, were the details not yet known to the public, and, more importantly, I'm going to throw in here, were they not yet even known to the law enforcement officers who were asking the question? And, number three, the ability of the suspect to resist false suggestions. Not to resist suggestions, but to resist false suggestions. We'll talk about that when we talk about these March 1 statements. Now, you're going to hear in this case that there was nothing unique about the March 1 interrogation of Brendan Dassey other than it started off as a witness' statement. Remember, on March 1 Brendan Dassey was still a witness. He was not a suspect at all. He wasn't on, uh, the radar screen. All Brendan did at that point, or all the police knew at that point, is that he may have seen some things in a fire of his Uncle Steve, Steven, um, uh, Avery. And you're going to see that entire March statement given by Brendan Dassey. Now, some of it is going to be difficult to watch for a couple of reasons. Number, one, some of it's really boring, um, but we're going to show you start to finish the entire admission. I think it's about four hours long. So as you think later in this week, um, just prepare yourselves, you're going to have four hours of sitting and watching, um, a lot of times, not very interesting, um -- interesting questions. But let me also warn you, because it's fair for me to do this, that some of the details may be disturbing. Uh, they are statements made by a young man who involved himself in some very, very serious behavior, some very serious choices. And you're going to hear how he made those choices, and the kinds of things that he and his uncle did to this 25- year-old girl. All right? Now, we have to give you those details. We have to play the entire, um, statement for you. You're the jury in this case. You have to determine whether or not this makes sense, the degree of detail that Brendan gives, the words that Brendan uses, whether or not they ought to be believed. That's your job. Your job at the end of this case will decide whether that statement ought to be believed. I'm going to briefly go through what Brendan Dassey says on March 1, the version -- Brendan's version of what happened to Teresa Halbach. Brendan Dassey, in, again, sometimes graphic detail, will talk about approaching Uncle Steve's trailer, and before he even knocks on the door, he hears screaming. He hears screaming from inside of the trailer, and he knocks on the door. Now, remember what I told you before about, um, Brendan's statements and should they be believed, and the things that, uh, was he - there, uh, and did he help? Uh, remember, also -- And at the end of my opening, we're going to talk about some choices and the evidence of some choices that - - Brendan makes. But the choice to knock on the door, even though you hear screaming from a young woman inside, uh, is the first choice that Brendan makes. You're going to hear that Steven Avery answers the door. You're going to hear that he's sweaty, and that he tells Brendan Dassey that he has raped this woman that he has in the back of his bedroom. These are difficult, hard images to kind of wrap your mind around. But this is the version that Brendan Dassey gave on the 31st of October. Brendan actually sees Teresa tied up. He sees her shackled with handcuffs and leg irons to the back bed -- in the back bedroom. And, here, when we talk about decisions, Mr. Avery, himself, asks Brendan if he wants to have sex with the woman that's been restrained in the bedroom now. Some of the language is very graphic, um, he they don't use the word, do you want to have sex. All right? They use some very, very crude, degrading language towards any woman, but certainly towards a young woman, uh, who is in this trailer already. When we talk about those decisions that Brendan gets to make at this point, Brendan says, yes, I want to do that. You're going to hear that Brendan Dassey rapes Teresa Halbach. You hear that he walks into the bedroom while Teresa's restrained on the bed, and by force, and by violence, and with the use and threat of a weapon, he has sexual intercourse with this woman without her consent. You're going to hear a lot more details that I'm not going to share with you at this time about that particular moment, that particular, um, event. I want you to listen to that young man's description of what Teresa Halbach says to him as he's doing that to her. After the rape, Steven Avery praises his nephew, and says, that's how you do it. These are explanations, again, from Brendan. The repulsive expression, lack of empathy, lack of any kind of moral fiber, any kind of moral compass at all, for an uncle to tell a nephew, that's how you do it. Then Steven and Brendan discuss if they should, and how they should, kill Teresa Halbach. Again, the decision tree. What does Brendan decide to do? Steve says, will you help me? Brendan says, yes. You'll hear testimony about Steven and Brendan going into the bedroom. Steven Avery stabs the victim. Brendan Dassey, handed the knife by Uncle Steve, cuts Teresa Halbach's throat. You're going to hear that they take, um, this 25-year-old woman, unclothed, to the garage. They place her on the floor. Dassey waits with Teresa Halbach, who is not yet dead, laying on the floor, as Mr. Avery retrieves his .22 caliber Marlin Glenfield semi-automatic rifle, and Brendan says Uncle Steve shoots her ten times, at least twice in the head, including on the left side of her head. The statement goes on that Avery and Dassey load Ms. Halbach, who's now been killed, thankfully, into the back of her -- cargo area of her SUV, and they decide how to dispose of her body. Mr. Avery dis -- discusses and decides that, uh, we should burn the body. Should mutilate the body so that it can conceal the crime. Mr. Dassey will tell investigators that he helped. That he helped carry this unclothed young woman to this large bonfire in the back of Steven's garage and throws this young girl on the fire. You're going to hear that, um, Mr. Dassey describes burning, mutilating the body to conceal the murder, and taking this very large car seat remember, you saw that in earlier pictures and the two of them threw this car seat onto the fire. By the way, let me just stop here, and, as you take notes, as you take notes during this trial, please remember to jot down the kinds of things that require two people. Please remember to jot down where it's a two-man job rather than a one-man job, to help you decide, was he there? This is one of those places that requires a two-man job. This large, um, car seat that you'll see, this large metal frame, that's thrown on top of this young woman whose body's being mutilated. You're going to hear Brendan tell the officers that the vehicle was driven down to that pit area that we, uh, talked about, that it was concealed with branches and a car hood, and the license plates were removed, and Steven Avery, for some reason, went underneath the hood of, uh, Teresa's vehicle. Brendan Dassey will tell you that the garage that, thereafter, when they walked back, that the garage was cleaned with bleach, was cleaned with gas, was cleaned with paint thinner, that Mr. Avery took the Toyota key, put it into his bedroom, that Teresa's clothes were thrown onto the fire. They're statements from Brendan. Remember this. Brendan's telling you that her clothes were thrown on the fire, that Avery's finger was cut and actively bleeding at the time, that Teresa's cell phone and camera were burned in the burn barrel earlier that day, and that Steven's girlfriend, Jodi, Jodi Stachowski, had called Steven Avery's house at least twice while Brendan was at the house. Those are the statements of an individual. The details of an individual who's committed rape and murder and mutilation. It's your decision, the jury's decision alone, whether or not he was there and whether or not he helped. And when you evaluate Brendan's testimony, you're going to have to come up with, um, those decisions. I can't tell you. There's no expert witness, the Judge, uh, nobody can tell you, but the jury, collectively, will decide whether to believe Brendan or not. Now, the police officers will provide you with some help to corroborate, to explain the confession, the evidence in this case. Uh, you'll have to ask yourself whether the police already know. Even though Mr. Wiegert keeps saying, it's all right, Brendan, we already know, you're going to find out they didn't already know, uh, what -- and were very, very surprised of, uh, what Brendan, uh, was telling them detail after detail after detail. What did they suspect? Um, and what could the police verify? What later could they find, by physical evidence, to support or to corroborate what it was that Brendan was saying? Later that same day, on March 1, you're going to hear that the officers -- they got a search warrant. They said, well, if Brendan says that Teresa was shot in the garage, we better go take a look in that garage. We better take a better look than we took last time. The evidence that will be presented to you that will verify Brendan Dassey's statements, the State believes, will be compelling, the State will believes will corroborate or verify what Brendan says. Again, we're not going to ask you take Brendan's word for it, all of these things, but all of these questions that I'm going to ask you now, and this is the last portion of my opening statement, uh, is meant to, um, explain to you the physical evidence that answers all of these questions. When Brendan says that Teresa was in the trailer on 31st, do we believe that or not? Well, you're going to see evidence that, uh, an AutoTrader Magazine and the bill of sale, the completion of the transaction, the completion of the photography, and her business with Steven are found in the trailer. Found inside the trailer verifying what Brendan said. Was Teresa restrained that day as Brendan says? You're going to hear that both handcuffs and leg irons were found in Steven Avery's bedroom during the search of his bedroom. The most important question, perhaps, is was she shot in the garage? And that's where the March 1 search warrant becomes so critically important. You're going to see the snow, and the snow is kind of your cue that this is in March, rather than, uh, the November, uh, before. Uh, this is Steven Avery's garage where they do a much more thorough search, uh, of, uh -- of the garage. There are two -- These are called evidence tents, by the way, and No. 9 and No. 23, which is back here, which I'll show you in just a minute, are the important ones. Officers do, in fact, find two bullets. Remember? He said that she was shot in the garage. The police, on March 1, as a result of Steve of, uh, Brendan Dassey's statements, after getting the search warrant, find two bullets in the garage. One where Tent No. 9 was shown, it's closer to the front of the garage, and one behind a compressor, where Tent No. 23, uh, is located. This is a better view for you of where, uh, those two bullets are found in the garage, but the most important finding is No. 23. Bullet No. 23 isn't just a bullet they find, but Sherry Culhane finds Teresa Halbach's DNA on that bullet. This evidence, this bullet, is proof positive, 100 percent, something the police didn't know, that Teresa was, in fact, shot in the garage, just like Brendan Dassey told the police. Was she shot ten times? You're going to hear, on the 6th when they reviewed and they examined and collected evidence, there were 11 separate .22 caliber shell casings that were recovered. Very consistent. Was she shot with this very .22 caliber rifle? Again, of all the rifles in the world, Brendan said it was Uncle Steve's that was hanging on the wall that was used to shoot Teresa. You're going to hear evidence from a man by the name of Bill Newhouse from the Crime Lab. Mr- Newhouse will take that .22 caliber rifle, you will hear, do some test firings, and will match the .22 caliber bullet that was recovered in this case, as well as all of the shell casings that were recovered, and will tell you that this bullet and these shell casings came from this gun to the exclusion of all other guns on earth. This gun. Not just consistent with. They come from this gun. Was Teresa shot in her head as Brendan will tell you? You'll hear from our anthropologist, Dr. Leslie Eisenberg, who, uh, is the bone expert, who will find a piece of bone that she will describe as a piece of Teresa Halbach's cranium, that is, a skull bone piece, and you'll hear and you'll see that beveling, that curve mark there, is actually an entrance wound. They even take, uh, x-rays of that particular cranial piece, and Ken Olson from the Crime Lab will tell you that -- and perhaps you can see those little white dots, uh, that are right next to, uh, the entrance wound -- those little white dots, when they're x-rayed, are lead. That's lead from a bullet. All right? So these are bullet entrance wounds to Teresa's head, just like Brendan Dassey told you happened in the garage. Both Dr. Eisenberg and our pathologist, Dr. Jentzen, will render the opinion that there are at least two gunshot wounds to the head found from these cranial remains. One on the left side of the head, just like Brendan says, and one to the back of the head of Teresa Halbach. Do we believe that, um, Teresa's body was loaded in the rear of the SUV, as Brendan says? Well, you'll see and you'll hear from a blood spatter expert who will talk about the, uh, large stains, the blood stains, that are left from Teresa Halbach. That's her blood, by the i way, and we'll show you some close-ups, unfortunately, uh, of that particular area of the cargo area of Teresa's car where, just like Brendan tells you, she's loaded in the back of the cargo area of the SUV. Was her body burnt and mutilated like Brendan tells you? Lots and lots and lots of evidence about this. First of all, the, um, burn area in the burn pit, itself -- You'll also, by the way, hear from some witnesses. Um, Brendan's now stepfather, Scott Tadych, will actually be called to testify. I'm sure he won't want to, uh, but he will say on the 31st, that night, uh, between 7:30 and 7:45 in the evening, he saw Brendan and Steven tending that fire, and we'll talk about the flames being so high behind that garage. He not only sees the fire, he sees Brendan and Steven Avery. So an eyewitness will put Brendan there, just like he said he was, back tending that fire. You'll hear about the bones being recovered and being charred, and we've already talked about this particular, uh, bone, but Dr. Eisenberg will also identify every bone that is found. Uh, these, uh, anthropologists are able to look at a little fragment of bone and tell you that it comes from this part of the leg, or that part of the arm, or that part of the spine. And she'll testify, and she'll tell you that every bone of Teresa Halbach is represented in that burn pit in the back. You'll even hear from a dentist, the forensic dentist, Dr. Donald Simley, uh, who found a particular tooth, Tooth No. 31, on Teresa Halbach. On the left is Teresa's x-ray, when she was alive, of that particular tooth, and on the right is what's found in the burn pit. In the burn area. You'll be able to match them up for yourself, that Teresa's Tooth No. 31, um, one of the back teeth on the left side of her jaw, was recovered from the burn area. Brendan says that a car seat was thrown in the fire. Do we have evidence of that? Can we prove that? Can we corroborate that evidence? Absolutely. We will show you, and, in fact, we'll bring into this courtroom, the remains of that burned car seat. Two-man job, ladies and gentlemen. Two people required to throw that car seat, to carry that particular metal grave car seat. Brendan says the SUV was driven to the pit area. Uh, you'll find not only where the, uh, SUV was found, where the, um, crushed -- or car crusher is, you'll also see some diagrams that Brendan actually places where Uncle Steve and I dropped off and hid that vehicle to conceal this crime. Brendan said it was concealed with branches and a car hood. Did that happen? Absolutely. Branches and a car hood, exactly as Brendan described, will be found concealing that car. Members of the jury, two-man job. We'll probably bring in that large piece of heavy car hood to show you, um, that Brendan and Uncle Steve leaned that and concealed that car. Were Teresa's license plates removed as, uh, Brendan said? Absolutely. We find the license plates in a junked vehicle. Was Teresa's car hood opened up by Uncle Steve as Brendan says? Well, on April 3, again, as a result of Brendan's statements, law enforcement swabs -- they take a Q-tip and -- and they swab the hood latch, reaching up underneath the hood, just to see if we can get a a DNA profile. Sherry Culhane does. She gets a full profile that's Steven Avery's sweat. Steven Avery's sweat is found on the hood latch, just like should happen if Brendan is to believed that Uncle Steve went under the hood. Again, facts not known by law enforcement at the time Brendan made these statements. Brendan says that the garage floor was cleaned with paint thinner. You're going to hear, from a man by the name of John Ertl, from the Crime Lab, who will talk about a three-or four-foot circle, just to the left and behind the riding tractor, uh, which is a big bleach stain. Uh, Mr. Ertl will talk about that bleach stain. You'll see that bleach and paint thinner are recovered. Uh, but perhaps most importantly, Brendan, himself, hands over to Investigator Fassbender his jeans. He says, these were the pants I was wearing that night, and these pants are splashed with bleach from cleaning Uncle Steve's garage. Brendan said that, uh, Teresa's Halbach's, uh, key was put into the bedroom. You already know that the key was found in Uncle Steve's bedroom. Interestingly, Brendan says that the clothes of Teresa Halbach, after they cleaned up, were burned. They were thrown onto the burn pile. Little bit harder to prove that her clothes are actually burned. But we did it. You're going to hear from a young lady today, uh, by the name of, uh, Katie Halbach. Katie's actually sitting in the front row. Teresa's sister. She knows about Teresa's clothes, and Teresa owned a pair of what's called Daisy Fuentes jeans. They're jeans, you're going to hear, that are sold at a Kohl's Department Store. She kidded her sister. Katie kidded Teresa, as sisters sometimes do, about having those kind of jeans. Um, but you're going to hear that after Teresa's death, those jeans were missing. Those jeans were gone. Teresa was wearing those jeans on the 31st of October. Jeans have little rivets on them, and those of you that are wearing jeans can kind of, uh, take a look at this a little bit later, but Daisy Fuentes has six different rivets that actually say the words "Daisy Fuentes" on them. You're going to hear that the five of those six rivets were recovered from the burn area right behind Steven's, um, garage. Also a zipper was found and some other clothing items were found. So as Brendan Dassey, that nobody else knew about the burning of the clothes, Brendan Dassey, when he says that we burned her clothes, were able to verify that. Was Avery's finger cut and actively bleeding? Of course, it was. We have a photo of it and we have Avery's blood, which Mr. Stahlke, the, uh, blood spatter expert, will tell you how all of those are left. Brendan says that Teresa's cell phone and camera were burned in Avery's burn barrel. Burn barrel was outside the car. You're going to hear and read a report from a gentleman by the name of Curtis Thomas. Mr. Thomas works at the FBI in Virginia. Mr. Thomas got to see all these electronics which were recovered from Mr. Avery's burn barrel. And guess what was in there? Teresa Halbach's Motorola V3 RAZR cell phone, Teresa Halbach's PowerShot A310 digital camera are found, just like Brendan said they would be. Lastly, did Avery's girlfriend call twice on October 31? Phone records will indicate that a woman by the name of Jodi Stachowski, the girlfriend of Steven Avery, called twice on the 31st, just like Brendan said. The evidence in this case, members of the jury, isn't just going be based on the statements of a young man, aren't just going to be the fanciful, um, expressions or, um, imagination of somebody. We're going to be able to prove to you in this case that things the public didn't know, things the police didn't know, were provided by a young man who was at the scene. Was he there? Absolutely. Did he help? Absolutely. And so the jury's role, then, will be to decide these facts. Your role as a jury will be to decide whether Brendan's admissions of involvement in this case, knowing things that nobody else knows, that only the murderer and the murderer's accomplice could know in this case, and you are to search for the truth. The evidence, members of the jury, at the conclusion of this case is not going to show that Brendan Dassey was at the wrong place at the wrong time. The evidence is going to show that Brendan Dassey was at the right place at the right time. Teresa Halbach got lucky. She got lucky that there was a young man who showed up. She got lucky that there was one person that could save her life. But the choices that Brendan Dassey made, the choices that he made with his uncle, insured that instead of leaving, instead of just saying, no, instead of talking Uncle Steve out of it, which were all choices that he had, instead of calling 911, instead of calling his mother or a family member, or instead of actively rescuing this girl, Brendan Dassey chose to rape this young girl, to involve himself in her murder, and to help dispose of and mutilate this 25-year-old body. Choices require consequences and accountability, and at the conclusion of this case we're asking that you find the defendant guilty. Thank you, Judge.
THE COURT: All right.
ATTORNEY FREMGEN: Thank you. I don't, uh, have any audio visuals, so I'll apologize ahead of time. You have to listen to me instead. On October 31 of 2005, Brendan Dassey came home about 3:45 from school, from high school, with his brother, Blaine. Not unusual for Brendan to come home with Blaine. Everyday they came home the same way. Dropped off at the end of the street. The access road, the Avery Road accesses to his house, and began to walk down the road. It takes about five minutes to get to the house from the -- from the mailboxes. And as they're walking, they start to talk about who gets to use the phone first to call a friend to go trick or treating. They race home, and Blaine wins the race, so he gets the phone first. Blaine calls his friend, Jason. They set up a time to meet to go trick or treating, and Brendan plays some video games. He watches a little bit of TV, and about 5:00 his mom comes home and makes supper for Blaine and -- and Brendan. About 20 after 5, maybe 5:30, Blaine leaves to meet Jason, his friend, to go trick or treating, and Barb Tadych, now Tadych, was Janda, meets her boyfriend, fiance at the time, at about 5:30 to go up to Green Bay to visit with his mother who's in the hospital. She leaves, and Brendan is still at home watching TV, playing some video games, and at about 5:45 Blaine's boss, his name is Mike Kornely, Brendan used to work for Mike as well, calls to talk to Blaine. Talks for about five minutes and Brendan takes a message for Blaine that -- that Mike called. Shortly after that time, Steven Avery calls. Steven Avery, obviously, as you know, is Brendan's uncle. Lives about a couple hundred yards from -- couple hundred feet from the house. - . Calls and asks if he wants to come over to watch a bonfire that that Steve has set. Brendan says, yes. About 15 minutes later, Steve calls again, asks Brendan, what's taking you so long? Brendan's kind of putzy, he's going to he's changing his pants, putting on a sweatshirt, it's a little bit chilly for an October night, and he goes over to the bonfire. And when he gets there, it's a little bit dark now, about seven-ish. He drives around with his Uncle Steven. Steven has his mother's golf cart, and they're traveling around the yard picking up debris. Wood, an old cabinet, some tires, and a van seat. And as they collect the items, they begin to pile them up next to -- or just to the side of this little area behind Steven's garage where he's got the bonfire going. They throw some items onto the bonfire, put some other items off to the side, and they do that for about four or five trips around the yard, collecting debris, collecting garbage, and they begin to toss the garbage onto the fire throughout the night. After they're done cleaning up the yard, Steven asks Brendan if he wants to help clean up a mess in his garage. Brendan says, yes. They go into the garage, and there's a small area behind the lawnmower as if something had spilled. Steven takes some gasoline and pours it onto this little area, and they use some clothing, old rags, that sop up the mess, and as they begin to clean it up with these old clothes and old rags, they throw them onto the fire, and they do that for about a half hour. Steven tries some gasoline and paint -- paint tninner to help clean up the area, and some bleach as well. After about a half hour, they go back out by the bonfire and Steven gets a call on his cell phone. It's from Brendan's morn, Barb. She calls over to -- to see if Brendan is over by Steven by the bonfire. He says he is. Reminds Steven to tell Brendan that he needs to be home before ten and asks that he has a sweatshirt or a coat on because, again, it's kind of a chilly night. Brendan never talks to his mom, but he knows he now has to be home by ten. They watch the fire for awhile and then tossed the van seat onto the back of the fire. About 9:30, quarter to 10, Brendan goes home. Gets home, watches some TV, and goes to bed. Now -- Now, what I've just done is explain to you what we believe the evidence will show that happened on October 31. As Mr. Kratz has pointed out, that's called the opening statement. I think it's more like a story. It's like reading a novel. A trial is kind of a novel. Novels have characters, and you'll see witnesses. Novels have a plot or some sort of a theme. Each side, the prosecutor and the defense, we each have a theme we want to present to you. And then there's always a conclusion. Now, difference between a trial and a novel is that the conclusion hasn't been written. That's your job. At the end of this case, after each attorney has had an opportunity to present witnesses and evidence for you, had an opportunity to give what's called a closing argument, after the Judge instructs you on the law, it's up to you, and you alone, to finish the story, to decide what actually happened. Now, not unlike a story or a novel, there can be turns and twists. Mr. Kratz pointed out in their theme there are turns and twists, and we'll do the same. There may be similarities between novels and trials, but there are some differences as well. For instance, when I read a story, sometimes I get a little anxious and I want to find out, what -- what happened. Who did it. So I tight -- tend to want to skip some of the pages, pass up on a chapter, maybe even take a peek at the very end. But you can't do that. Part of that, and the obvious reason, is that the Court controls the tempo and flow of information here. We can't just start now and we'll skip to the end to the closing arguments. You need to hear the evidence. And when we talk in jury selection about burden of proof and presumption of innocence, one of the questions I had for you, and I believe most of you raised your hands or at least nodded affirmatively, that you want to hear from both sides, and you can't do that if you skip to the end. You can't do that if you hear just one side. As Mr. Kratz pointed out, they get to go first. They'll present you with number of witnesses, days and days of -- of evidence, exhibits, photographs, testimony. And when they're done, we get an opportunity to provide you with the same. But if you don't presume Brendan innocent, even after they're done with their part of the case, after they rest and allow us an opportunity to present witnesses for you, then you've already skipped to the end of the book. You've passed a number of chapters and -- and you've denied the presumption of innocence. And what I was, uh, most impressed by on jury selection is I believe every person here agreed, raised their hand that, yes, we need to presume Brendan innocent at all times until it's time for you to -- to deliberate, your final time to go from here into the backroom to make your decision. It is important to remember who is on trial. This is not the Steven Avery trial. And it seems so simple to say that, but it's very difficult to do. In February, late or early March, when the Steven Avery trial was was, uh, going on, I would often go to court, different county, and attorneys, and even a judge, would ask me, shouldn't you be over in Calumet? Isn't that where the Avery trial's going on? Yep, that's true. My in-laws, my, uh -- my neighbor, even my pastor said the same thing to me, and I'd have to politely tell them that each time, well, that's a different trial. I represent Brendan Dassey, the nephew, and it's a different case entirely. And I believe that's what the State wants to present to you as well. They need to present evidence about the Steven Avery involvement, but I think they want to focus on Brendan as well, and to that I agree. This is not Steven Avery. You'll hear days and days of evidence about Steven Avery, his DNA, his blood found in the SUV, about the bone fragments behind his house in a burn pit, about the bullet fragment found in his garage. You'll hear about the ignition key found in his bedroom. But I don't believe you'll hear evidence about Brendan Dassey's DNA. You won't hear the same evidence involving Brendan Dassey. There won't be any DNA, no blood, no saliva, no sweat, no hair, nothing. No fingerprints. No science that's going to point you to Brendan Dassey. Not the science that points to Steven Avery. But, again, this is Brendan Dassey's trial, not Steven's trial. It's about a 16-year-old boy at the time. It's about a 16-year-old high school student with below average cognitive abilities. A fourth-grade reading level, a low IQ. It's about a shy introvert, socially inept, suggestible child. That's what this trial is about. You'll learn that this shy, socially inept, suggestible individual will meet two highly trained, intelligent, adult police officers. DCI Agent Tom Fassbender and Investigator Mark Wiegert. They're trained as adult law enforcement officers, trained to obtain confessions, and trained on Brendan Dassey. Alone with these two officers, Brendan makes several statements, as Mr. Kratz has already alluded to in his PowerPoint presentation, in his opening statement. It starts off in a progression where Brendan says Steven Avery killed Teresa Halbach, and it progresses to the point where he indicates he participated. And the State will argue to you later, and offer evidence throughout the trial, through the officers, that they believe that this progression of audio taped statements from -- at the school, the videotaped statements at the, uh, police station, and then the final May 13 videotaped statement as a progression to the final truth. What we want you to consider, three things, while you're watching these videotapes, and we agree, very powerful videotapes, very important videotapes, but like in a story, two different stories, there's a different perspective, a different theme. We want you to look at three things. Corroboration. Similar to what the State offered. They want you to look at what it corroborated. We want you to also focus on what is not corroborated. There are dozens of details that go uncorroborated in these statements. Corroboration simply means that there's something independent that can prove the statements are true. Some other independent source that suggests that what you heard is accurate. But there are dozens of instances where their details are uncorroborated. The second to consider is the inconsistencies. There are a number of inconsistencies throughout this progression of statements. When you watch these statements, take note of the different changes from one statement to the next. Simple. Details that seem to be mundane, unnecessary change from statement to statement. And though the State will try to pro to suggest that it's an escalating progression from the first time they met with Brendan Dassey to the last time he talked to them, it's really a rollercoaster ride of the truth. Up and down. One statement says one thing, the next says the other, and it just goes that way throughout this progression. Some of the changes are not logical. Oftentimes, detached from the purpose of the investigation. Sometimes it's the product of the interviewer. Watch for that as well when you're watching these videos. Oftentimes, you'll hear the investigators asking Brendan to simply change what he said. They ask him to change what he said to meet their theme, to meet the story that they want to present. And last, we want to ask you to watch the video for, lack of a better term, the appeals to emotions the officers make throughout the different statements to Brendan. This 16-year-old low-educated -- or excuse me -- low intellectual ability, low cognitive ability, shy introvert, they're asking him, and they're -- they're appealing to emotion. Watch how he answers the questions. Watch how the questions are asked. At times it differs. Times they cozy up to Brendan to get the answer they want. At times they pull back from Brendan when he's not giving them the answer they they -- they -- they want and they expect. It's like the new puppy dog. When he does what he's supposed to do he gets a pat on the head and a treat. Good job, Brendan. Good job. Good boy. But when it's not what they want, we're leaving Brendan, until you tell us what we want to hear. I believe these statements are very powerful, and I agree with the State that you need to take considerable effort to watch them. Take notes. I encourage you, take notes. We've seen these videos a number of times. You may only get to see this one time. And I would encourage you to take notes throughout. But not just to what is said, take notes on how it's said. How the questions are asked. How it goes from, I didn't say that, or I don't know, to the answer the police got that they wanted. The facial expressions, the distance between the interviewer, or the interrogator, and Brendan, the interaction, physically, between the two. I believe that the when you watch the videos carefully, they'll be exposed for what they are, and I think they're just garbage. And just like that, you can discard it. You're -- be instructed by the Judge later that you decide what and how much you want to believe. It's entirely up to you. Now, I think these three focal points of the statements are important to note because the G-State won't explain to you why there are uncorroborated details, why there are so many inconsistencies, but we will. We'll provide testimony that shows, from his school, describes him as having low cognitive functioning, memory problems, um, fourth- grade reading level. Fails to make eye contact with peers and adults, and avoids participation.
A forensic psychologist will also testify, and testify as to tests that he performed on Brendan that indicate that he's a socially inept child, substantially impaired cognitively. He has passive tendencies and vulnerable to suggestion. Coupled with this testimony and the videos, I believe we'll show you how easily Brendan is manipulated ad was manipulated. Manipulated by the more intelligent, readily trained, authoritative figures, the two police officers, who presses me when he says good things, things they want to hear, and pull away and sternly isolate him when he says things that they don't want to hear. Despite these statements, the lack of scientific evidence to connect Brendan to Teresa Halbach's murder, the volume of uncorroborated details, the rollercoaster of changes in his statements from one to another, the psychological results in his psychological makeup, his suggestible nature, will all be enough, we believe, for you to find reasonable doubt. And that's what this is about. As the Judge instructed you, you have to decide this case based on what is reasonable doubt. And the Judge will give you another instruction at the end as well, not just before, but also before you retire to make your final decision. If, at the end, you walk into the jury room and you considered all the evidence from all the parties, give them whatever weight the credibility of each witness, whatever weight you wish to give, and you're able to say, well, the State's case does make sense as well as the defense, their case does make sense, you would then have a reasonable doubt, and that's all we're asking you to consider, and you must stop. It's not a contest. This isn't a competition. It's not a basketball game where somebody has to show up and win at the end. You don't have to reconcile the State's case with the defense case. In fact, you shouldn't. That's not your role. Your role isn't to decide in -- in that situation who wins. You don't have to reconcile doubt. As the State attempts to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the allegations against Brendan, consider the number of times that we feel Brendan was manipulated during his interrogation, and we'll discuss that with the witnesses, and we'll make further our observations at the end. Consider all of the inconsistencies of the various statements as they go from one to the other. Consider the lies the police told Brendan during his statements. We believe, after careful consideration of all this, in the end, tpere would be only one conclusion you could write for this chapter in this story, and that would be not guilty. Thank you, very much.
THE COURT: Mr. Kratz?
ATTORNEY KRATZ: If we could approach just briefly, Judge? (Discussion off the record.)
THE COURT: All right, uh -- All right. We're going to adjourn and take a lunch break. We'll be back here at one o'clock. I'll remind the jury, there's no discussion of this case at this time amongst -- amongst you. Uh, all right. One o'clock. (Jurors out at 11:40 a.m.)
THE COURT: All right. One o'clock.
ATTORNEY FREMGEN: Will this courtroom be locked during the lunch break?
THE COURT: Sure. I believe it is. Yeah. Okay. It will be. (Recess had at 11:40 a.m.) (Reconvened at 1:00 p.m.; jurors not present.)
THE COURT: Counsel, I'm informed that, uh, one or both of you have something to put on the record at this point?
ATTORNEY FALLON: Uh, yes. Good afternoon, Your Honor. The, uh, State would like to take up one evidentiary matter as it may pertain to anticipated cross-examination on a rule of evidence before the jury arrives. I'm not sure if opposing counsel has anything they wish to discuss.
THE COURT: Hearing none?
ATTORNEY FALLON: Hearing none, um, uh, we noticed during the, um, opening statement, uh, of the defense that there was reference to the, uh, May 13, uh, interview of, uh, the defendant, Mr. Dassey. Uh, we wanted to, uh, take time to point out that, um, first of all, the State was contemplating, if at all, use of that information as part of its rebuttal case and, in all likelihood, would not be introducing that evidence in its case in chief. Uh, as such, um, the law is quite clear that those statements of the defendant can only be offered by the prosecution because then they would be offered by a party opponent, and, uh, uh, as further evidence in support of that proposition, I would cite State v. Pepin, 110 Wis. 2d 431, and State v. Johnson, 181 Wis. 2d 470, for the proposition that the defense would not be entitled to elicit that information on cross-examination of an officer unless and until the State introduces that evidence first. So we just wanted to make sure that we're clear on the rules of evidence, because if it were to be elicited by the defense, then it would not be a statement of a party opponent, it would be elicited by the same party.
THE COURT: Mr. Fremgen or Mr. Edelstein, any response?
ATTORNEY EDELSTEIN: Your Honor, at this time, uh, having heard the argument of Counsel, I would ask the Court reserve any ruling on that . matter and allow us an opportunity to review the - authority cited by Counsel. Um, we did discuss - it very briefly before court convened, uh, after noon here. We have not had the chance to review that matter and, of course, the
basis of, uh, . some of the State's evidence, which they clearly : .
indicated they intend to introduce, including, in . - : . their case in chief, not the least of which is the May 13 telephone call so intricately tied to that statement of May 13, um, I think this needs further examination before we can appropriately respond to the State's, uh, anticipatory objection.
ATTORNEY FALLON: Well, uh, just two minor points. Uh, we never mentioned anything about any May 13 statement in the opening remarks, and, uh, number two, just so the record is clear, um, the objection right now, the appropriate objection, to attempt at cross on that would be a hearsay objection. So if the Court chooses to defer ruling until later, that's fine, but we do have an officer taking the stand later this afternoon so...
THE COURT: Yeah. I -- I -- I will defer ruling, but it's my understanding, Mr. Edelstein, that the proposed -- or I shouldn't say the proposed -- the statements of -- of the -- from the May 13 interview would be admissions by a party opponents under 9-0-8-0-1 (4) (bl), and, uh, it seems to me, uh, you are precluded at this stage, at least, from asking about them. Uh, again, we'll we'll flush this out a little later on but, uh, uh, if that's what you're asking --
ATTORNEY EDELSTEIN: Your Honor, it may it it I think it's going to depend upon precisely what the officer testifies to. If he goes anywhere near any statements that he participated in, be they con -- characterized as statements or confessions that involved our client, I think irregardless of the date, there are certain areas that we have, particularly on cross, um, leeway to get into. I don't know if that's the purpose of any of his testimony here this afternoon, but if he does go there, I would, uh, ask that -- that we be notified in advance, or at least certainly be given an opportunity prior to any cross, to have this matter addressed by the Court, including an opportunity to review the case as cited by the State.
THE COURT: All right. Let's proceed. Mr. Kratz? We'll get the jury in here and we'll get your witness. (Jurors in at 1:07 p.m.)
ATTORNEY KRATZ: State would call, uh, Karen Halbach. KAREN HALBACH, called as a witness herein, having been first duly sworn, was examined
and testified as follows:
THE CLERK: Please be seated. Please state your name and spell your last name for the record.
THE WITNESS: Karen Halbach, H-a-l-b-a-c-h. DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY ATTORNEY KRATZ:
Q Good afternoon, Mrs. Halbach. Could you tell the -- the jury, please, uh, whether or not you knew a young lady by the name of Teresa Halbach?
A Yes, I did.
Q You have to pull the microphone down nice and close for us, please. Who was Teresa?
A She was my daughter. The second oldest in my family of five children. Um, she's a very caring and very loving young woman. She was very dedicated to her family and friends. She was a hard worker. Um, she had a great sense of humor. Uh, she was also the life of the party. Um, she, um -- She had an ability -- ability to make people smile, and I think that's why she enjoyed photography, because kids really responded to her.
Q All right. You told me that, uh, there were other, uh -- other children, um, in your family as well. Could you identify them?
A Tim is the oldest, and then there's Teresa, and then Mike, and then I have two younger girls, Katie and Kelly.
Q Could you tell the jury, please, where Teresa lived?
A She lived next door to -- to us. About a quarter mile west of us. My husband and I own the farmhouse and she lived there about a year before she died.
Q Going to hand you what's been marked for identification as Exhibit No., um No. 1. Could you tell the jury what that is, please?
A It's a picture of Teresa.
Q We'll be showing the jury, uh, photographs as well. When you say that Teresa lived next door to you, can you describe that a little further, please?
A Well, she lived a quarter mile west from us in a farmhouse that we own. She her -- her rent was going to go up. She wanted to live someplace cheaper so I said, why don't you move closer to home, so we'd really give you a deal on rent. So she took us up on it and, you know, we enjoyed having her there.
Q All right. I know you mentioned briefly about Teresa's background, but did she have, um, um, post high school education?
A She went four years to UW-GB. She graduated in '02 Suma Cum Laude.
Q And GB, that's GreenBay?
A Right.
Q After that, I think you've already mentioned briefly, of the kind of work that Teresa went into, but can you describe that a little more fully? What, uh -- what type of employment did she have?
A In her final semester at GB, she, uh, started an internship with Tom Pearce Photography in Green Bay, and then after she graduated, she continued working with him, and then she realized she wanted to own her own business, so she decided -- she started Photography by Teresa, and, uh, she also worked part-time for AutoTrader Magazine.
Q All right. This, uh, photography studio, did she have any areas of, uh, expertise within that studio?
A Um -
Q Any kind of, uh, portraits that she enjoyed more than others taking pictures of?
A Well, she especially liked taking picture of kids. She was good with kids. But she also did weddings, graduation photos. Um, if you had an event that you wanted pictures taken, she would gladly do it for you.
Q Mr. Wiegert's going to hand you what's now been marked as Exhibit No. 2, if I'm able to do this. Tell us what that is, please?
A It's, um, a picture of Teresa.
Q All right. Now, Teresa's photography business, you said, also included working, uh, at least part-time for AutoTrader Magazine. Um, what were you aware of her duties with that magazine?
A It -- Just know people would call AutoTrader to have pictures of their vehicles taken. And a photographer would have a certain area. And then Teresa would go -- When somebody in her area would want a picture taken, she would set up a -- an appointment with them and then go take the picture of the vehicle for them.
Q Would Teresa ever discuss or describe with you, uh, where some of her clients were that she took pictures of?
A Once in a while she would, yeah. If she was over and talking about -- talking with us.
Q All right. Had you ever heard -- At least before the 31st of October of '05, had you ever heard the name Steven Avery?
A Yes, I did.
Q And Teresa, uh, did she ever mention being at Mr. Avery's property before?
A Two times she had told me she had taken pictures at the Avery Salvage Yard.
Q All right. Mrs. Halbach, were you familiar with the kind of vehicle that, uh, Teresa drove?
A Yes, I was.
Q Could you describe that for the jury, please?
A It's a Toyota RAV 4.
Q I'm showing you what's been marked as Exhibit No. 3. Can you tell us what that is, please?
A It's a picture of Teresa in front of her vehicle.
Q Before, um, moving into the investigation, um, itself, you, I think, had mentioned that Teresa had some younger sisters. Uh, could you tell me their names, please?
A Katie and Kelly.
Q I 'rn sorry?
A Katie and Kelly.
Q How much younger were Katie and Kelly than she?
A Um, I think there's years difference between Katie and Teresa, and then Kelly's two years younger than Katie.
Q And could you describe the kind of relationship that Teresa had with her younger sisters?
A Um, they were very close. Teresa always wanted a sister. And they spent a lot of time together shopping or watching movies or...
Q All right. Did Teresa spend, uh, time with her sisters, um, at your home ever?
A Yeah, they did, and, um, Teresa would come over Sunday nights a lot, because their three favorite shows were on, so they'd watch it altogether and goof off and...
Q All right. Were Sunday nights kind of a, um -- a -- a family night or regular time for all of you to get together?
A Right. The kids would always stop in on a Sunday sometime during the day.
Q Karen, I'm going to direct your attention to Sunday, October 30 of 2005. Do you remember that day?
A Yes.
Q Could you tell.the jury what you remember about Sunday, the 30th of October?
A Um, my dad's birthday is October 31, Halloween, so the day before, my whole family got together at his house and we just celebrated his birthday during the day.
Q Was Teresa in attendance at that party?
A Yes, she was.
Q Were the rest of, uh, the siblings there as well?
A Yes,they were.
Q What happened that night if you recall?
A That night, um, we milked cows, and then Teresa came home from -- about seven, because Extreme Makeover Home Edition was coming on and she wanted to watch it with the girls.
Q She was at your house?
A Right. At our house.
Q All right. Do you know about what time Teresa left your home on the 30th?
A I would say it was after ten.
Q Um, did you know what Teresa's, um, work schedule was the next day? That is, the 31st?
A No, I did not.
Q How often during the week would you speak with . your daughter, Teresa?
A She might stop in once or twice, or call, depends on how busy she was, or if we were busy on the farm, you know.
Q On the 31st of October, 2005 how old was Teresa?
A Twenty-five.
Q Had Teresa ever been married?
A No. -
Q And at that time, that is, on the 31st of October, 2005 was Teresa involved in a relationship? Did she have a boyfriend or anything?
A No.
Q Mrs. Halbach, when was the first time that you had heard that Teresa was missing?
A On Thursday, November 3, about one o'clock, Tom Pearce called me and he was concerned about Teresa because she hadn't showed up at the studio Tuesday or Wednesday, and -- because she always stopped in at least once a day, even if she wasn't really busy that day. But he said what what -- what really worried him was that her cell phone, her voice mail, was full. He got a message saying that, and that was very unusual for Teresa because that was her business phone als -- also, and for her not to return somebody's message was a very odd -- so that worried me too.
Q Do you know what kind of, uh, cell phone Teresa had?
A Yes, I do.
Q Tell the jury, please?
A She had a Motorola RAZR V3 or something like that.
Q I'm going to hand you what has been marked for identification as Exhibit No. 8. Tell the jury what that is, please?
A It's a receipt for her cell phone.
Q And do you know if that receipt has a date on it? That is, when she purchased her Motorola RAZR cell phone?
A Yes. It says August 30, 2005.
Q I'm going to show you, also, what's been marked as Exhibit No. 9. I'm going to have you turn to the last page of that exhibit and ask if you, um, can identify this as the cell phone, um, provider contract with a Cingular phone?
A Yes, it is.
Q Does that include And, by the way, is that the same date of October 30, 2005?
A Yes, it is.
Q And does it include the make and model of her phone towards the bottom? That is, a, uh, Motorola V3 --
A Yes, it does.
Q --phone? Mrs. Halbach, on the 3rd of November, after being informed by Teresa's business partner that, uh, she was missing, could you tell the jury what, uh, you, uh, and other family members did?
A Um, I called Teresa's two brothers, Tim and Mike, to ask if they had heard from her. They said, no. And I told them about Tom Pearce calling me, so they got worried, too. And then, um, they started calling people around. And in the meantime, my husband was out plowing in a field, I went and brought him home and I said, we need to look for Teresa to find out where she is. And then, um, he went and -- Teresa had a roommate. He went and talked to the roommate, asked if he saw -- if he had seen her in the last three days. And while he did that, I called AutoTrader Magazine to see if -- when the last time they had heard from her, and I didn't get an answer right away, so then I called the Calumet County Sheriff's Department.
Q Were there other citizens -- not only family members but other citizens -- uh, even on that first day, even on the 3rd, that were trying to help locate Teresa?
A Right. We called Teresa's friends, or Tim and Mike started, and they, in turn, called other people. We had a lot of people looking for her by phone.
Q Were you able, even on that first day, even on the 3rd of, uh, November, to try to retrace her steps from when she was last seen? That is, on the 31st of October?
A Yes. Mike -- my son, Mike, was able to get into Teresa's cell phone records, and he knew that she -- I'm not sure how to say it or - -
Q Just go ahead.
A He knew that she hadn't looked at her messages or where her -- when she -- when her last call was, and that was on Monday, so he knew that was odd. So we knew something was up so we kept looking for her.
Q All right. The fact that Teresa hadn't retrieved her voice mail messages since the 31st, um, obviously that worried you?
A Right.
Q Were you able, or were you, with the assistance of your sons, able to determine the last stops or the last places that Teresa was on the 31st?
A Um, I know the boys knew where her last stops were on the 31st, but I'm not sure how they found that out.
Q Okay. Do you know if they were using cell phone records to try to retrace her steps on the 31st?
A They were doing that, yes.
Q Were you told and did you have any discussions with them that, uh, her last appointment that afternoon, that is the 31st, was with, um, Steven Avery, or at least with that property?
A Yes, I was.
Q Mrs. Halbach, between the 3rd of November and the 4th of November, did you work with any outside agencies in trying to search for Teresa? In other words, did you work to develop any missing person posters?
A Yes, we did.
Q Can you describe that process for us, please?
A On Thursday night Jay Breyer called us. He works with Y.E.S., Youth Educated in Safety. And helped us put together a missing person poster for Teresa.
Q Have you look at the back of that exhibit that I've given you. What number is that?
A Five.
Q Exhibit No. 5, can you tell us what that is, please?
A This is Teresa's missing person poster.
Q All right. On the 3rd, and especially on the 4th, of November, do you recall citizens, um, distributing thousands of these posters throughout Northeast Wisconsin?
A Right. Yes, we did. That was mainly what we did on Friday, was distribute posters.
Q Do you remember what other efforts citizens, that is, family members and other citizens, engaged in, uh, that Friday? We're talking Friday, the 4th?
A Um, my understanding -- I stayed home with our two younger daughters, but they would hand out posters, but they'd also keep their eyes open alongside of the road, you know, in case she had an accident or, um I believe they -- if -- they thought she went to Green Bay and back and had an accident, they followed them roads, looked in the ditches.
Q All right. Were you aware that law enforcement, I that is, the police departments, um, were also performing aerial, that is, uh, airplane searches?
A Yes.
Q Um, was, uh, Teresa or her vehicle found either that Thursday or that Friday?
A No.
Q Tell us, then, what the, um, family and friends of Teresa planned for Saturday, the 5th of November?
A Teresa had a good friend, um, Ryan Hillegas, and he got a group of people together at Teresa's house, and they organized searches in the area in Manitowoc County where she was last seen, or her last three appointments on Monday, so they wanted to search them areas for sure, and they searched all along roadways, under bridges. You know, our main thought was she had -- had a car accident, and, um, I think that's what they focused on.
Q You had mentioned that, uh, your, um, husband and you had, um, milked cows at least during one of the -- the days. Could you describe whether or not that's the family business? That's what you guys do?
A That's what we do, yeah. We're dairy farmers.
Q On Saturday, the 5th of November, um, were you aware of a young, uh, woman, um -- actually two women, um, Pam and Nikole Sturm being involved in the search efforts?
A Yes, I was.
Q Could you tell the jury who is Pam Sturm?
A Pam Sturm is my husband's first cousin.
Q All right. And do you know where Ms. Sturm and her daughter, Nikole, were searching?
A Um, they had asked Ryan Hillegas if, um, anybody was searching the Avery Salvage Yard. He didn't think so though. So she said her and her daughter were going to go search the junkyard.
Q All right. I know this is difficult, Ms., uh -- Ms. Halbach, but later that day did you receive any news?
A Pam and Nikole stopped at our house later in the day and told us that they had found Teresa's vehicle.
Q Were you asked at all to either identify, um, the vehicle or, uh, to further assist in law enforcement efforts that day? That is, Saturday?
A Yes, I was.
Q And what did you do Saturday, if you remember?
A Um, I think Investigator Wiegert -- Wiegert called me after he was in contact with Pam Sturm and he asked me if Teresa's RAV 4 had a Lem -- LeMieux Toyota sticker on it.
Q If her what? I'm sorry.
A If her RAV 4 had a LeMieux Toyota sticker on it.
Q Her vehicle?
A Yeah.
Q All right. What is a LeMieux Toyota sticker?
A That's where she bought it. In Green Bay.
Q All right. Do you know if you were able to assist them in that?
A I didn't know for sure, but I knew Mike did, so I called Mike and asked him, and Mike called me back or -- or he said, yes, it did, and then I told Mr. Wiegert it did.
Q All right. What's the next you heard from law enforcement?
A I - I draw a blank. I can't think.
Q Okay. Um, how often was it that law enforcement was contacting you or keeping you informed about the investigation?
A Very often. They kept us well-informed.
Q Let me just ask you, Mrs. Halbach, uh, we'll get into some other, um, easier areas, but, uh, within the next day or two, uh, were you informed that human, uh, remains were found that they believed to be your daughter Teresa?
A Right. Yeah.
Q Do you remember when you were told that?
A I think we knew human remains were found Tuesday, but I think on Wednesday, the 9th, we were told that they were identified as Teresa's.
Q All right. Mrs. Halbach, were you aware of a, um -- a camera, a digital camera, that your daughter had provided to her by AutoTrader Magazine to take pictures of her cars at least for that part of her job?
A Yes.
Q I'm going to show you what's been marked as Exhibit No. 6, ask if you can tell the jury what that is, please?
A It's the box for the digital camera.
Q Now, Exhibit No. indicates a, um, PowerShot A310 by Canon. Do you know, um, where this box was located?
A In Teresa's house.
Q Teresa tend to keep boxes and receipts and things like that?
A Yep, she did that.
Q Kind of a pack rat?
A Well, I -- I call it organized.
Q Okay. Were you aware of a, um -- a personal, um, data assistance, something called a PDA, that, uh, Teresa also owned?
A Yes, she had one of them.
Q I show you what's been marked, uh, for identification as Exhibit No. 7. Tell us what that is, please?
A It's the box for her PDA.
Q And as long as Mr. Wiegert's up, I'm going to also give you Exhibit No. 10. Tell us what that is, please?
A It's a receipt for PDA that she bought at Target November 15, 2004.
Q Now, PDA, at least the most common version is, or sometimes it's called a Palm Pilot, do you know what these things do?
A I think you can put your appointments in it, your schedules, that type of thing.
Q All right. And the Palm Zire 31 brand, uh, the box that we're looking at, um, uh, in the Exhibit that you've just identified, um, was that, again, found in Teresa's apartment?
A Yes, it was.
Q Just a couple more questions, Mrs. Halbach. The investigation, um, into Teresa's disappearance and her death, uh, required DNA samples being provided. Were you asked for one of those?
A Yes.
Q And do you know, um -- Do you know about when you ,. ,. had to
give a DNA sample to compare with some of ,: . the, um, materials that were
A I would -- I think it was in the spring.
Q All right. But you did provide a -- a -- a sample of I think it was your saliva; is that right?
A Right. >
Q The last question -- last, uh, difficult question I have for you, Mrs. Halbach, is at anytime after the 30th of October, that evening after 10:00 on the 30th of October, 2005, uh, had you ever seen or heard from your daughter, Teresa Halbach?
A No, I did not.
ATTORNEY KRATZ: At this time, Judge, I would move the admissions of Exhibit 1 through 10.
THE COURT: Any objection?
ATTORNEY FREMGEN: What was 8 and 9?
ATTORNEY KRATZ: The two receipts and the contract.
ATTORNEY FREMGEN: No objection.
THE COURT: Mr. Kratz, did you -- did you introduce an Exhibit 4?
ATTORNEY KRATZ: That was, uh --
Q (By Attorney Kratz) I did show you. That was the, uh -- it was a photo of your family. Do you still have it up there?
A No, I gave it back.
ATTORNEY KRATZ: Oh. Mr. Wiegert, let's put it up there.
Q (By Attorney Kratz) We were talking about your family, and I'll show you Exhibit No. 4.
ATTORNEY KRATZ: I apologize, Your Honor. .
Q (By Attorney Kratz) I'm showing you Exhibit No. 4. Tell us what this is, please?
A It's a family picture that our daughter, Teresa, set up. She didn't take the picture, because she was she's in it, but she set it up.
Q Uh, timers --
A Uh, no. Mike's girlfriend took the picture. She snapped it.
Q She just set it up. Can you identify just, uh, briefly for us the people in this picture?
A Um, from left to right in the back row is my husband Tom, and then there's Katie and Kelly, and in the front row is Tim, and then myself, and Mike holding our dog, and Teresa's on the end on the right.
Q All right.
ATTORNEY KRATZ: With that, and with that offer, Judge, that's all the questions I have of this witness. Thank you.
THE COURT: Any objection?
ATTORNEY FREMGEN: No, Judge.
THE COURT: All right. They're received. Cross?
ATTORNEY FREMGEN: I just have a few questions. CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY ATTORNEY FREMGEN:
Q Prior to November 5, 2005, have you ever heard of the name Brendan Dassey?
A No, I don't think I did.
Q Had Teresa Halhach ever mentioned -- Teresa, your daughter, obviously ever mentioned anything about a Brendan Dassey? You mentioned she had mentioned Steven Avery's name before; correct?
A Right.
Q Had Brendan's name ever been mentioned by her?
A No.
ATTORNEY FREMGEN: Okay. Nothing else.
THE COURT: Any redirect?
ATTORNEY KRATZ: No. Thank you, Judge.
THE COURT: You may step down.
ATTORNEY KRATZ: State will call Katie Halbach to the stand.
THE CLERK: Please raise your right hand. KATIE HALBACH, called as a witness herein, having been first duly sworn, was examined
and testified as follows:
THE CLERK: Please be seated. Please state your name and spell your last name for the record.
THE WITNESS: Katie Halbach, H-a-l-b-a-c-h. DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY ATTORNEY KRATZ:
Q Hi, Katie. How old are you?
A I'm 15.
Q Could you tell us, please, who Teresa Halbach was?
A She is my sister.
Q And was Teresa older or younger than you?
A She was older than me.
Q How much older?
A Eleven years.
Q Now, some sisters are closer than others. Could you describe how close you were to Teresa and what kinds of things you used to do together?
A Um, we were pretty close. We would -- Well, me and my little sister would go over to Teresa's house, sleep over, or we would go shopping, or things like that.
Q All right. What kind of things would you shop for?
A Um, clothes, mostly.
Q Do you know where Teresa did, uh, most of her shopping? Or was it all over?
A Um, it was all over pretty much.
Q Teresa ever shop at a department store called Kohl's?
A Yes, she did.
Q Katie, were you the closest in age, at least, uh, female sibling, the closest to Teresa?
A I am.
Q And your other sister is younger; is that correct?
A Yep.
Q By the way, would you, um, do other recreational kinds of things with Teresa?
A Um, I guess like we would -- She would take us to parks and we would go for walks and things like that.
Q Was Teresa involved in coaching any sports?
A Yes. She coached my little sister's volleyball team.
Q Okay. And would you ever go watch those games or anything?
A I did.
Q I'm going to show you what has been marked as Exhibit No. 11. Can you tell us what that is, please?
A This is a picture of the volleyball team that she coached.
Q And who is she?
A My sister, Teresa.
Q Is she in that picture?
A Yep. She is in the back row, first person on the left.
Q All right. I think you had mentioned, Katie, that, um, after shopping with, uh, your sister, um, it wasn't unusual for you guys to buy some clothes together; is that right?
A Yep.
Q Had you ever purchased or gone with Teresa, uh, and purchased any specific articles of clothing like jeans or anything like that?
A We would.
Q As her closest sister, at least closest in age, uh, I know we talked about clothes, generally, but you -- were you aware of the jeans that she owned?
A I know most of them.
Q Do you know and can you tell the jury, please, what kind of jeans your sister owned?
A I know of a pair of Daisy Fuentes jeans she had.
Q Okay. Let's just start with those. What are Daisy Fuentes jeans?
A Um, it's a brand name of jeans that is normally found at Kohl's.
Q Okay. How is it that you remember the Daisy Fuentes jeans?
A Um, one day I noticed that she was wearing them and told her that Daisy Fuentes was an old person so she was wearing old people's jeans.
Q Okay. At some point, Katie, had you, um, been told that your sister, Teresa, had been killed?
A Yes.
Q After, um, Teresa's death, were you asked to go to her, um, apartment, her residence, and look through some of her clothing?
A Yes.
Q When you looked through your sister's clothing, were you able to find those Daisy Fuentes jeans that you teased her about?
A No, I did not.
Q Mr. Wiegert's handed you a pair of, uh of jeans with an exhibit sticker on them. I think it's a gray or a blue sticker. Can you tell me what exhibit number that is?
A Exhibit 13.
Q And have you ever seen those jeans before?
A Yes, I have.
Q What is Exhibit No. 13?
A Um, it's a pair of jeans that I picked out at Kohl's one time that I thought were similar to the jeans that Teresa owned.
Q Did a law enforcement officer or officers take you on a -- a shopping trip and have you find the jeans that your sister used to own?
A Yes. I went with Mr. Fassbender.
Q Okay. If you can hold up Exhibit No. 13 and show the jury, please, um, what kind of jeans are those?
A They are Daisy Fuentes jeans.
Q And are those jeans, uh, at least to the best that you were able to determine, uh, the same or similar jeans that your sister had owned prior to her death on the 31st of October?
A They are.
Q You know what a rivet is on a jean?
A Um, I believe it is one of these little buttons that holds the jeans together.
Q Okay. And those rivets on those jeans, do they say anything on them?
A They say "Daisy Fuentes".
Q I'm going to have you give those jeans back to Mr. Wiegert at this time. I'm going to have Mr. Wiegert take them over to the ELMO machine and see if we can show the jury what we're talking about. Just as he's doing that, those little brass buttons, or those, um, little things, are those the rivets that you were talking about?
A Yes.
Q When Mr. Wiegert zooms in, it looks like that's as far as it zooms in, the little black lettering that goes around the rivet, um, since you've seen it, and we have a hard time seeing it, that says "Daisy Fuentes"; is that right?
A Yes.
Q Katie, do you know what a lanyard is?
A I believe it's one of those key chain things you put with your keys that you can wear around your neck.
Q Okay. And do you know if you ever gave your sister, Teresa, a, uh, key chain thing, a lanyard, for around her neck?
A I did.
Q Mr. Wiegert is going to have another exhibit marked for you, and we're going to show you, I'm sure, what will be Exhibit No. 14.
Q Tell the jury what that is, please?
A It is a blue lanyard that says "Air National Guard".
Q Do you recognize Exhibit No. 14?
A Yes. It is the lanyard that I gave Teresa.
Q And do you remember where you got that and where you when you gave it to Teresa?
A It was two summers ago. I was at the EAA Convention, and there was a booth, and they were giving away free lanyards.
Q Now, that particular lanyard, if you can hold it up for the jury so that they can see what you're talking about, it's got a plastic thing on the end of it. Can you show them that? That plastic end to the lanyard, do you know what that goes into?
A Um, a fob.
Q All right. And can you tell the jury what a fob is, if you know?
A Um, it's another piece of cloth, the same color, and then it's connected to a key chain.
Q To help the jury, I'm going to show you Exhibit No. 12, which is a photograph. Ask if you have seen that before?
A Yes, it's the same lanyard.
Q And does Exhibit No. 12, that is, the photograph, include the key part of it, that is, the fob that clicks in or goes into that particular key chain?
A It does.
Q Does that key chain and that fob depicted in Exhibit No. 12 look the same or similar as the key chain and, uh, fob, or lanyard and fob, that you gave to your sister a couple of summers ago?
A It does.
Q no you know whether or not your sister ever used that key chain and and, uh, um, that lanyard and and fob?
A She did.
Q How do you know that?
A Because before I gave her the lanyard she had a different one and then I remember her switching them.
Q Okay. Katie, on Sunday nights did your sister, Teresa, and you make a habit of watching some television shows together?
A We did.
Q Where would you guys usually watch those shows together?
A Either at our house or hers.
Q All right. Do you remember the day before she was killed, that is, on the 30th of October, if you and Teresa and your other sister spent that night together and watched those shows together?
A Um, I believe we were at my grandpa's house for his birthday.
Q All right. You remember that birthday party that night? ,
A Yeah.
Q Or that day at least?
A Yeah.
Q And the same question that I asked of your mom, after the 30th of October, had you ever seen or heard from your sister, Teresa?
A I did not.
Q Last question for you. Um, do you know what kind of soda that, uh, your sister, Teresa, used to drink? Did she have a brand of soda she liked?
A Um, she likes cherry sodas a lot.
Q Do you know if she liked Wild Cherry Pepsi brand soda?
A She did.
Q That's all I've got, Katie. Thank you.
ATTORNEY KRATZ: Judge, I would move the admission of -- Uh, Berta, I'm sorry.
THE CLERK: Um
ATTORNEY KRATZ: Eleven through fourteen?
THE CLERK: Eleven, twelve and thirteen.
ATTORNEY KRATZ: And 14.
THE COURT: And 14.
THE CLERK: And 14.
ATTORNEY KRATZ: Eleven through fourteen, Judge.
THE COURT: Any objection, Counsel?
ATTORNEY FREMGEN: I would like to be heard on 13.
THE COURT: Uh
ATTORNEY FREMGEN: No objection to 11, 12 and 14.
THE COURT: Okay. Eleven, twelve and fourteen are received. You want to be heard outside the presence of the jury or here?
ATTORNEY FREMGEN: Uh, at a break we can take that up.
THE COURT: Okay. Cross?
ATTORNEY FREMGEN: No, sir. Thank you.
THE COURT: All right. You may step down.
ATTORNEY KRATZ: May we just have a brief sidebar, Judge?
THE COURT: Sure. (Discussion off the record.)
ATTORNEY KRATZ: State would call Tom Fassbender to the stand. THOMAS FASSBENDER, called as a witness herein, having been first duly sworn, was examined
and testified as follows:11
THE CLERK: Please be seated. Please state your name and spell your last name for the record.
THE WITNESS: Thomas J. Fassbender, F-a-s-s-b-e-n-d-e-r. DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY ATTORNEY KRATZ:
Q Mr. Fassbender, could you tell us how you're employed, please?
A Yes. I'm a special agent with the Wisconsin Department of Justice, Division of Criminal Investigation, DCI.
Q What are your duties with DCI?
A Uh, currently I investigate, uh, crimes, such as homicide, uh, or crimes that are statewide importance in nature, and I'm a part of what we call a General Investigations Bureau.
Q Could you speak up just a little bit? I'd appreciate it. Were you employed in that capacity on November 5 of 2005?
A Yes, I was.
Q And on November 5 of 2005, uh, were you called to a location which has been come to known as the Avery salvage property?
A Yes, sir.
Q How is it that you got called to that location?
A I was called by my supervisor, who, uh, informed me that the Calumet County Sheriff had asked for DCI's assistance at that location, and it had to do with, uh, an investigation into a missing person, which was Teresa Halbach.
Q Tell the jury, if you would, please, about what time, um, you got to that location?
A I arrived at, uh, that location, which was the Avery Salvage Yard, just a little after 2 p.m. that afternoon.
Q Tell the jury, please, what, if anything, you observed upon your arrival at that salvage yard?
A When I arrived at the salvage yard, um -- salvage yard is located at the end of a road named Avery Road, and at the end of that road, uh, there was a -- a law enforcement presence set up there. Kind of like I guess what you would called a command post, and met with, um, members of law enforcement there, uh, to include the sheriff of Calumet County. Uh, received a -- a real brief, uh, briefing at that time, and, uh, subsequently went down into an area known as the -- the salvage yard where the -- the salvaged vehicles were maintained, and there was another, uh, law enforcement presence down there, uh, so to speak, like a checkpoint, um, and -- and it was from that location that I was shown where a vehicle Teresa's vehicle, had been located.
Q I don't know if you told us, but, uh, who also was there when you got there? A. Well, for certain, uh, the Calumet County Sheriff Jerry Pagel was there, and other law enforcement officers, to include officers from, uh, the Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department and Calumet County Sheriff's Department.
Q After your arrival, uh, was there any discussion regarding what role, if any, the Wisconsin Department of Justice would take in the investigation?
A Yes. Uh, as I mentioned, Sheriff Pagel had requested DCI's assistance. Um, with that being said, I learned that, um, the Manitowoc County Sheriff's. Department had requested the Calumet County Sheriff -- Sheriff's Department to take the lead role in the investigation, and, uh, with that, they Sheriff Pagel requested DCI's assistance. So, in essence, we were there, uh, to assist in the investigation, and, ultimately, I was asked, uh, to join Investigator Mark Wiegert as a lead investigator in the investigation.
Q Is it unusual, Agent Fassbender, for DCI to become involved in major crime investigations?
A No, that's not unusual.
Q After your arrival at the, um, scene, um, were you able to survey, if you will, the, uh -- the propertY, itself?
A Yes.
Q And I've handed you or had handed to you an exhibit. Can you tell us -- I think it's Exhibit No. 15. Tell us what that is, please?
A This is Exhibit 15, and this is an aerial photograph overview of, uh, the Avery Salvage Yard, including residences, um, on or around that property.
Q I've had Mr. Wiegert hand you a laser pointer. And, actually, we'll be using the large screen to my right, although I'm sure the jurors can see with the smaller screens as well. Uh, if you'd be so kind as to refer to Exhibit No. 15 and show the -- and describe for the, uh, jurors the major landmarks of the Avery salvage property.
A As I mentioned before, uh, this road right here running north and south is Avery Road. As you come south on Avery Road to this intersection right here, to the west, or to your right if you're going south, is a driveway, essentially, that goes all the way down to two residences. There's a trailer at the end right down here. That is, uh, the residence or the trailer where Steven Avery resided. Uh, there's a, um, unattached garage there also. The residence just to the east of Steven Avery's residence, uh, is the residence of Barbara Tadych. Uh, at that time it's Barbara Janda. And that, uh, is the residence that, um, Mr. Das -- Dassey, uh, resided in. Brendan Dassey. Uh, there's an abandoned trailer right there along this driveway. Going back to the intersection at the end of Avery Road, uh, is where the auto salvage business is essentially located, as well as several other -- or two other residences. Uh, this building right here, this large building, is where the au -- auto salvage office and, uh, workshop was located. There's an impound area right in here that has three buildings associated with it. That's an old office, I believe, and shop area. And right here's the residence of, uh, Al and Delores Avery, or Mr. and Mrs. Avery, Steven Avery's father. Uh, if you go -- continue south when you get to this intersection -- And, by the way, this is where that command post would have been set up, that law enforcement presence that I was talking about. If you countinue south, there's another residence located right in this area, which is Chuck Avery's residence, which would be Steven Avery's brother. And then continuing south, you go down into what was commonly referred to as the, uh, salvage yard, or the pit, and that was, uh, called that, I believe, because it used to be an old quarry, uh, area, similar to the quarries that are located around the salvage yard. So you go down -- uh, descent into this area where all the vehicles are located, uh, into the, uh, salvage yard area.
Q So that the jury has a, um a better understanding of, uh, some of the, um -- the areas, I'm going to show you, first, what has been marked as Exhibit No. 16. Tell us what this is, please?
A That would be the northwest corner of the salvage yard. And I had mentioned, uh, Steve Avery's and Brendan Dassey's residences. Right here is the trailer that Steven Avery resided in and his unattached garage. Uh, that's that driveway I was talking about coming to that location, and this is the, uh right here I'm pointing at the northwest corner of the entire, um, Avery properties. Next, or just to the east, of Steven Avery's residence is Brendan Dassey's, uh, residence, or where he resided, his unattached garage, also, which would make up, and then the surrounding, uh, curtilage or yards of both, uh, residences.
Q One of the other corners of the property I'm now showing you as Exhibit No. 17, tell us what that is, please?
A This would be the southeast corner of the, uh, Avery Salvage Yard. Um, you can see that berms, or possibly see that berms, are built up around these areas. Uh, to the south of that is -- is a -- a quarry, a privately owned quarry, Radandt Q uarry, and to the east of that is a field field area. Uh, so -- And you can see the salvaged vehicles here, some salvage vehicles lined up along there, a retention pond there, and also a automobile crusher located right there, which is, again, in this photo, which would be the lower right-hand area of the photo.
Q Now, this particular corner of the salvage property, I think you mentioned when you first arrived, uh, on the property you had concentrated on this area; is that -- is that a correct statement?
A That's correct.
Q Can you tell the jury why? What you saw?
A I was sent down to this area, and there was a staging right -- oh, somewhere right in this area, uh, law enforcement vehicles, uh, like I said, what could be considered a checkpoint. Um, beyond that is where I was told that, um, Teresa's RAV 4 vehicle had been found, and I was pointed to an area right there. There's a -- a red vehicle right there that's offset from the other line of vehicles, and the RAV 4 was located right in that area, and in this photograph it , is not there. It had been removed already.
Q The last exhibit, um, I think that I've given you so far, is Exhibit No. 18, and you talked about a command post. I show you Exhibit No. 18, and tell the jury what we're looking at, please?
A This is Avery Road that I'm pointing to right now starting in the, uh, lower right-hand corner on this - photograph. And as you reach where the command post was, which was right there, and right here there's some command post vehicles, is the northeast corner of the Avery Salvage Yard. Um, I mentioned some of the the, uh, buildings here. This is the office and shop area to the Avery Salvage Yard. This big, red building is another work
Q I can zoom out a little bit. I'm sorry.
A --work area, I think, associated with the, um, impound area. The old shop and service area, I believe, and then right in here is, uh, Al and Delores' house, and I can't quite see it in here, but, uh, Chuck Avery's house is right in there
Q Within the, um, pit area, I guess, the -- what
Q Now, I know that you, uh, at least briefly, talked about a command center or a command post. Um, let me just skip ahead so that the jury knows where we're going. How long was it that law enforcement had control of this 40-acre property?
A Well, beginning on -- on, uh, November 5 at approximately 11a.m., uh, law enforcement offer or arrived on that property, uh, in response to a call that Teresa Halbach's vehicle may have been found there, and from that point on, through approximately 11:30 on Saturday, November 12, uh, we maintained a presence and held that property.
Q So a full week?
A Yes.
Q Within the, um, pit area, I guess, the what would be to the, um, south and west of the command center, um, you may notice some vehicles. Can you describe those vehicles for us, please? And, by the way, what exhibit is it that you're looking at?
A I'm currently looking at Exhibit 19.
Q And is what's up on the screen a, uh, depiction of Exhibit 19?
A Yes, it is.
Q Tell us what that is, please?
A Basically, we -- uh, we're looking toward the southwest, um, from the, um, north side of the property. And as I mentioned, uh, the salvage area, or the -- the junkyard area, goes down into a pit, so we're standing up on the elevation part, I believe, to the rear of and I'm not positive -- but to the rear of, or the south of, uh, the Dassey residence, or, uh, Steve Avery's residence, looking out over the salvage yard, and the -- and the vehicles you see in the picture are, essentially, um, many of the, uh, salvaged vehicles in that pit area.
Q Through your seven days of, um, contact with that residence, uh, did you come to determine how many junked vehicles were on that property?
A Yes. There were approximately 4,000 vehicles on that property or on that salvage yard.
Q All right. You said that, um that this particular property, and -- and I don't expect any of these, uh, out-of-town jurors to know this, but, uh, the entry to this property is on a county road, a Highway 147; is that right?
A A state highway. Highway 147. Yes.
Q I'm showing you now what's been marked as Exhibit No. 20. Can you tell us what that is, please?
A That's a sign for the Avery Auto Salvage and Towing, and that is located at the, uh, north end of Avery Road where it intersects with, uh, State Highway 147.
Q Exhibit 20 is really just the business sign that directs patrons into that salvage area; is that right?
A That's correct.
Q Now, Agent Fassbender, your original, um, contact with that location you said was at the, uh, request of, um, Sheriff Pagel, the sheriff from Calumet County; is that right?
A Yes, that's right.
Q At about what time -- Um, perhaps you answered this, but at about what time did you arrive at that scene?
A Shortly after 2 p.m.
Q And about that time, or shortly thereafter, did you agree to become one of the lead investigators in this case?
A Yes.
Q And, again, shortly after 2 p.m., did you and other law enforcement officers become actively involved in securing or applying for what's known as a search warrant?
A Yes.
Q Tell the jury what a search warrant is, please?
A Essentially, a search warrant is an order, uh, signed by a judge, based on probable cause that directs law enforcement to search a person, object, uh, place, uh, and to seize, uh, property or items of property. It's based on probable cause that a crime may have been committed. Uh, along with that, uh, the date that it's issued to the date that it's, uh, executed, uh, you have five days to do that, and you have 48 hours to return the search warrant. Basically, that's returning it to the Clerk of Courts, or the Court, with a an inventory of what was seized if anything.
Q The judicial authorization, that is, the, um the fact that a judge authorizes you to search, uh, either a place, uh, or buildings, or residences, or even persons, um, did you believe that that was required or necessary before, uh, you folks went any further that day? That is, on the 5th?
A Yes.
Q You said that upon your arrival, um, you had observed some items or some property that had been previously discovered by some citizen searchers; is that right?
A That's correct.
Q Describe that for the jury, please?
A The item was a -- a 1999, uh, RAV 4. It was bluish/green in color, and, um, the citizen searchers . had located it on the Avery property, and had contacted law enforcement, uh, reporting that they may have located, uh, Teresa Halbach's vehicle.
Q I'm going to show you three exhibits. First, uh, Exhibit No. 21, larger picture of that, can you tell us what we're looking at, please?
A That is the, uh, rear of that vehicle I just described, a Toyota RAV 4, 1999, bluish/green in color, and that is the condition that that vehicle, or the rear of the vehicle, the condition of that vehicle, uh, as it was found.
Q And does that look the same or similar as when you saw it shortly after 2 p.m. on the 5th of November?
A Yes.
Q And, by the way, just so this jury is aware, uh, had that vehicle been secured? That is, did law enforcement officers, who arrived on the scene prior to your arrival, make sure that nobody had entered or tampered with that vehicle?
A Yes.
Q The vehicle, at least Exhibit No., uh, 23, as we see it -- excuse me, 21, as we see it, appears to be obscured by, um -- at least at the back of it -- by some branches. Uh, could you describe that further? Did it appear to be intentionally concealed in your opinion?
A Absolutely. Uh, tree branches, posts, fence posts, boxes, plywood, auto parts.
Q All right. Let's move on, then, to Exhibit No. 22, the side of the vehicle. Tell us what we're looking at here, please?
A This is the passenger side of that vehicle. Uh, uh, you can see to the -- the rear of the vehicle is that red vehicle I was talking about that the RAV 4 was, uh, positioned next to. Um, as you can see, it's got tinted windows in the back. Uh, there's a vehicle hood leaned up against, uh, the RAV 4. You can see branches. Even in the, uh, lower right-hand corner is a piece of the, uh, particle board or plywood I was talking about. Uh, and on top of the vehicle you can see that branches, uh, were placed on the top of the vehicle also.
Q And, finally, I'm going to show you Exhibit No. 23. Tell us what we're looking at here, please?
A That's a photograph of the same vehicle. The RAV 4. Uh, the passenger side front corner facing that direction. Again, uh, it's a good picture to show, uh, the objects that were used to -- in an attempt to conceal the vehicle. Uh, brush, branches, uh, posts fencing, plywood. There's actually a -- a box on the hood somewhere in there, too. Um, and the -- and the, uh -- toward the rear of the passenger side you can see the vehicle hood, uh, leaning up against the the RAV 4.
Q If you would be so kind as to take the laser pointer, the larger image, show that vehicle hood that we're talking about?
A On the left side of the photograph here, um, that I'm pointing to right now, is that vehicle hood lean -- leaning up against the, uh, passenger rear quarter panel area of the RAV4.
Q Do you know what that vehicle hood's made out of?
A Metal. Steel.
Q All right. Have I had other exhibits provided to you? Are there other exhibits that were provided?
A Yes.
Q Could you tell me what they are, please? Twenty-four?
A What's been marked as Exhibit 24 is a, uh -- another photograph of, uh, the 1999 Toyota RAV 4. Uh, it's more at or around dusk. Getting dark out. Again, it still has the, um, debris, um, that was put on and stacked up by the, uh, RAV 4, and, also, there was or shows, uh, some individuals in the scene, some law enforcement officers in the scene.
Q All right. In this picture, as well, is the steel, um, vehicle hood, uh, in front of a gentleman I think that the jury will learn is John Ertl. Can you first point to Mr. Ertl from the Crime Lab, and then, again, describe that vehicle hood?
A Uh, Mr. Ertl's standing right there in the, uh, coveralls. Uh, he's from Wisconsin State Crime Lab. They had been called to the scene to assist in processing, uh, or seizing evidence, and that the vehicle hood is is to his left and in front of him right there leaning up, again -- against the Toyota RAV 4.
Q Before we go any further, uh, Agent Fassbender, we've brought into the court, uh, what's been marked as Exhibit No. 26. Can you tell us what that is, please?
A Exhibit 26 is that vehicle hood that I've pointed out in the photographs, uh, leaning up against the, uh, rear quarter panel -- passenger rear quarter panel of the RAV 4.
Q Have you picked up, or with the assistance of others, attempted to manipulate that particular piece of steel?
A Yes.
Q Uh, in your opinion, um, would that take more than one individual to, uh, at least appropriately, move it from one area to another?
A Yes.
Q I'm showing you, also, what's been marked as Exhibit No. 25. Tell us what that is, please?
A Exhibit is another photograph of, uh, the RAV 4 and its location. Where it was found. This photograph is taken looking, uh, at the rear passenger corner of the vehicle. Clearly, again, showing, and I'll point out, the vehicle hood, uh, what appears to be a fence post next to the vehicle hood, and branches, uh, concealing the vehicle.
Q If I can go back just a a moment, please, to Exhibit No. 24, uh, we see Mr. Ertl, yourself, couple of other individuals in that -- in that depiction, um, and you mention this was right around dusk; is that right?
A Yes.
Q What's the significance, if any, of Exhibit No. 24? In other words, what is happening just prior to and just after this photograph was taken? I'm going to ask it a -- a -- different way because that -- I know that that was a bad question. I'm sorry. Uh, was this vehicle, um, completely processed at the scene or was a decision made to remove the vehicle from this location?
A The decision was made in conjunction with, uh, the forensic scientists from the Crime Laboratory that we would move the vehicle from the scene. Um, one, uh -- Some factors that entered into that decision, obviously, was, uh, darkness, uh, coming upon the scene, and inclement weather also having already happened, and, uh, more inclement weather being predicted,so the vehicle was, the uh, removed from the scene and and transported to the Crime Laboratory in Madison.
Q Could you tell the jury, please, how the vehicle was removed from the scene?
A Well, first, the Crime Lab personnel that were at the scene, uh, processed and examined the items that, uh, were used to conceal the vehicle, um, to determine whether they felt it had any evidentiary value. Certain items were seized and transported with the vehicle, such as the vehicle hood there. Um, at that time a wrecker service was contacted, as well as a transport service, Rabas, uh -- Rabas, R-a-b- a-s, I believe, came and, uh -- with their wreckers, and they removed the vehicle from its location and brought it out by where we had seen the vehicle crusher. At that location Pethan, uh, Transport was located with an enclosed trailer and the RAV 4 was backed into that enclosed trailer and sealed, and then, um, transported to the Wisconsin State Crime Laboratory in Madison, Wisconsin along with or in the accompaniment of the two forensic scientists that were on the scene.
Q Just prior to the removal of the vehicle, uh, were there any other resources that were called in, uh, to search, uh, at least around that particular RAV 4?
A Yes, there was.
Q Describe that for us, please?
A Um, we utilized, uh, Great Lakes Search and Rescue, which is, uh, basically, uh, search dogs, and they came to utilized, of the the uh, yard, scene. in salvage that And one area, yard, dog, that uh, c in particular, south, uh, ommencing at east around was area the crusher area. The dog was used to, um, see if it would alert on the crusher. You know, this dog I'm talking about is a dog that would alert. They called them cadaver dogs, and they will alert on, uh, uh, deceased human bodies as well as human blood. And, uh, that dog was utilized to search that area to the south and then along that south line to the -- or past the Toyota RAV 4.
Q I'm showing you Exhibit No. 27. This is a woman named Julie Cramer and a dog named Brutus. Do you recognize them?
A Yes.
Q Tell us, who are Julie and Brutus?
A They're members of the Great Lur -- Great Lakes Search andRescue, and, uh, Julie is the handler of Brutus. Brutus is one of those dogs I just mentioned. And they are the two that searched the area I just talked about.
Q Now, were you present when the K-9 handler, that is, the human remains handler, Julie Cramer and Brutus searched the area of Teresa Halbach's RAV 4?
A Yes, I was.
Q Describe your observations for the jury, please?
A Well, as we were going down that line of cars on the, uh, south berm of that property that I had pointed out, um -- Actually, prior to that, Julie had explained what would happen if Brutus alerted on, uh, an area that may contain human remains or blood, and as they were going down that area or that, uh, line, and when they reached the RAV 4, Brutus clearly, at least to my observations, alerted on that -- that vehicle.
Q And just so the jury's clear, uh, after Brutus, the human remains dog, alerted on the RAV 4, uh, it was at that time that the Crime Lab removed the vehicle? In other words, that it was secured and removed from that location; is that right?
A The vehicle was -- was in a secured state to begin with and maintained. It was maintained in that state. Um, the Crime Lab arrived just after Brutus alerted on that vehicle, and the vehicle was maintained there for probably another two hours, uh, until we could get the resources at the scene to remove the vehicle. So it was about two hours and then it was removed, yes.
Q All right. Do you know if the vehicle was locked at the scene?
A Yes. It was.
Q Are there any other exhibits up there that you haven't identified yet?
A No, sir.
Q I just need to ask that every once in a while. Mr. Fassbender, we're showing you what's been marked for identification as Exhibit No. 28. Could you tell us what that is, please?
A This is a photograph of the southeast portion of the Avery Salvage Yard, and I think, more particularly, depicting the automobile crusher, and I'll use the pointer on the big screen. Um, I'm pointing at that right now. Large, uh, orange-ish/yellow piece of machinery. Uh, you'll notice right near there is another piece of machinery moving what appears to be a crushed vehicle. Um, that happened when all those crushed vehicles to the south of that crusher were examined and moved to the north side of the crusher.
Q If you just point to Exhibit 28 again and show us where the crushed vehicles, that is, after the vehicles were put in the crusher, where were they stored or kept, at least temporarily, on the Avery property?
A Pointing at the crusher right now, the -- the, uh, orange- ish/yellow piece of machinery, just to the right of that on the photograph, or to the south of that, is where approximately 50-plus crushed vehicles were located.
Q And if you could show the jury, please, where Teresa Halbach's vehicle was discovered in relation to that car crusher?
A Teresa's vehicle would have been up in this area on the south edge of the salvage yard, on the other side of the retention pond, and I'm pointing to an area toward the middle right of the photograph.
Q Now, do you know about how far that, uh, vehicle was -- that is, Teresa's vehicle -- was from the car crusher?
A It was about 350 feet.
Q And at least from the intact vehicles, that is the noncrushed vehicles, was Teresa Halbach's vehicle in a row or in a line of vehicles closest to the car crusher? Does that question make sense?
A Uh, Teresa Halbach's vehicle was in a line of vehicles, that it was very near the car crusher and it had access to the car crusher.
Q All right. Let's talk about the crusher, itself, Exhibit No. 29. Tell us what that is, please?
A That's a photograph of the car crusher that we just saw, which is located in that southeast, uh, corner of the Avery Salvage Yard. To the, uh, left of the car crusher, which I'm pointing out right now, to the left of that car crusher, or the north, is, um, the crushed cars. Originally, they were to the south, but when we examined each and every car, crushed car, they were then placed, uh, in this area to the north of the car crusher.
Q Before we move forward, tell the jury why it was that you examined and looked in, in those first two days of the search, why you examined every - one of those crushed cars?
A We were looking for Teresa.
Q And at that point, at least on Saturday, Sunday, and Monday, uh, you hadn't found her body yet; is that correct?
A That's correct.
Q Before we move too far, I'm showing you Exhibit 32. Might give us a better perspective. Can you tell us what that is, please?
A Again, 32 is a -- an aerial photograph, uh, showing the southeast corner of the, um, Avery Salvage Yard. Uh, and on the screen there's a big box in the lower right-hand corner that's titled, "vehicle crusher". That's where the vehicle crusher was located. And then approximately 350, 60 feet to the southwest is a smaller box, where I'm pointing right now, that has a title "RAV 4 location", and that's where Teresa's vehicle was located.
Q Can you point to that line of cars? You talked about a line of cars that looked like it was close to or waiting to be crushed? Is that a fair characterization?
A Along the left side of the photograph, I'm pointing to a line of cars, which is basically the south edge of the Avery Salvage Yard, and that is right there, and Teresa's vehicle was located in amongst that line of cars.
Q You said after the crusher crushed the cars, they were in a a crushed state. Um, I'm going to show you what's been marked as Exhibit No. 30. Tell us what that is, please?
A That is that, uh, crushed state that, uh, you just mentioned. Often, uh, the way my understanding -- and I'm not an expert on this - - when they crush the cars, uh, they would place more than one vehicle in that crusher. They crushed three, four vehicles at a time and make somewhat of a sandwich of, uh, several vehicles. So what you're looking at there is, uh, several vehicles crushed into one, um, item, essentially.
Q All right. I'm going to ask you a bit of a hypothetical, and if you don't feel that you can comment or express an opinion about this, um, then please tell us that, but if Teresa Halbach's vehicle would have ended up in the middle of one of these sandwiches, uh, would it have been easily identified or located?
A Well, it would have been very difficult to locate.
Q I showed you a couple of other aerial photographs, and I want to show you Exhibit No. 33 before going too far. It's going to give the jury a little better understanding or overview of the area. Can you tell us what we're looking at, please?
A This is an aerial photograph from more of a distance. Uh, right in the center of the photograph, essentially, is the Avery Salvage Yard that we've been talking about and showing previously. Uh, to the left side of the photograph, or the upper left corner, is a highway. That's Highway 147. And then Avery Road right here, uh, on the left side of the photograph, and going toward the right, or toward the south, that's Avery Road, and into the auto salvage yard. To the south, or the lower side portion of the au -- salvage yard, is a quarry, gravel pit quarry, uh, owned by Radandt. To the south of the Avery Salvage Yard that I'm pointing to right now, or to the right of the Avery Salvage Yard, is also a quarry owned by Radandt. To the east of the salvage yard is open field. To the northeast of the salvage yard is another quarry owned by Michels, and to the north of the Avery Salvage Yard, again, is is, uh, open field and farm field.
ATTORNEY KRATZ: If I may, Your Honor, I am about to shift topics into more specific searches. I'm going to suggest this might be a good time for our afternoon break.
THE COURT: Okay. Uh, we'll take a 15-minute break, ladies and gentlemen. Uh, just so the jury knows, today we'll go until 5:00. Usually, it's 4:30. There's some give and take in that depending upon where the lawyers are with the various witnesses. All right. (Jurors out at 2:37 p.m.)
THE COURT: Mr. Fremgen, do you still want to be heard on that objection?
ATTORNEY FREMGEN: Judge, my -- my objection was simply
THE COURT: Why -- why don't you get to the microphone, please. Thank you.
ATTORNEY FREMGEN: On, uh, No. 13, my objection was simply -- I -- I -- I don't have an objection with it being used as a demonstrative aid. I just don't think it should be received as evidence since there was something similar to, purchased later with, uh, the detective or the agent afterwards to find something that looked like the jeans. I -- No problem with the State's use of it as a demonstrative aid. But, again, I just don't think it should be received as evidence in this case.
THE COURT: Well, my understanding is it's principally being used to link up the rivets from, uh -- from what was found to -- what was known to be owned by the -- by the victim; is that correct?
ATTORNEY KRATZ: There's been no claim that those are Teresa Halbach's jeans.
THE COURT: All right.
ATTORNEY KRATZ: In fact, just the opposite. They're demonstrative, Judge.
THE COURT: Uh, uh, for that limited purpose, it's going to be admitted. All right. (Recess had at 2:40 p.m.) (Reconvened at 3:04 p.m.)
THE COURT: Mr. Kratz, you may proceed.
ATTORNEY KRATZ: Thank you. (By Attorney Kratz) Agent Fassbender, let's move on, then, to responsibilities on the 5th of November. You had mentioned earlier that a search warrant was obtained and you had spoken, at least to this jury, about the, um, processing, recovery, and seizure of the SUV. Could you describe for the jurors, please, um, what was the search plan, uh, later? That is, that first day on the 5th of November?
A Essentially, what happened after we got the search warrant is we did an initial search, which sometimes it's described as a, uh, protective sweep. Law enforcement, when they execute a search warrant, will do a sweep of the area or buildings that they are going to search to see if there's any people, or dangers to, uh, law enforcement or anyone else at that time. In this instance, we did do that. We sent out teams to do protective sweeps and to do an initial search immediately, uh, to see if we could find Teresa. Hopefully, find her alive. So we had that initial search that was followed up with dog teams. Primary purpose of the dogs was to go through the salvage yard and through the rows of vehicles to see if they alerted on anything, but the dogs were also utilized, uh, in, uh, many of the residences and -- and buildings to see if they would alert there. After those searches were done, um, we go back to the command post, and we debrief, and, uh, a search -- or evidence search team was put together. Uh, due to resources and personnel, we had one evidence search team that we utilized, uh, that evening, and that search team started to - out by searching, uh, Steven Avery's trailer that evening.
Q I'm showing you what's been marked as Exhibit No. 34. Tell us what we're looking at, please?
A That is a photograph of Steven Avery's trailer, and to the left of the trailer is his unattached garage.
Q In the foreground, and to the right, uh, do you see a burn barrel?
A Yes, I do. There's a burn barrel, uh, with some yellow, um, police tape around it.
Q We're going to hear from, uh, Special Agent Heimerl, I think it's tomorrow, but, uh, sometime on Tues -- excuse me, on, um, Monday, the 7th, were you aware that that search or -- excuse me, that that, uh, burn barrel was recovered, uh, processed, and found some electronic equipment inside?
A Yes, it was, on Monday, the 7th. November 7.
Q Tell us what, uh, Exhibit No. 35 is, please?
A It's another photograph of the front of Steven Avery's residence, trailer, and then, uh, Steven Avery's unattached garage. You can see the LP tank in the background between the garage and trailer, and a, uh, pickup truck in front of the garage.
Q Now, this, uh, trailer of Mr. Avery had, uh, two entrance doors. Is that your understanding?
A That Two primary entrance doors, yes. There was also a, uh, patio door in the back.
Q Or the front or what would be to the front of the trailer entrance doors, are those depicted in Exhibit No. 36?
A Yes, they are.
Q And is that being depicted on the large screen as well?
A Yes.
Q You had mentioned the back of the trailer, um, had a sliding door, or an entry, uh, location. Exhibit No. 37, does that show that part of the trailer as well?
A Yes, it does.
Q Now, Agent Fassbender, the, um, search of the residence, itself, uh, how was that performed and who was that performed by? In other words, how were teams developed to do the searching, uh, during this, um, process?
A When we're searching, uh, for evidence, uh, on I ,.1. Saturday evening, a, uh, team was put together, and this team may be a little different than the initial search teams, because, uh, they're searching for evidence, and if they find evidence, uh, we want them to be able to process, collect, uh, prepare for transport of that evidence. So when we put that particular team together, we're looking for officers that have been trained and have experience in evidence processing and collection, and that's how that team ultimately got put together. i.
Q You talked about a search of the, um, and a sweep of the trailer and the garage. I'm showing you Exhibit 38. What is that?
A That's, again, a -- a viewpoint of Steven Avery's trailer in the background, his unattached garage in the foreground with, uh, his black truck, and we would be facing west taking that picture.
Q Just so the jury can see, I'm going to zoom in a little bit closer, um, there's a -- a dog, uh, to the left of the, um, exhibit. Do you see that?
A Yes.
Q Were you aware of that dog and were you aware of the demeanor of that dog?
A Yes, I was.
Q Describe that for the jury, please?
A The -- The occasions I had to be around that dog, that dog appeared to be very ag--aggressive. Pulling on its chain, leaping against the chain, barking and snarling. I I kept my evidence.
Q Were you made aware and and I think we've heard, um, or will hear some more about this, but did that dog prevent a search area of the back of Steven Avery's garage at least for a couple of days of your processing?
A Yes, it certainly did when we had the dogs there, because the dogs didn't weren't goi537ng to go near that dog because of the aggressive nature, and as well as, uh, searchers going through that area, steering clear of that area.
Q What is Exhibit No. 39?
A Thirty-nine is a photograph of the front of Steven Avery's unattached garage with his pickup truck parked in front of that.
Q And, again, this garage was not only swept on the 75th but was later, uh, searched on Sunday, the 6th; is that correct?
A That's correct.
Q Were you familiar, uh, Agent Fassbender, with the van that Teresa Halbach took photos of on the 31st?
A Yes.
Q I'm showing you what's been marked as Exhibit No. 40 so that we can talk about that just, uh, briefly. Tell us what we're looking at, please?
A That is the van, maroon van. I believe a Plymouth Voyager that, uh, Barb Tadych had for sale that Steven had arranged for Teresa to come out and take a photograph of.
Q And that vehicle is what would be directly in front of, or, perhaps, better stated, between the Avery and the Janda, slash, Dassey residence; is that correct?
A That's correct.
Q In fact, as we look at Exhibit No. 41, gets a better perception or perspective, at least, as far as Barb's trailer; is that right?
A Yes.
Q The red trailer that we had talked about, were you able to determine who that trailer had belonged to?
A Yes.
Q Who is that?
A Who lived there or who it was owned by?
Q Who lived there?
A Uh, Steven Avery.
Q All right. And so the jury can, uh, see photos of him, Exhibit 43, is that a picture of his driver's license photograph?
A Yes it is.
Q And, I'm sorry that 42. And Exhibit No. 43, on the 9th, after he was booked in this case, is that a picture of his booking photo?
A Yes, it is.
Q On Steven Avery's property, uh, that is, uh, to the rear of his garage area, uh, were you aware of any tires, uh, that were located that, uh, you determined were later used to fuel, uh, a large fire behind Steven's garage?
A Yes, there was a, uh, pile of tires.
Q I'm showing you Exhibit No. 31. Is that a photograph of those tires?
A Yes. And that was located on the southwest corner of, um, the yard, um, associated with the residence that Steven lived in.
Q Agent Fassbender, the, um, search -- that is, the week-long search -- of the property, um, items were located. That that's fair, isn't it?
A That's fair.
Q Were you aware of Teresa Halbach's license plates being found that week?
A Yes.
Q Do you remember where those were found?
A Yes, I do.
Q Tell us where that was. Please?
A That was on Tuesday, um, November 8, and they were found in a salvaged vehicle that was located along the driveway, just to the south of the driveway, going down to Mr. Dassey, Mr. Avery's residences along a fence line there.
Q Tell us who those, uh, plates were located by?
A Uh, they were located by William Brandes, who was a volunteer firefighter, who had been teamed up in search teams with law enforcement officers, uh, looking for evidentiary items such as those license plates.
Q Let me show you Exhibit No. 44, ask us if you -- can tell us what that is, please?
A That's a photograph, uh, of the vehicle -- station wagon there, that the license plates were found in.
Q The license plates, themselves, were they photographed inside of this vehicle?
A Uh, yes, they were.
Q Who were they photographed by?
A Uh, Trooper Cindy Paine.
Q So Wisconsin State Trooper?
A Uh, Wisconsin State Patrol Trooper, yes.
Q Exhibit No. 45, tell us what that is, please?
A That's the photograph of the license plates placed inside that vehicle, uh, taken by Trooper Paine. Um, the plates had been removed because they were folded in on themselves. They had to be unfolded to determine what the number of the license was, and then they were just placed back in there and a photograph was taken.
Q All right. And, finally, Exhibit No. 46, tell us what this depicts, please?
A Forty-six is basically a relation in ship picture. Uh, on the left side of the photograph shows Steven Avery's residence. Next to that, to the right, is the Janda/Dassey residence, and, then, a little further to the right, or to the west, is an arrow pointing at the vehicle that the license plates were found in.
Q So if you're looking at this particular access road, could you show us, uh, how you would walk or drive down this road to get towards the either the Avery residence or the Dassey residence?
A Well, on the picture to the right here, that is the -- or to the top of the picture -- is the driveway or access road going down to, uh, the Janda/Dassey residence and Steven Avery residence. If you keep going to the right, which would be to the east, you would run into Av.ery Road and the entrance to the salvage yard, and then Avery road to the north out to State Highway 147.
Q I've handed you what's been marked as Exhibit No. 47. Could you tell us what that is, please?
A That's a photograph of the front, or the north side of, um, Mr. Dassey's residence.
Q And can you tell us what's in front of -- of that, um, residence?
A Right in front of that residence, where I'm pointing right now, about in the middle of the photograph is a golf cart.
Q I'm also going to show you Exhibit No. 51. Tell us what 51 is, please?
A That photograph depicts that same golf cart. It's blue in color with a white seat on it.
Q Agent Fassbender, have you ever had occasion to be inside of that residence?
A Yes.
Q I'm going to direct your attention, and I know I'm skipping ahead just -- just briefly, but on the 1st of March, um, we heard, at least in our opening remarks, about a statement that was given you by the defendant, Brendan Dassey? You and Investigator Wiegert? Is that correct?
A Correct.
Q Later, on the 1st of March, were you given permission and, in fact, did you enter the residence of Barb Janda and Brendan Dassey?
A Yes.
Q And in the Janda and Dassey residence, uh, did you find any, uh, items, specifically, in the bedroom of Barb Janda?
A Yes.
Q I'm going to first show you what's been marked Exhibit No. 49. It's shown on the large screen. Tell us what we're looking at, please?
ATTORNEY FREMGEN: Judge, could I have a sidebar, please?
THE COURT: Sure. (Discussion off the record.)
Q (By Attorney Kratz) Exhibit No. 49, and what are we looking at?
A That is the bedroom of, um, Barb Tadych, um, in her residence, and showing some closet space or storage space there, and on, um, the handles of some of those, um, closets or storage space we found located, uh, some -- what you would call leg irons and handcuffs.
Q I'm going to show you what has been marked as Exhibit 48. These are close-ups. Do you recognize Exhibit 48?
A Yes, I do. It's a pair of the handcuffs that were, uh, taken out of, um, that bedroom.
Q And Exhibit No. 50. Tell us what that is?
A That's a pair of what we'd call leg irons, also taken out of that bedroom.
Q Now, also on the 1st, did Mr. Dassey identify for you any clothing items? Specifically, items that he had worn on the 31st of October?
A Yes.
Q I show you Exhibit No. 52. Tell us what that is, please?
A That's a jacket that we located in Mr. Dassey's residence. Um, I believe it had the name of Friar Tuck on it or Friar Tuck's, something like that.
Q And what did he tell you about this jacket?
A That he believed that, uh, was a jacket that he had worn, uh, the night of October 31, 2005.
Q Exhibit 53. Tell us what that is, please?
A That's a pair of, uh, tennis shoes or sneakers, also taken out of, uh, Mr. Dassey's residence, and, again, it -- they fit the description of sneakers he said he was wearing that evening.
Q And, finally, Exhibit No. 54. Tell us what that is, please?
A It's a pair pf blue jeans that, uh, Mr. Dassey himself, um, located, or took me to in his residence, um, indicating that those are the pants that he wore that evening.
Q On the photograph, uh, appears to depict some stains on them. Do you see that? And can you show us that on -- on the screen?
A Yes. Um, white stains on the lower right-hand pocket area of the blue jeans, and also on the upper, uh, left-hand pocket area of the blue jeans there's some white staining.
Q Some stains around the, uh, bottom portions or around the knees as well?
A Yes. Spots and stains that are white.
Q Now, we'll get into the statements of Mr. Dassey, uh, much more detail later this week, but did Mr. Dassey describe for you what those stains were?
A Yes.
Q What did he tell you?
A He said they were bleach stains.
Q Did he say how those bleach stains got on his jeans?
A Yes. ..
Q How?
A He said that he got them when he was helping clean up the garage floor in Steven Avery's garage, and that -- because they use -- utilized some bleach to clean that area.
Q Now, the jeans, themselves, uh, has Mr. Wiegert provided you with, uh -- with those?
A Yes.
Q What is that exhibit number?
A Exhibit 58.
Q Tell us what Exhibit 58 is, please?
A Exhibit 58 is the pair of jeans that, uh, Brendan Dassey, um, took us to in his residence on I February 27, 2006 and consented to us taking them.
Q And do those jeans still appear, as you see them - today here in the courtroom, to have bleach stains on them?
A Yes, they do.
ATTORNEY KRATZ: What are those exhibits, Mr. Wiegert, 59 and 60?
Q (By Attorney Kratz) We're going to show you Exhibits 59 and 60. Tell us what those are, ,. please?
A Two sets of, um, handcuffs.
Q Do you know where those were retrieved from or where you retrieved them from?
A One set of the handcuffs was retrieved from Mr. Dassey and, uh, Mrs. Tadych's residence, and I believe another set was, um, seized from Steven Avery's residence.
Q Exhibit No. 61 and 62 are being handed to you now. What are those?
A Uh, two -- two sets of, um, fur lined leg irons.
Q Where were those seized from?
A I know we took two sets of leg irons out of Mr. Dassey and Mrs. Tadych's residence, and we also took one set of leg irons out of Steven Avery's residence.
Q All right. Agent Fassbender, this has been, uh, agreed to by the, uh -- by the defense, but, um, were you able to retrace the steps of Teresa Halbach? That is, uh, where she had been prior to arriving at Mr., uh, Avery's property on the 31st of October, and approximately when? Do you recall?
A Yes, we were able to retrace. And I didn't understand or hear the rest of the question.
Q If you were able to tell us, first of all, the two residences that afternoon, the afternoon of the 31st, that Ms. Halbach had been?
A Yes.
Q Who is that?
A Uh, Steven Schmitz residence and a JoEllen Zipperer residence.
Q And at the JoEllen Zipperer residence, um, did law enforcement officials receive from Mrs. Zipperer, specifically, that packet of, uh, information, the AutoTrader information, given to her by Ms. Halbach?
A Yes.
Q I show you what's been marked as Exhibit 55. Tell us what that is, please?
A That's an AutoTrader bill of sale and Auto -- a current AutoTrader Magazine, and a, uh, "For Sale" sign.
Q Is it your understanding that after a transaction was completed between Ms., uh, Halbach and whatever customer for AutoTrader, that she would give them a bill of sale as well as the most current magazine?
A Yes. Same thing happened with Mr. Schmitz.
Q All right. And the defense has also been kind enough to stipulate, which means agree, to some business records. I'm showing you Exhibit 56. Ask if you can tell us what those business records?
A Exhibit 6 - 56 is a copy of Cingular, um, toll records, billing, uh, for, uh, the cell phone of Teresa Halbach.
Q Okay. And are 57 the cell phone records for Cellcom? That is, for Mr. Avery's cell phone on the 31st of October?
A I believe so, but let me confirm. Yes.
ATTORNEY KRATZ: And, Judge, although, uh, this is, perhaps, the first time this week that this kind of statement, uh, will be made, but, uh, I would ask that, uh, uh, defense counsel, um, agree, and indicate to the Court, their acceptance and approval that the, uh, business records, in this case of Cingular and Cellcom, be admitted without the necessity of calling a custodian of the records and without objection of the defense.
THE COURT: Mr. Fremgen?
ATTORNEY FREMGEN: I believe we've stipulated to that already.
THE COURT: That's part of the stipulation. All right.
ATTORNEY KRATZ: Thank you.
Q (By Attorney Kratz) Agent Fassbender, the balance of the week, that is, after the 5th of November, could you describe fot he jury, please, the, um, uh, search efforts of this property? I don't mean, specifically, what days and what was searched, but, uh, just give the jury, if you will, since they're not going to hear day by day, um, what was searched for, uh, in the Avery property and the surrounding, uh, property as well?
A As I said before, there's approximately 15 buildings on the property. All the buildings were searched by search teams. Um, also on the property, each and every, uh, uh, vehicle of the approximate four sev four thousand vehicles were searched. Uh, additional personnel were brought in to assist in those searches, to include, uh, Wisconsin State Patrol. Uh, on two separate days 60- plus troopers were brought in just for search efforts. Um, anywhere from 45 to 60, uh, volunteer firefighters were brought in on, uh, two or three days. Uh, law enforcement personnel from several counties were brought in, or asked to come in and help. Several police departments were asked to come in and help. Citizens searches were done in, uh, adjacent properties, not on the Avery Salvage Yard. Um, Winnebago County, for example, brought their dive teams in, and, uh, they were utilized in ponds. They were located in adjacent properties, quarries. Some ponds were pumped out, uh, to look through those, uh, for either Teresa or evidentiary items.
Q The next area of inquiry I have, uh -- I'm sorry. The next area I have for you, Agent Fassbender, are the creation of, um, computer- generated images on and around this property. First of all, are you familiar with how these images were created?
A Yes.
Q And could you start by generally describing for the, uh, jury, uh, what these images are and what they're meant to depict?
A These images were prepared by Tim Austin of the Wisconsin State Patrol, who was asked to come right -- to the scene right away on November 5. Uh, he uses what's called a "total station, uh, measuring" or "forensic mapping" uh, piece of equipment. And with that, he's able to uh, map or measure a scene, uh, to scale, uh, so you have accurate measurements of, uh, any particular scene. In this case, a -- a large scene or a crime scene. Um, they are meant to depict, uh, measurements of items at the scene, uh, relationships of items at the scene and -- and the measurements between them. Uh, he's also able to depict those or produce sketches in two dimensional as well as, uh, models in three dimensional, adding height -- 2 a height to that, uh, sketch or that model, and he's also able to, uh, render, um -- the word escapes me now -- render, um, animation scenes that's what I'm thinking of -- of that same scene or certain areas of that scene. And an animation would be a -- a virtual tour or walk-through a certain area on that scene.
Q Since the jury, uh, would not be and will not be in this case, visiting this scene, and since these images show angles or depictions that the naked eye cannot, do you believe that these images will assist the jury in understanding relationships? That is, between relationships of, uh, evidence that was not only seized but also relationships of evidence, uh, to fixed points within the property?
A Yes. Definitely.
Q All right. Let's show the jury -- By the way, do you know about how many measurements were taken by Mr. Austin?
A Over 4,100 measurements both manually and electronically.
Q You talked about them being, um, accurate. Do you know just how accurate these are?
A Well, I -- I think the greatest distance measurement he had was 1,200 feet, and at that distance the maximum amount of error would be less than one-half inch.
Q Exhibit No. 63. We're going to go through these very quickly. Can you tell us what we're looking at, please?
A Sixty-three is a three-dimensional, uh, depiction of the Janda/Dassey residence and the Steven Avery residence in the northwest corner of the Avery properties.
Q And if you could just take your laser pointer, just show the jury, uh, what we're talking about here?
A Again, the, um, Janda/Dassey residence, unattached garage to it, the Steven Avery residence and unattached garage. And the surrounding yards, and that right there is the, uh, van that was for sale.
Q Okay. Exhibit No. 64?
A Um, again, 3-D rendition of essentially the same section of land but from a different angle coming from the north, and the, uh, Janda/Dassey residence, garage, Steven Avery residence, garage, the vehicle that was for sale.
Q Once again, these are views that are unattainable by the human eye; is that
Q These are not photographs, these are actual by the human eye; is that correct?
A Yes.
Q Exhibit No. 65, please?
A It's a 3-D rendition of, uh, the Janda/Dassey residence from the front, uh, looking south, and the unattached garage, and the golf cart is right there.
Q These are not photographs, these are actual computer-generated images; is that correct?
A Correct.
Q Exhibit No. 66?
A Another view of the Janda/Dassey residence and garage from the back yard looking north now, from the south looking north, um, four burn barrels in the back of the, um, residence area.
Q Exhibit 67?
A Uh, another depiction of Steve Avery's residence, Steven Avery's garage, the van that was for sale. And then to the right side of the picture you can see Steven Avery's burn barrel depicted.
Q Sixty-eight?
A A, uh, more close-up version of the depiction of Steven Avery's residence, the front of the residence, ! . the deck, the, uh, entrance door to the north, and then the rear entrance door to the south.
Q Exhibit 70?
A Uh, another 3-D rendition of the rear area, or to the south, of Steven Avery's garage. Steven Avery's garage right there, Steven Avery's residence right there, and then a, uh, mound, built up mound, of dirt and stone, and also a dug out portion of that mound to the south of the mound, which is what we called ,- the burn area, doghouse, and the dog chain.
Q I'm sorry, Agent Fassbender, I misspoke. This was Exhibit 69; is that correct?
A Exhibit 69, that's correct.
Q I'm sorry. And this also shows the burned out van or vehicle seat in it; isn't that right?
A Correct. Right to the right of the darkened area, -: . which is the burn area, uh, just outside of that and on the edge of the elevated dirt area is that burned, uh car seat.
Q All right. Now we're moving to Exhibit No. 70. What is this?
A A different angle depicting the, uh -- the mound and the burn area. The, uh, car seat, Steven Avery's garage, Steven Avery's house.
Q Exhibit 71?
A 3-D, uh, rendition of, uh, the Janda/Dassey residence. You would be looking from above and to the east, looking west. The vehicle that was for sale, I believe it was a Plymouth. Uh, the garage, Steven Avery's house, and the burn area behind the garage. Steven Avery's garage.
Q Now, Trooper Austin was also able to do interior scene modeling. In other words, uh, um, rip off the roof, if you will, of buildings and show you, uh, a birdseye view of the inside of -- of, uh, buildings; is that correct?
A That's correct.
Q I show you Exhibit No. 72. Tell us what we're looking at here, please?
A This is where, uh, Trooper Austin made the roof, uh, disappear on Steven Avery's residence, looking straight down, or almost straight down, into the residence to depict what the inside of the residence, uh, looked like or had in it.
Q These included all of the rooms of the trailer?
A Yes.
Q And even to the exterior, both exterior main doors, as well as the, uh, sliding glass door towards the back; is that right?
A That's -- That's correct.
Q Now, some closeups, uh, as to some of those rooms. Uh, one of the bedroom closeups, which includes some firearms, that's Exhibit 73. Tell us what we're looking at?
A This bedroom is the bedroom located to the rear of Steven Avery's residence, or to the far south. This was Steven Avery's bedroom. Um, and the firearms, um, mentioned are in a gun rack on the wall, or the northern wall, of that bedroom.
Q So that the jury understands these, um, depictions, even the interior depictions, were taken by detailed measurements by Trooper Austin as well; is that right?
A That's correct.
Q A different view of that bedroom would be Exhibit No. 74. Tell us what we're looking at, please?
A Same bedroom. Steven Avery's bedroom. Just a different angle. Here you can see a desk in the corner with a chair, and, uh, uh, a bookcase, album holder, is how it's been described, along that, uh, east wall of the bedroom.
Q And later this week we're going to hear about how close Steven Avery's bedroom door is to the exit door. That is, the door that goes towards the garage. But could you just show us that with your laser pointer?
A Steven Avery's -- Entrance to his bedroom right here, the rear exit door/entrance door to his trailer right there. Just a couple steps.
Q Mr. Tyson, a deputy with the Sheriff's, uh, Department, tomorrow, will talk about bleach being found. But can you tell us what Exhibit No. 75 is?
A Exhibit 75 depicts the bathroom in Steven Avery's trailer, which is located right next to, or to the north, of his bedroom. In that bathroom area there's a, uh, laundry area right up in here where this box is, and a shelf. There was empty beach -- bleach bottle seized off of that shelf.
Q The last two images, then, uh, include, uh, garage images. This is Exhibit No., um, 76. Can you tell us what that is, please?
A This is Steven Avery's garage with, um, the roof, uh, disappearing and allowing us to see the inside of the garage. I might add that this is more of a cleaned up version of the inside of that garage. Lot of the clutter -- There was much more clutter. A lot of the clutter is -- is not in there.
Q And, finally, Exhibit No. 77. Tell us what that is, please?
A Steven Avery's garage. Different angle. The roof has been removed. The garage door is open, or removed, and, um, again, the clutter not included, but it is accurate, uh, rendition of the inside of that garage.
Q Now, Evidence Tents No. 9 and 23, do you know what those depict?
A Yes. Evidence Tent No. 9 toward the front of the garage depicts where a bullet fragment, a .22 caliber bullet fragment, was located in the crack in the cement of the, uh -- the floor of the garage. And then back here, the other evidence tent, uh, is where -- 23-A is where a bullet fragment was also discovered, uh, underneath a air compression in the back -- air compressor in the back of that garage.
Q These were searches on March 1 and after Mr. Dassey's statement? Is that your understanding?
A That's correct.
Q Agent Fassbender, ypu talked about an animation, or that it was possible to, um, depict, or have Trooper Austin depict, through animation, uh, what it is that, uh, he had, um, shown in a 3-D version. Have you been able to, um, view that animation?
A Yes.
Q I show that to the jury at this time. Oop. I'm sorry. That's the wrong animation. If you'd be so kind as this plays, uh, Agent Fassbender, since the jury will not get a virtual tour, or will not get a tour, of the property, um, explain for the jury, if you will, what they are observing?
A Well, this would be, essentially, the aerial view of Steven Avery's garage and residence. You're looking west to the east, and just at the bottom of the screen would be the roof to the Janda, uh, Dassey residence. And we're moving toward the north and reducing altitude, coming around the front of the Janda/Dassey residence and showing the front of Steven Avery's trailer. To the right you can see the van, where it was parked, uh, the van that was for sale.
Q Use your laser pointer if you fee it's necessary.
A The van right there. Continuing, and he -- he out the van. The front of Steven Avery's trailer. To left is the garage. Now, we're approaching Steven Avery's trailer coming from the east headed west. You can see a wraparound deck. There's also a pool in the back. And that's the main entrance door points coming up over Steven Avery's trailer to the top and looking down upon his residence. The roof is gone, and now we're looking into the living room of Steven Avery's trailer. In the corner there's a computer desk, TV, spare bedroom, bathroom, and Steven Avery's bedroom. And that would be working, uh, north to south in his trailer. Again, just different angles of Steven Avery's bedroom. Again, from an elevation looking down, Steven Avery's garage, and, again, the interior of the garage. There's a Suzuki Samurai parked in there, and a snowmobile also placed in the garage. Coming around to the rear, or to the south, of, uh, Steven Avery's garage is that mound, built up mound, of dirt and stone I talked about. The doghouse, the chain, and the dog, and this dug out portion of that mound area, which was the burn area, steel belts right there, the car seat, burned out car seat, and a tire, which were all located at the scene. Just pulling away from that, toward the, uh, southeast, more of a distance view of Steve's garage and residence. We would be, essentially, in the backyard of the, um, Janda/Dassey residence right now. The four burn barrels I talked about earlier, and the Janda/Dassey residence. Or the Tadych, now, residence. Associated with that residence were these four burn barrels. You can see the relationship between Steven Avery's property and Mr. Dassey's property. Front, or the north, of Steven Avery's -- to the north of Steven Avery's trailer and garage. In the forefront of the, uh, rendition here is Steven Avery's burn barrel. Again, the relationship between all three items, the garage, the residence, and the burn barrel.
Q Again, those -- that was an animation, uh, created from those still photographs by Mr. Austin? Is that your understanding?
A That's correct. (Exhibit No. 78 marked for identification.)
Q The last, uh -
ATTORNEY KRATZ: By the way, Judge, I should have the record reflect that the, uh, animation that has just been shown, uh, I am having marked as -- at least for identification -- as Exhibit No. 78.
THE COURT: Okay.
ATTORNEY KRATZ: Um, we'll be tendering that as well.
Q (By Attorney Kratz) The last, uh, area of inquiry I have for you, um, Agent Fassbender, uh, is a statement from Mr. Dassey. Uh, although we're not going to be discussing the, uh, March 1 or earlier statements in November, um, I understand that you, individually, that is, you . alone, spoke to Mr. Dassey on February 27; is that right?
A Myself and another DCI agent, uh, spoke with him, uh, spoke with him, uh, his mother, and his brother, who also present at that time.
Q Where did that take place?
A At the, uh, resort motel in Mishicot, uh, later in the evening. I think it was, uh, after 10:00 p.m.
Q All right. On the 27th of February -- By the way, this was 2006; is that right?
A That's correct.
Q This was before the March 1 admissions were obtained from Mr. Dassey; is that right?
A It was on the evening of February 27.
Q Would you agree that this was characterized as a witness interview?
A Yes.
Q And at that time was the topic of any bleach or bleach stains brought up?
A Yes, it was.
Q Describe for the jury how that came up, please?
A Well, I received information about Mr. Dassey having some bleach stains on some jeans, and that being a result of, uh, cleaning Steven Avery's garage floor. Acting on that information, I went to the motel where Mr. Dassey's mother and his brother were located, and I inquired about that, and Mr. Dassey advised that, uh, yes, he had some jeans that he was wearing that evening, October 31, 2005, uh, when he was assisting Steve Avery in cleaning up a garage -- Steve Avery's garage floor, because it had some stains on it. Uh, when asked what he thought he was cleaning up, uh, and the color of those stains, he described them initially as dark red, uh, but he believed, um, that they were oil stains, uh, from some vehicles or such. Uh, upon further speaking with him, uh, he described the stains as red in color, because the rags or the cloths they were using to clean up the stains appeared red on the cloths. When asked what he used to clean up the stains, he advised that they initially tried gasoline. Um, that worked a little, and then they used paint thinner, uh, and that may have worked a little more he thought, and, then, ultimately, they used bleach on the garage floor, uh, to finish the cleanup. He said that the rags they used to clean up the substance Steven threw in the, uh, fire that was going, um, behind -- in a burn area behind Steven Avery's garage. And, again, when asked, um, about what he thought the substance was, if he thought it could have been blood, and he said, yeah, he thought it could have been blood, and said, when asked what do you think to this date, which would have been February 27, he believed it to be blood.
Q And so the jury understands, and I know that later in the week we'll hear of this, but that Mar -- that, uh, February 27 statement, then, caused you and Investigator Wiegert to re-interview Mr. Dassey two days later on the 1st of March; is that correct?
A That was one of the things.
ATTORNEY KRAT-Z: At this time, Judge, I will move the admission of Exhibits 15 through 78, and have no further questions of this witness at this time. Thank you.
THE COURT: Any objection, Counsel?
ATTORNEY FREMGEN: I think just as to 78, there might be a second item
on that that hasn't ,.: been -- just that first overview that we saw?
ATTORNEY KRATZ: There is a second, uh, animation, Judge, and if that is played, uh, that will, uh, be identified and, uh, described through our anthropologist, Dr. Eisenberg, later this week. But I'm not offering it at this time.
THE COURT: You -- You're offering the part of 78 that we've seen, which is the virtual tour?
ATTORNEY KRATZ: Just the scene model, yes, Judge.
ATTORNEY FREMGEN: With that, no objection.
THE COURT: All right. They're received. They'll be received then. Cross?
ATTORNEY EDELSTEIN: Thank you, Your Honor. CROSS-EXAMINATION BY
ATTORNEY EDELSTEIN:
Q Agent Fassbender, uh, how long have you been employed with DCI?
A Twenty-two years about.
Q And prior to that, you were also a state employee, uh, as -- as a trooper; is that correct?
A For five years, yes.
Q Or state patrol? However you want to characterize it?
A Correct.
Q Okay. Now, is it fair to say that from the perspective of who's in charge of this overall investigation, that became yourself as well as Wiegert from Calumet County; correct?
A That's correct.
Q Prior to getting the phone call, as you indicated in your direct, from your superior, you really didn't have much information about this incident; is that right?
A That's correct. Just from the media.
Q Now, early on, you testified that by the time you arrived at the Avery property, quote, law enforcement had control of the property. Is that your understanding?
A Yes.
Q And what time did you get there?
A Sh -- shortly after 2 p.m.
Q And on what day?
A Saturday, November 5, 2005.
Q Now, prior to that, law enforcement didn't necessarily have control of the property; correct?
A That's correct.
Q In fact, there were individuals, who were citizens, who were kind of traipsing around there?
A Yes.
Q Okay. And they were looking for any signs connected to Teresa? Is that a fair statement?
A To my knowledge, yes, two -- two citizens went to that salvage yard to obtain permission to look through it. Yes.
Q Okay. And, in fact, they got permission from members of the Avery family; correct?
A Yes. Earl Avery.
Q Who asked you to become, as you testified, the lead investigator?
A I believe Sheriff Jerry Pagel. Calumet County Sheriff.
Q As you understood it, when you arrived and made your way down there by the RAV 4, which I believe was depicted in Exhibit No. 23, uh, no one had been inside of the vehicle; correct?
A No. The vehicle was found in a locked condition.
Q So somebody tried to get in?
A I don't understand that. Not to my knowledge no one tried to get in.
Q How do you know it was locked? Somebody would have to check a door, would they not, to see if it was locked? You testified it's locked. How do you know that?
A Uh, one of the Sturms, with one of the citizens, that went on the property to look, um, used a tissue to try the door handles, yes.
Q Okay. So somebody did try to get in?
A Yes. I -- I took it to mean an apparent effort to -- that was physically visible. I'm sorry. I misunderstood the question.
Q And we've seen the photographs of what the RAV 4 looked like when it was found. Um, who, if you know, was there guarding or securing the RAV 4 when you showed up around two o'clock?
A I'm not sure who was guarding the RAV 4 at that time. To my knowledge --
Q You indicated -- Go ahead.
THE COURT: Well, let him finish.
A My knowledge was that Calumet Cou -- or, uh, Manitowoc County Deputies initially did that, and then when Calumet County personnel got there, uh, they took over. But I'm not sure of the exact time that the Calumet County Deputy took over. I believe it was somewhere around -- between two and three, three-thirty.
Q (By Attorney Edelstein) But you don't have a specific recollection of whether it was Calumet, or Manitowoc, or who was standing there when you got there; is that what you're telling us?
A That's correct.
Q All right. Now, you indicated that prior to anything happening with the RAV 4, the lab people -- And we're talking about your folks from your agency from Madison were called; right?
A Yes.
Q And they showed up; correct?
A Correct.
Q And I believe you testified that the items around the RAV 4, which you described as having been used to conceal it, were processed; correct?
A Examined might be a better term. Processed.
Q Well, let -- let's -- Was it a visual examination only, to your knowledge?
A That's correct.
Q So there were no forensic tests made at that time at that location?
A Not to my knowledge.
Q Were you present from the time that you got there and saw what was the secured, or should have been the secured, RAV 4, until the time the vehicle was physically loaded up into the enclosed trailer?
A I was not present at the RAV 4, no. I was on scene, but I was not present at the RAV 4.
Q All right. So if the if the lab personnel did anything beyond a visual inspection, you weren't there to see it?
A That's correct.
Q But as lead investigator, you keep up with the things that the lab people do in the course of the investigation?
A I try to, yes.
Q Well, that's kind of important, isn't it?
A Yes.
Q In fact, a lot of times you have the -- in conjunction with others involved, the authority to make specific requests of the lab for processing for evidentiary items?
A Correct.
ATTORNEY EDELSTEIN: Your Honor, may I approach? (No verbal response.)
Q (By Attorney Edelstein) Agent, with respect to Exhibit No. 26, you saw it paraded in here earlier by two different law enforcement officers; right?
A Yes.
Q And this is what you describe as the hood that was laying up against the RAV 4?
A Yes.
Q And I believe you testified in response to Mr. Kratz's inquiry that it was pretty heavy?
A Yes.
Q And would -- you -- in your opinion, you thought it would take two people to move it?
A Two people to easily manage it I think is how he'd asked the question. Not just move it, but how to properly or easily manage it.
Q Okay. So you're not suggesting to this jury that one person would be unable to move this about?
A No, I'm not.
Q Have you ev.er picked it up?
A Couple days ago. Last week, I believe, I tried to pick it up and I can lift it.
Q Okay. Would it surprise you if I said I could lift it?
A If you can get your arms around it, no, it wouldn't.
Q Okay. You got a little bigger wing --
A Yes.
Q -- span than I do?
A Yes.
Q All right. So you -- to the extent that one individual in otherwise relatively good health could move it, you wouldn't take argument with that, would you?
A No.
Q Okay. You never weighed that, did you?
A No, I haven't.
Q Never asked the lab to weigh it, did you?
A I didn't ask them to weigh it. I don't know if they did.
Q Did you ask them? I'm sorry.
A I did not ask them to weigh it.
Q But it was taken to the lab?
A They took it with the RAV 4. Yes.
Q And do you know, as part of your investigation in this case, being the lead investigator, there are no fingerprints on that that match Brendan Dassey; correct?
A Correct.
Q You also know that there's no fluids of any type, no tissue of any type, no fibers of any type, that are connected to Brendan Dassey; right?
A Related to that hood?
Q Yes, sir.
A Correct.
Q Let's go back for a second here to the RAV 4. When you first got there, um, it's your understanding the vehicle was locked; right?
A Yes.
Q And the purpose of having all these -- these people there involved in this -- And you described this as -- as starting off as a, uh, missing persons type case; correct?
A Yes.
Q Was there a reason why the RAV 4 was not opened at that point if you're looking for someone who you're hoping is still alive?
A Because, uh, law enforcement officers looked in the windows of the RAV 4 and did not see Teresa in the vehicle.
Q Now, during the course of your direct exam, you described from the aerial photographs a line of vehicles, and you testified that those were, quote, cars waiting to be crushed; right? You remember that?
A I remember that question being asked. I didn't necessarily agree that they were waiting to be crushed, but there's a line of vehicles along the back of the property.
Q All right. So you don't have an opinion as to what the status of any of the particular vehicles of the 4,000 found on the property may have been on any given date during that seven-day period of time that police controlled the property?
A With the exception of maybe some vehicles that were being prepared to be crushed, uh, like in the shop, or around the shop where they're getting items removed so they can be crushed, like gas tanks, or whatever it has to be removed from a vehicle.
Q Okay. And and you are aware that in this type of business certain items do have to be removed before they would properly be placed into the crusher, including things that hold fluids? For example, gasoline tanks?
A Properly, yes.
Q Now, you testified, and correct me if I'm wrong, in response to Mr. Kratz's hypothetical, that if Teresa's vehicle had ended up, shall we say, as a sandwich in between other vehicles that the -- that had been processed through the crusher, that it would have been difficult to locate the vehicle. Do you remember testifying to that?
A Yes, I do.
Q Now, you've been an officer, what, 27 years or so?
A Correct.
Q Okay. And when you showed us the pictures of the vehicles that had, in fact, been crushed, it's fair to say that it would be relatively easy to identify the color of the vehicle, would it not?
A Potentially, yes.
Q And you testi -- Well, what -- what do you mean, "potentially"?
A When I looked at that, some vehicles you could clearly see the color and others maybe you couldn't. I mean
Q Well, you tes --
A -- depends on the manner that it was crushed.
Q Well, you testified that with the state troopers and the other volunteers, be they firemen or whoever, every single vehicle, including the squashed or crushed vehicles, had been examined?
A Yes. They took them apart, they uncrushed them, each vehicle, and looked at them.
Q Well, did they uncrush them or did they simply separate them?
A Separated them --
Q Okay.
A --and opened them up. If you want to call it uncrushed, if you want to say separated or opened up.
Q Okay. So, obviously, somebody had some equipment which was capable of -- let -- let's say that the -- the roof had been flattened on a vehicle. Somebody had equipment to either enlarge it or remove it so as to be able to have a peek inside?
A Equipment was brought in. I know they were using the Jaws of Life on occasion to do some of that work.
Q Okay. In addition to, uh -- And the purpose, of course, of looking inside, would be to see if there's any sign of human remains; correct?
A Correct.
Q Okay. But to the extent that you testified it'd be difficult to locate, assuming you were able to determine a particular color, there are other methods by which to determine the ex--- the precise existence of a given vehicle besides the color; correct?
A Well, certainly.
ATTORNEY KRATZ: Judge, I'm sorry. May 2 interpose an objection? Is he talking about a law enforcement officer with Jaws of Life or some citizen searcher? If he could be more specific with his questions?
ATTORNEY EDELSTEIN: I -- I have -- I can do, that, Judge.
THE COURT: Okay. Go ahead.
Q (By Attorney Edelstein) Officers have access, if you will, to information to determine the, um, identity of vehicles that the general public does not; correct or incorrect?
A Well, with the internet nowadays I don't know if that's necessarily true, but to -- to run identifying numbers
Q Correct. A`-- through D.O.T., yes, we can do that.
Q Okay. There's areas, be it on the frame, it might be different locations, that are basically hidden intentionally by the manufacturer to assist in vehicle indication; right?
A Yes.
Q Okay. So given that, that you have the ability to identify the hidden VINs, and, uh, looking at colors, and do you still stand by your assertion that had this vehicle been in the middle of a -- 2 a crushed sandwich, so to speak, that it would have been difficult to locate?
A My response was just a visual observation. If someone was walking by or looking at those piles of cars, it would be difficult to locate. That was not with the understanding that I'm going to go and un- sandwich the vehicles, tear them apart and dig through them.
Q Okay. So if it was just kind of a -- Correct me if I'm wrong. As I understand your testimony, you're saying if somebody simply does sort of a cursory walk-through, you might miss it? It might be difficult to locate?
A I believe it would, yes.
Q Okay. But if someboby takes the time to actually look carefully at each of the vehicles, including those that might be sandwiched, um, knowing things like color and age of the vehicle, it probably wouldn't have been that hard?
A It depends on the amount of work you put in. W.e brought a lot of equipment in and -- and tore the vehicles open and apart to do that. It took almost a whole day.
Q Now, you testified about er.eating these teams,. uh, to do things on the 5th, uh, following the -- the search warrant for a protective sweep; correct?
A Yes.
Q Did you decide who would be on these teams?
A I don't believe I was involved in the teams that went out and did the -- the sweeps and the search for Teresa. The initial search.
Q Where were you when that occurred?
A I was with the dog and the handler down by the RAV 4, and then we continued searching along that line of cars, and into an area in the Radandt pit to the south of the Avery property.
Q Going back to, I think it's 88, the hood over here, did you make any observations in the immediate area of the RAV 4 to determine whether or not that hood came from anywhere close to that location?
A I did not.
Q To your knowledge, did anyone else?
A I don't know.
Q So you cannot tell us where, if at all, that may have come from before it was propped up against the RAV 4?
A That's correct.
Q And so I take it, then, you have no information relative to the, uh -- whether or not there were any footprints in the mud leading up to the RAV 4 that would have shown a path from the RAV 4 to a location where the hood came from?
A That's assuming there's mud and, um --
Q Well, on -- on the day that you were there, what : was the condition of the ground?
A It was dry, at least most of the day, until the torrential rains started and wiped everything out.
Q Is it fair to say that during the course of your involvement in the investigation, nobody produced any type of footprints in the junkyard area that connected to the shoe prints developed off the pattern of Brendan Dassey's tennis shoes?
A There were no footwear impressions obtained.
Q So the answer to my question would be?
A No.
Q Thank you.
THE COURT: Counsel, before you go on, just to correct the record, I think you identified the hood as Exhibit 88? And it's really Exhibit 26. 23
ATTORNEY EDELSTEIN: I'm sorry.
THE COURT: It's okay.
Q (By Attorney Edelstein) I believe you said, Mr. Fassbender, that the RAV 4 was 350 feet from the crushing device?
A About 350. I think it was a little more than that, 360, 367, something like that.
Q Is that a number that you personally arrived at or is that a number you obtained from someone else?
A I believe that's a number obtained from Trooper Austin's measurements.
Q Okay. Do you know, did he base that measurement as the crow flies, or based upon the distance one might have to travel from where it was, getting around a little watery depression area over by the, uh, crusher?
A My understand as the crow flies. My understanding is as the crow flies.
Q Okay. Well, realistically, nobody's going to go in a straight line from where the RAV 4 was over to that crusher in 350 feet, would they?
A Correct.
Q So you -- when we talk proximity, then, and you're talking about closeness to the -- to the crusher, it really was more than the 350 feet you testified to? As -- as a practical matter?
A If I were to walk it or drive it, it would be more than that.
Q Okay. Agent Fassbender, you testified about Exhibit 60 and 59; right? You iden --
A Yes.
Q You identified them as handcuffs?
A Yes.
Q Where did 60 come from?
A If those were the two that were presented to me at the same time, I was unsure. I said that one pair of handcuffs came out of the Da -- Dassey/Janda residence and one came out of Steven Avery residence, I believe.
Q All right. It is true, however, that neither one of the exhibits, be it 59 or 60, came from the bedroom area where Brendan Dassey lived or slept; correct?
A That's true.
Q All right. It didn't -- Neither one of them came from an area that you would characterize as his area? His room?
A Correct.
Q In fact, it's more accurate to say that both of them came from areas that were probably controlled, or appeared to be controlled, one by Steve Avery, one by his mother?
A Yes.
Q When I speak of the mother, I'm talking about Brendan's mother; right?
A Yes.
Q And that's how you understood the question?
A That's correct.
Q We're not talking about Steve Avery's mother?
A No. I understood it to be Barb Tadych.
Q Okay. Again, 59 and 60, whichever one came out of the Avery place, whichever one came from Barb's bedroom, they went to the lab; right?
A The ones out of, uh, the Janda/Dassey residence I don't believe went to the lab. I'm --
Q Well --
A -- not positive without seeing the paperwork or records.
Q The ones from the Avery property, they obviously went to the lab?
A Yes.
Q Not one shred of physical evidence on the handcuffs from the Steve Avery property connecting Brendan Dassey to those handcuffs; correct or incorrect?
A Correct.
Q No fingerprints?
A No.
Q No DNA?
A There was DNA found on one of the sets of handcuffs that was male DNA, and it excluded Teresa Halbach but didn't exclude Steven Avery.
Q Did not, in any way, shape, or form include Brendan Dassey; correct?
A To my knowledge, no, without looking at the -- the lab report.
Q Okay. I realize there were a lot of evidence in this case, and I'm not trying to put you on the spot, but we all know it's very important and the jury's entitled to know; right?
A Correct.
Q Okay. If, during the course of my exam, if there's something you're not sure about, you need to look at your notes, by all mens let us know and we'll take a look at them. Let's talk about Exhibit 61 and 62. Again, where did these come from?
A Are there three sets of those, uh, behind that hood?
A No, sir.
Q Those would have come out of, uh, Ms. Tadych's bedroom.
Q Both sets?
A Yes.
Q Okay.
A I had testified that one set came out of Steven Avery's house, because I thought -- as they were being brought up, I thought I had seen three sets.
Q Okay. So being like any other human, any other officer, you make mistake; right?
A Well, there was a pair of leg irons taken out of Steven's house, and just the way they were brought up, I thought I had seen -- because I saw one pair, and then two were brought up later, so I thought I had seen three sets of leg irons.
Q I understand. But -- So you're attempting, simply, to correct what you told Mr. Kratz on direct?
A Yes.
Q Which you acknowledge to this jury was an error?
A Yes.
Q All right. And that happens because you're a human; right?
A Correct.
Q Neither one of these, that being Exhibits 61 or 62, has any fingerprints on it that belonged to Brendan Dassey; correct?
A Correct.
Q Neither one of them has any DNA evidence connecting either one of these items to Brendan Dassey; correct?
A Correct. With the caution that I'm not positive they were processed. I'd have to look at the Crime Lab reports to make sure.
Q Okay. Well, if we take a break, you'd certainly do that for us, wouldn't you? And we'll revisit that when we get a chance?
A Certainly, if you'd like.
Q I believe you testified about, and I can't recall the, uh -- the exhibit number, but it was one of the Austin depictions with the Avery garage roof removed. Remember that?
A Yes.
Q And I believe you testified about two pieces or two fragments of bullets that you believe were located within that garage; right?
A Yes, sir.
Q Would you agree with me that the Austin depiction of that particular garage, to the extent that it does not include a great many items that were actually physically present at the time when you first got there, um, that the Austin exhibit doesn't necessarily show reality?
A That's correct.
Q In fact, I think you called it a cleaned-up version?
A Yes. There's a lot of debris that was not included in that depiction.
Q Well, wasn't just debris, there were a lot of items that were not included?
A By debris, items. I mean, I'm --
Q I -- I think of -
A I agree -
Q -- debris as something you might throw away?
THE COURT: One at a time. Go ahead.
A Items are included in my definition of debris, so, yes, itmes, debris, pieces of machinery, property.
Q Exhibit 58, these are the jeans that you got from Brendan after he basically showed them to you; right?
A Yes.
Q Okay. You testified they appear to have bleach on them; right?
A Correct.
Q Okay. These went to the lab, did they not?
A I believe so, yes.
Q No human blood on there, is there?
A No.
Q No blood of any kind on there, is there?
A I was advised that they had been cleaned.
Q Pardon me?
A I was advised that they had been washed.
Q All right.
A But, no, there was no blood of any kind on there.
Q Twenty-seven years in the business, you work closely with the lab, are you telling me that the fact that those jeans may have been laundered once, or even twice, say, between October 31 -- and I think you picked him up on -- What day? The 1st?
A March 1 --
Q Okay.
A -- '06.
Q Let's say they'd been laundered in between, are you telling me that the lab would be incapable of determining the presence of blood on those jeans?
A Greatly reduced, if at all possible.
Q I understand you're not an expert, but you've had occasion to have items examined by the lab that have, in fact, been laundered, haven't you?
A I may have. I don't have, uh, independent knowledge right now, and in my instances they have not found blood on those items if -- if it's occurred. I -- I don't recollect ever having that happen.
Q Now, you talked briefly about some conversation you had with Brendan, and this was up at, uh, Fox Hills Resort; right?
A That's correct.
Q He stayed there and his brother stayed there, I think, on the 27th?
A Yes. And his mother.
Q Okay. And who picked up the tab for that stay?
A That may have been, uh, the county. I'm not sure.
Q It was arranged, and you were well aware that it was arranged, that they would be staying there, and could stay there, and it wouldn't cost them anything; right?
A Certainly.
Q Okay. Be it the State, Calumet County, Manitowoc County, you knew the government picked up the bill?
A Government picked -- Yes.
Q All right. In fact, when you went up there, it was about 11:50 at night; right? I'm talking about --
A I'm not sure.
Q --Fox Hills.
A 10:50 or 11:50. I -- I -
Q Did I say --
A Yeah.
Q 11:50?
COURT REPORTER: One at a time, please --
ATTORNEY EDELSTEIN: I'm sorry.
COURT REPORTER: -- if possible.
Q (By Attorney Edelstein) 10:50 sound better?
A That sounds better.
Q And during the course of that conversation you I- had with Brendan, um, you're talking to him about an incident where he had, um, some bleach stains on his pants; right?
A Correct.
Q And you got around to talking to him about what he was doing in the garage, and you talked about cleaning up some red stuff?
A Yes.
Q Okay. And the truth of the matter is, Mr. Fassbender, that during the course of that conversation with Brendan, the first person to use the word -- or to suggest that it was blood on the floor was, in fact, yourself. Does that sound right?
A That's -- Yes, that sounds right.
Q All right. It wasn't Brendan who said, I thought I was cleaning up blood. Right?
A That's correct.
Q You asked him, could it have been blood? And he simply said, could have been. Right?
A After he described the color, yes.
Q Okay. So you asked him if it could have been blood, and he said, yes, it could have been. Right?
A Something to that effect, yes.
Q And then you asked him -- and we're talking about February 27, '06, you gave him a question to the effect that, well, what do you think it was now? And we're talking about that present time. February 26, right?
A Yes.
Q Okay. Um, and he said, could have been blood.
A He said he believed it was blood.
Q Okay. And those responses came after you indicated that it could have been blood or you thought it was blood; correct?
A After my question.
Q All right.
ATTORNEY EDELSTEIN: That's all.
THE COURT: Any redirect, Counsel?
ATTORNEY KRATZ: Couple of questions, just so that we're clear. REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY ATTORNEY KRATZ:
Q Investigator Fassbender, are you -- or do you now have an independent memory of how many sets of leg irons and how many sets of handcuffs came from the bedroom of Barb Janda on the 1st of March?
A To the best of my memory, two sets of leg irons and two sets of handcuffs.
Q If, uh, we would show you the evidence bags, that is, the -- the actual containers in which the handcuffs, uh, were placed in on the 1ast of March, would that tend to refresh your recollection of that?
A Yes, it would.
Q I'm going to have, uh, Mr. Fallon here bring you Evidence Tag 8266 and 8267. Have you take a look at those and tell me if that refreshes your memory?
A The bag, uh, with Evidence Tag No. 8266 contained one pair of silver handcuffs, uh, taken from the bedroom of Barb Janda at the time, Barb Tadych, now. And Evidence Tag 8267 contained one pair of silver handcuffs also taken from that same bedroom. Uh, Barb Janda's bedroom.
Q So how many pairs of handcuffs did Barb have in her bedroom?
A So two pair of handcuffs in her bedroom.
Q So the jury understands, and they'll hear from Deputy Kucharski tomorrow, but there were handcuffs and leg irons also recovered from the bedroom of Steven Avery; is that right?
A Yes.
ATTORNEY KRATZ: I think that's it from this witness, Judge. Thank you
THE COURT: All right. Uh, the witness may step down. Any further witnesses?
ATTORNEY KRATZ: Uh, I would prefer to start at, uh -- tomorrow morning, Judge, with our other law enforcement, uh, witnesses, if that would be okay with the Court?
THE COURT: All right. Tomorrow morning, 8
ATTORNEY KRATZ: Sounds good.
THE COURT: Uh, jurors, we're going to adjourn for the day. I'm going to remind you again, I'm sure this is going to get tedious listening to me saying -- say this, but you can't talk about this case with anybody, including fellow jurors. We'll see you tomorrow morning at 8:30. (Jurors out at 4:37 p.m.)
THE COURT: Anything further on the record this afternoon, gentlemen?
ATTORNEY KRATZ: No.