Justice Failed Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey
This document was written by me, emsenn, and is released for the benefit of the public under the terms included in the "License" supplement. It was made possible with financial contributions from humans like you. Please direct comments to my public inbox or, if necessary, my personal email.
This document was written when the events it discusses were contemporary. Information in it may now be incorrect, and opinions presented may be out of date.
Justice Failed Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey
The following links are all to articles I wrote for the Gazette Review.
When, in 1985, Denis Vogel failed to pursue alternate leads to a violent crime, he left a criminal free in his county, an abject failure of duty.
When Andrew Colburn was instructed to ignore information which could have led to Steven Avery's exoneration, his department failed.
When Steven Avery was viewed as the only possible suspect in Teresa Halbach's disappearance, the Sheriff's Office failed again.
When 16-year-old mentally handicapped Brendan Dassey was questioned at length based on conjecture put forth by a 12 year old, the District Attorney and Department of Justice failed.
When James Lenk was found to be having a critical role in the physical investigation of Steven Avery, despite an ongoing civil suit, he failed. When he inappropriately handled a crime scene, he failed.
When Michael O'Kelly lied to a retarded child to get him to confess to a crime pointedly against the best interest of the defense team which had hired O'Kelly, O'Kelly and the defense failed in their duties to offer loyal counsel.
When Judge Patrick Willis disallowed the presentation of third party liability, preventing Steven Avery's defense from offering any coherent narrative, he failed in his role as adjudicator.
Many of these may have been honest mistakes of emotionalism, but that does not negate the standard at which public servants are meant to hold themselves. Most evidently egregious are the behaviors of Len Kachinsky and Judge Fox.
When Len Kachinsky hired Michael O'Kelly and approved the use of that form (see articles), it is a clear demonstration of ineffective and disloyal counsel. While Kachinsky has claimed he would seek a guilty plea and argue Dassey's lack of culpability due to mental issues, the form completely negates any argument about culpability Kachinksy could have put forth. Put simply, Kachinksy, through ignorance or malice, sold out his client.
My final article on the topic which argues against another man's presumption of innocence, highlights, albeit in passing, the most clear cut example of judicial misconduct.
Judge Jerome Fox, who presided over the trial against Brendan Dassey for the murder of Teresa Halbach, had previously worked for a firm which had represented Scott Tadych, who at the time of the trial was Brendan Dassey's stepfather. This is a clear conflict of interest, and yet Judge Fox did not recuse himself.
With these arguments against both Dassey's defense and adjudicator, it should be clear that regardless of guilt, Brendan Dassey did not get a fair trial, and certainly not one which legitimately proved beyond reasonable doubt that he was guilty.
That doesn't sound much like a bombshell, does it? I don't know who killed Teresa Halbach, or even that Avery is innocent. I'm sorry, but real cases aren't tidy like that.
The best I can do is argue a few concrete reasons why Brendan Dassey may deserve to get that appeal, and so that's what I plan to do. This is the last article I'm probably going to write about this case, at least for a bit, but as I said in an earlier status, I'll be talking to people who are helping with Dassey's defense next week.
This document was made possible with contributions from humans like you. Thank you! I currently accept contributions through the following platforms:
If there is another service through which you'd like to contribute, please send an email. Please note that in accordance with my personal directives #003 and #018, I release all useful information I create for free, so financial contributions do not entitle you to access to any "exclusive content."
Copyright 2019 emsenn
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this document and associated media files (the "Document"), to deal in the Doftware without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Doftware, and to permit persons to whom the Doftware is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
The Document is provided "as is," without warranty of any kind, express or implied, including but not limited to the warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, or noninfringement. In no event shall the authors or copyright holders be liable for any claim, damages or other liability, whether in an action of contract, tort, or otherwise, arising from, out of or in connection with the Document or the use or other dealings in the Document.