Steven Avery

Steven Allan Avery (born July 9, 1962 ) is an American convict from the state of Wisconsin who was imprisoned for rape for 18 years and was released in 2003 after his innocence was proved. Upon his release from prison, he sued those responsible for his conviction for $ 36 million in damages . In 2005 he was found guilty of the murder of the young photographer Teresa Halbach (1980-2005) and sentenced to life imprisonment, where he again protested his innocence. The guilty verdict is controversial.

The true crime documentary series Making a Murderer (2015) was made based on his life . The publication brought the Avery case to the general public and led to petitions demanding Avery's release.

The documentary series, which has been two seasons so far, also deals with the arrest and sentencing of Avery's nephew Brendan Dassey in 2007. Dassey was also sentenced to life imprisonment as an accomplice in the murder of Theresa Halbach at the age of 16. In August 2016, a federal judge overturned Dassey's conviction on the grounds that his confession was obtained during police interrogation.

In June 2017, the Wisconsin District Attorney appealed the decision. In December 2017, a panel of seven judges from the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled 4 to 3 in favor of upholding the original conviction and found the police to revoke Dassey's confession had properly caught up. On February 20, 2018, Dassey's legal team, including former Supreme Court Counsel Seth Waxman, petitioned the United States Supreme Court for review. This was denied on June 25, 2018. Dassey no longer has any legal options to take action against his conviction.

Life

Steven Avery was born in Manitowoc County , Wisconsin , in 1962 . He grew up there in simple circumstances. Since 1965, his family has been running a car scrap yard on a 16-hectare property on which they lived outside the city. His parents Allan and Dolores Avery and his sister Barb Tadych with their sons Bobby and Brendan Dassey live or lived on the property.

Avery has three siblings: Chuck, his younger brother Earl, and Barb (Barbara). He attended public schools in Mishicot and Manitowoc . After leaving school, he accepted his family's inheritance and worked as a scrap dealer for cars on his estate.

At the age of 18, Avery broke into a bar and stole alcohol. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to ten months in prison in 1981.

On July 24, 1982, Avery married Lori Mathiesen. They had four children together: Rachel, Jenny and the twins Steven and Will.

His sentence was extended when a man claimed to have killed a cat with Avery in 1982. They doused the animal with petrol and oil and threw it into a bonfire . Avery pleaded guilty and was behind bars until August 1983.

In early 1985, Avery's cousin Sandra Morris filed a criminal complaint after Avery hit her car and threatened her with a gun. When she was interrogated, Sandra Morris said that Avery had exposed herself several times since July 1984 when she drove by. Avery denied the harassment allegation, saying she felt provoked. He faced a further six years in prison for illegally possessing weapons and disturbing public order .

Case Penny B.

In July 1985, Penny B. was assaulted and raped while jogging on the beach on Lake Michigan . The local law enforcement and police department quickly realized that the perpetrator must be Avery.

Avery was sentenced to life imprisonment for rape that year , despite pleading innocent. At the time of the conviction, there was no physical evidence linking Avery to the crime. In addition, he had sixteen alibis attesting to Avery's home at the time of the crime. However, as it later turned out, the victim incorrectly identified him as the perpetrator. The victim was guided by a phantom image of the perpetrator. It looked very much like an Avery police picture. The draftsman of the phantom said that he painted the picture according to the victim's descriptions. However, this is doubted because the victim's initial descriptions did not match the phantom image.

Around 1995, a Brown County officer called Manitowoc County Jail and said that an inmate "committed a robbery in Manitowoc County years ago and someone else was in jail for it." According to the deputies' memories, Sheriff Kocourek replied: “We already have the right man. Don't worry about it. "

In 2003, after 18 years in prison, Avery's DNA was found to be innocent and he was released. In addition, the DNA analysis was able to identify Gregory Allen as the real culprit.

As a result of his release, a working group was set up to examine the case for misconduct. She concluded that no real investigation had been made by the sheriff. However, a court could not find any police misconduct.

Action for damages

In 2003, Avery filed a $ 36 million civil lawsuit against Manitowoc County, its former sheriff, and its former district attorney for wrongful convictions and incarceration. Avery's 2003 release sparked widespread discussion of the Wisconsin criminal justice system.

Case of Teresa H.

Process flow

On October 31, 2005, 25-year-old photographer Teresa H. came to the Avery junkyard property to meet Steven Avery and take photos of a minivan for sale . She was not seen alive after that. On November 3, 2005, she was reported missing by her parents. Avery was charged and arrested on November 11, after his blood was found in their vehicle, of kidnapping, rape and murder of Teresa H. and of illegal possession of a weapon. He again protested his innocence and accused the authorities of accusing him of the murder in order not to have to pay him damages.

Avery's then 16-year-old nephew Brendan Dassey was interrogated several times in the course of the trial of the murder of Teresa H. and was finally named as the main witness for the prosecution, in which he stated in a video confession that Steven Avery was involved. Dassey was interviewed several times over a period of about four hours without a parent or attorney present. The investigators used the so-called Reid method . Proponents see it as an effective way to elicit confessions. However, according to critics, it can easily lead to false confessions, especially in children. When he asked if he could go home after a confession, the police answered yes.

Dassey claimed to have raped, murdered and burned with his uncle Teresa H. He was then arrested on March 1, 2006 and charged.

Len Kachinsky, Dassey's public defender, allowed Dassey to make another confession. Dassey then applied to Judge Patrick Willis to have a new public defender served. This refused. Only after a second request was Kachinsky released from his job.

In a phone call with his mother Barb Tardych, also cited as evidence by the prosecution, Brendan again confessed to Steven Avery's involvement. Later on, his mother's nephew confessed to having guessed everything the police wanted to hear, because "that's how he would do it at school". He repeated that his statements were made up. Dassey said he told the police what they wanted to hear.

Avery was found guilty by a majority of the jury on 2 of the 3 outstanding counts and sentenced to life imprisonment upon completion of the trial.

Evidence presented by the prosecutor

The prosecution finds Avery guilty and has provided the following evidence (among others):

• Avery is the last known person to see the victim Teresa H. alive.
• The victim's car contained traces of blood with Avery's DNA.
• Avery's sweat was found on the hood of the victim's car.
• A key with Avery's DNA was found in Avery's house.
• Dassey confessed to investigators that he helped Avery murder, rape, and burn the body.
• In a recorded conversation with his mother, Dassey confessed to his mother that he was involved in the crime.
• Bones from a cremated corpse were found on Avery's property.

Controversy over the evidence presented

Dassey's confession

The veracity of the confession of the nephew Brendan Dassey, which led to his conviction and that of Avery, has been questioned for several reasons:

• When questioned, investigators said Brendan was lying about 75 times. Only when Brendan admitted guilty hours later did they praise him for it and say he "finally told the truth".
• The Reid method used in the questioning leads to a high rate of false confessions among suspects who, due to their personality, can do little to counter the police interrogation methods. For this reason, this method is prohibited in several European countries, especially when interviewing children and young people. In Germany, it violates § 136a StPO , as its conception works with deceptions and threats.
• Judge William E. Duffin found in 2016 that the statements were made under improper conditions. He justified this by saying that the then 16-year-old was told by the investigators that they already knew what had happened and that he only had to confirm it. The young age, especially his learning disability and his low intelligence, as well as the fact that he was interviewed without parents or a lawyer, meant that the statement is invalid. The court ordered Dassey to be released within 90 days if the trial was not reopened. The public prosecutor appealed. The higher federal court ruled with a majority of two judges to one that Duffin's judgment will not be overturned. The public prosecutor appealed again; the case was reopened, this time with seven judges from the federal court. They overturned Duffin's verdict and decided by a majority of four to three judges that his admission was voluntary. The United States Supreme Court declined a request to review this ruling.

The prosecutor argues that Dassey also confessed to his mother in a conversation between the two, shortly after the investigators were re-interrogated. Later he confessed to her that he had made it all up, that he was innocent and that he had advised the investigators what they wanted to hear.

The defense gave the following example of Dassey's partly contradicting statements: When his public defender Kachinsky coaxed another confession from him (instead of standing up for his innocence), he turned to Judge Fox on the grounds that he wanted a new lawyer. In the courtroom, when Fox asked if his defense attorney would act in his best interests, he said yes. In addition, his statements during the interrogation show contradictions; Dassey first claimed that the victim had been shot in the bedroom, a short time later he thought the garage was the scene of the crime. It is this contradiction that annuls the truthfulness of individual, selective statements such as his confession. Dassey's statement should be understood taking the context into account. Alone they have no value and no claim to validity.

Search of Avery's property

Avery's lawyers argue that his property was illegally searched as part of the investigation and that the alleged evidence on his property is therefore worthless.

On November 5, 2005, a judge ruled that the Manitowoc County Sheriffs Department had a conflict of interest in which to search Avery's property. Instead, he turned the task over to the Calumet County Sheriffs Department. However, Manitowoc County officials were involved in the search.

On the morning of November 5, 2005, the volunteer seeker Pamela S., cousin of the victim Teresa H., discovered Teresa H.'s car in Avery's junkyard together with her daughter. After less than half an hour, she found what she was looking for in the 40-acre junkyard with almost 4,000 cars. When asked how she found the car so quickly, she said, “God showed them the way”.

On November 4, the previous day, a search by the Calumet County Sheriff's Department failed to find the victim's car on Avery's property.

According to Avery's attorney, Kathleen Zellner, who has represented him since 2016, a truck driver testified that he saw the victim's vehicle on a street outside the Avery's premises on November 4th and told the investigating officer that same day. A day later on November 5th, the car was found on Avery's property. The public prosecutor's office refuses to allow the vehicle to be examined by Zellner's law firm.

The individual pieces of evidence found during the search of Avery's property have been criticized and challenged, as detailed below.

Drops of Blood in the Car by Teresa H.

On November 11, 2005, drops of blood were found in six locations with Avery's DNA in the victim's car, which was at the time on Avery's property .

Avery's defense attorneys discovered in the course of the investigation that an ampoule of Avery's blood, which had been secured in the course of the 1996 appeal investigation in the Penny B. case, had broken the seal and the lid of the ampoule had a fine hole, apparently through a needle Syringe. When asked, the lab stated that they did not place the hole because there was no reason for such a thing. Avery's lawyers suspected that the blood found in the victim's car had been drawn from this vial and placed there to be strained.

The FBI developed at the request of the public prosecutor a new test to ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) to detect. It is a blood preservative that is not part of human blood. A positive test result would support the claim that the blood was placed. FBI forensic scientist Mark LeBeau testified that he tested three of the six blood stains in Teresa H.'s car and did not detect EDTA; the test was negative. He said that "with a reasonable degree of scientific certainty" all drops of blood in the victim's car do not contain EDTA. The test procedure has been criticized for the following reasons:

• The speed with which the test was developed is problematic. There was no time for extensive examinations and analyzes that would be necessary in order to know how often and under what conditions EDTA could be detected in dried blood from a decades-old blood ampoule.
• Avery's defense went on to state that it was impossible to tell whether the negative test result means that EDTA is not present or that EDTA was just undetected.
• The public prosecutor's office did not formulate the order neutrally. A letter asking prosecutors for analysis specifically stated that the purpose of the blood test was to "dispel the allegation that Avery's ampoule was used in the placement of evidence." Critics see this as an influence.
• Three of the six drops tested negative. However, this would not allow any conclusions to be drawn about the drops that were not tested.

The fact that Avery had a wound on his hand at the time of the crime is viewed by the prosecutor as evidence that the blood in Teresa H.'s car came from this wound. The defense, in turn, indicates that Avery's blood was discovered, but not his fingerprints. This leads to the following thought experiment: If Avery had entered the car, he could not have avoided fingerprints. However, if he had been wearing gloves, he would have hidden his fingerprints, but no blood could have leaked from the wound. By this logic, the blood cannot come from Avery.

Sweat on Teresa H.

Prosecutor's special investigator Ken Kratz says Avery's sweat was found on the latch of the hood of Teresa H.'s car. He saw this as a breakthrough in Avery's question of guilt and as indubitable evidence:

"It wasn't blood. It was from his sweaty hands. Do the cops also have a vial of his sweat that they are carrying around? The evidence conclusively shows that Steven Avery's hand was under the hood when he insists he never touched her car.
It wasn't blood. It was from his sweaty hands. Do the cops also have an ampoule of his sweat that they carry around with them? The evidence clearly shows that Steven Avery's hand was under the hood despite insisting he never touched her car. "

- Ken Kratz : www.businessinsider.com

It is worth noting that the information that Avery's sweat was under the bonnet preceded an interview with the nephew Brendan Dassey. It was only after Dassey's testimony that Avery's sweat could be detected.

Meanwhile, Avery's defense attorney Dean Strang stated that the DNA found on the hood was never confirmed to be sweat. He replied:

"Sweat in and of itself doesn't have our DNA. Obviously in its native state, a car hood wouldn't have Steven's DNA or anyone's DNA on it - it's a piece of metal. The sweat argument was an argument Mr. Kratz made repeatedly in the trial. There was no evidence of sweat. All they knew was they got Steven Avery's DNA from the hood latch area on Teresa's car.
Sweat in itself isn't our DNA. Obviously, a hood in its original state would not have Steven's DNA or anyone else's DNA on it - it's a piece of metal. The welding argument was an argument that Mr. Kratz made repeatedly during the trial. There was no sign of sweat. All they knew was that they got Steven Avery's DNA from the hood area of ​​Teresa's car. "

- Dean Strand : www.losangeles.com

During the trial, an agent testified that he wiped the car with latex gloves and opened the hood. The agent went on to say that he did so without changing his gloves. Strang speculated that the agent's latex gloves resulted in the transmission of Avery's DNA.

Forensic scientist Karl Reich states that it is not possible to test sweat for DNA.

Recent research by Avery's attorney Zellner also suggests that the DNA found on the bonnet lock cannot be sweat. Five test persons each touched the latch on the hood of the same car model three times. No DNA was found in ten cases. The highest amount of DNA found was 0.09 ng; however, in the case of Avery, 1.8 ng DNA was found, which is twenty times the amount.

Teresa H.

Another controversial piece of evidence is a car key belonging to Teresa H., which was only found during the seventh search of Avery's bedroom, lying clearly visible in a corner. Avery's DNA was found on it. However, the DNA of the user of the key, Teresa H., was not found. According to the defense, this can only be explained with a targeted placement of the DNA.

Forensic experts from the public prosecutor's office, on the other hand, consider it possible that only the DNA of the last person who touched it can be determined on a small object. The DNA would then be "replaced" at the moment of contact.

Avery's defense attorney Jerry Buting, however, claims that if two people touch the same object, the two DNAs would mix.

Burned bones

Burned bones have been found at his fireplace on Avery's estate. The prosecution sees this as evidence that Avery had murdered Teresa H. and then burned the body.

The bones were examined by the anthropologist Leslie Eisenberg. She found burned and unburned bones. All unburned bones and some of the burned bones could be identified as non-human.

Eisenberg estimated that the bones of Avery's fireplace and a nearby quarry all had similar charring and calcination .

The defense then developed the theory that the bones were not burned on Avery's property, but at a quarry 5 minutes' drive away. Subsequently, the bones were then transported to his fireplace to burden Avery.

More defense arguments

Avery's defense attorneys also argue with logical considerations: If Steven Avery had actually raped and murdered Teresa H. in the car, it would have been easy for him to remove the obvious traces of blood. There's a car press in his junkyard that he could have used to destroy the evidence. According to his lawyers, he was still using them the day before Teresa H. went missing.

What is unusual about the investigation is that Avery was immediately investigated, but in the case of murder, close relatives are usually initially suspected.

Unequal representation by experts

While 14 experts took their point of view for the indictment at the trial, the defense could only list two scientists. As a consequence, this offered the opportunity to interpret the evidence in favor of the prosecution.

Criticism of the legal system as a whole

Legal expert Samuel Gross believes the US legal system is prone to misjudgments in relation to the Avery case:

“It's a terribly underfunded system, and it is largely dominated by the ideal of getting people to confess without negotiating. This system of simply avoiding the cost of a trial and an investigation by forcing suspects to confess generates probably ten times more injustices than anything that happens during a trial, but we hardly notice it. "

- Samuel Gross : www.vice.com

Criticism of the Manitowoc County Sheriff

In a 2005 interview, then-Manitowoc County Sheriff Ken Peterson caused a sensation when he said it would have been easier to "eliminate" Steven Avery than "put him behind bars."

Another point of criticism was his testimony when questioned by the defense that he doubted Avery's innocence in the 1985 rape of Penny B.

Judgments

All those questionable circumstantial evidence, in particular Dassey's confession, ultimately led to the conviction. According to the prevailing opinion, legal principles such as In dubio pro reo (In doubt for the accused) have been violated.

Avery was sentenced to life imprisonment in 2007 with no early release and found guilty on two of the remaining three counts.

Brendan Dassey was found guilty on all charges in a separate trial from Avery and sentenced to 32 years in prison. Although only 17 years old at the time, Dassey was sentenced as an adult and his intellectual limitations were deemed irrelevant.

Jurors Reactions

In the United States and some other countries, the so-called jury members are members of a lay judges' bench who decide the guilt of the accused independently of the judge. Together they form the jury, also known as the jury.

In January 2016, after Making a Murderer was posted on Netflix, People magazine reported that a juror testified that one of the Avery trial jurors was the father of a deputy Manitowoc County sheriff and another judge was a Manitowoc County employee.

Juror Richard Mahler, who was released from trial due to a family emergency before the jury had even begun final deliberations, later stated that seven of the jurors, the majority, were not guilty. He was therefore confused that the jury finally agreed on a guilty verdict.

Another judge reportedly told the Making a Murderer filmmakers that he felt intimidated and pronounced a guilty verdict for personal safety.

Current representation by Zellner

Since 2016, Avery has been represented by the Chicago attorney Kathleen Zellner, who claims to specialize in misjudgments.

Zellner developed experiments with which she wanted to prove that the blood in Teresa H.'s car could not come from Avery. At the time of Teresa H.'s disappearance, he had a wound on his hand, from which, according to the prosecutor, the blood in the car came. However, she came to the conclusion that fresh blood had run out of his wound, but the blood found in the car had remained in one place. In addition, according to their experiments, the size of the wound would have resulted in significantly more blood escaping.

On August 26, 2016, Zellner filed with the Secretary of the Manitowoc County , Wisconsin District Court for post-conviction scientific testing. Judge Angela Sutkiewicz signed an agreement and arrangement for conducting the scientific research on November 23, 2016.

In June 2017, Zellner submitted a 1,272-page application for a retrial. The motion cites a lack of legal counsel, affidavits from experts refuting the manner in which Teresa H. is said to have been killed, as well as new evidence and criminally ethical violations from Public Prosecutor's Special Prosecutor Ken Kratz. Zellner claims that Steven Avery's conviction was based on falsified evidence and false testimony.

In addition, she promised anyone who can answer 100 questions unequivocally in a questionnaire she created and thus prove Avery's guilt, 10,000 dollars.

On October 3, 2017, the application for a new trial was rejected. Most of the cited evidence was not addressed. On February 25, 2019, a new appeal was granted, so the case must be re-examined.

Making a Murderer

→ Main article : Making a Murderer

The documentary series Making a Murderer appeared in December 2015 and was broadcast on the channel of the US video-on-demand provider Netflix . The series consists of recordings from court cases and interviews as well as video recordings of police interrogations and calls from prisons. The 10-part series was written and filmed by Laura Ricciardi and Moira Demos, who made their recordings over a period of ten years.

By the end of the documentary, Ricciardi and Demos had made over 500 hours of interviews and footage, to which were added 180 hours of footage from the trials. The two filmmakers interviewed Steven Avery's parents, his sister Barb Tadych and their son Bobby Dassey (Brendan Dassey's brother), as well as the brother of Teresa H. Ken Kratz, Special Prosecutor and District Attorney of Calumet County, Wisconsin, ignored several Interview requests. The filmmakers could only conduct interviews with Steven Avery by telephone; They were not allowed an on-site appointment by the sheriff and prison authorities on the grounds that there was a security risk.

A second season has now been released for Making a Murderer.

criticism

The criticism was mostly positive. On Rotten Tomatoes (were evaluated 114 reviews) to 96% were positive.

"Filmed over a 10-year period, Making a Murderer is an unprecedented real-life thriller about a DNA exoneree who, while in the midst of exposing corruption in local law enforcement, finds himself the prime suspect in a grisly new crime.
Filmed over a period of 10 years, Making a Murderer features an unprecedented real-life thriller about a person acquitted through DNA analysis. He finds himself in the middle of a corrupt local police department as the main suspect in a horrific new murder case. "

- Rotten Tomatoes : www.rottentomatoes.com

However, there were also critical voices that the series reported too one-sidedly. According to former Calumet District Attorney Ken Kratz, Avery's first-ever animal cruelty conviction was downplayed on the series.

The documentary series received strong criticism from the family of the victim Theresa H. In a People article, Kay Giordana, aunt of Theresa H., was quoted as saying that the documentary was "terrible" and "unhappy". She added that Avery was "100 percent guilty".

Dean Strang, one of Avery's attorneys on Theresa H.'s case, denied the allegation of bias. He stated that the filmmakers did "a good editorial job" and disagreed that significant evidence was omitted.

The filmmakers themselves also distanced themselves from the allegation of one-sidedness. They said the cause of some of the omitted evidence was the series' limited timeframe. Not all video recordings could be cut into the film, but the most important ones were brought in.

Petitions

We The People (White House)

An online petition has been running on petitions.whitehouse.gov since December 20, 2015, calling for a pardon for Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey. On January 6, 2016, 17 days after the petition began, the required 100,000 signatures were reached to receive a response from the White House . By January 7, 2016, nearly 130,000 people had signed the petition, to which the White House responded through its We The People team. In this it was pointed out that President Barack Obama can only offer mercy in cases against the United States . Avery's case, however, lies in the judiciary of the state of Wisconsin.

Change.org

A petition to President Obama and Scott Walker, the governor of Wisconsin, has been running on change.org since December 2015 . 536,712 people (as of August 2018) have signed it. The petition is now closed.

Web links

• Markus Böhm: Netflix documentary Making a Murderer. In: Spiegel Online . December 28, 2015, accessed December 29, 2015
• Eike Kühl: We're baking a murderer. In: zeit.de . 5th January 2016
• Bethonie Butler: Making a Murderer on independent.co.uk, January 1, 2016
• Nicklas Baschek: The image of the perfect crime. In: Jungle World . January 28, 2016

Individual evidence

1. ↑ ^{a b c d} Markus Böhm: Netflix documentary "Making a Murderer". Der Spiegel Online, accessed on December 29, 2015 . 
2. ↑ ^{a b c} Lenika Cruz: Making a Murderer: An American Horror Story. theatlantic.com, accessed December 29, 2015 . 
3. ↑ Hendrik Ternieden: Netflix documentary "Making a Murderer". Der Spiegel Online, accessed on June 21, 2018 . 
4. ↑ ^{a b} Suspect in the Making a Murder case could be released. Frankfurter Allgemeine, accessed on June 21, 2018 . 
5. ↑ ^{a b c d} Ansgar Graw: How a man was made a murderer. WELT Online, accessed on June 22, 2018 . 
6. ↑ US appeals court agrees to reconsider 'Making a Murderer' conviction. NBC News, accessed August 5, 2017 . 
7. ↑ Netflix's Making a Murderer subject Brendan Dassey has conviction overturned. ABC News, accessed August 13, 2016 . 
8. ^ Court: 'Making a Murderer' defendant Brendan Dassey's confession stands. Associated Press, accessed December 8, 2017 . 
9. ↑ Docket for 17-1172. www.supremecourt.gov, accessed October 7, 2018 . 
10. ↑ ^{a b c d e} Mike Nichols: Unjust jail term didn't make a monster. Badger Diggings, accessed January 7, 2016 . 
11. ↑ Steven Avery trial timeline. Retrieved October 8, 2018 . 
12. ↑ Kurt Chandler: Blood Simple. Milwaukee Magazine, accessed August 16, 2018 . 
13. ^ Morgan Sennhauser: What happened to Andrew Colborn (English). Gazette Review, accessed August 8, 2018 . 
14. ^ Jost Müller-Neuhof: Controversial Reid method: Federal government rejects police interrogation technology. Tagesspiegel, accessed on August 8, 2018 . 
15. ↑ ^{a b} Ulf Steinert: Scriptum Vernehmungslehre, p. 30. (PDF) University of Applied Sciences of the Police of the State of Brandenburg, accessed on October 17, 2016 . 
16. ↑ The Reid Method: inadmissible, but effective. Strafakte.de, accessed on August 8, 2018 . 
17. ↑ Chicago-Based Lawyers Await Judge's Decision on 'Making a Murderer' Case. nbcchigaco.com, accessed January 6, 2016 . 
18. ↑ Review: 'Making a Murderer,' True Crime on Netflix. New York Times, accessed December 29, 2015 . 
19. ↑ Michael Tarm: Court: 'Making a Murderer' defendant Brendan Dassey's confession stands. Yahoo, accessed August 18, 2018 . 
20. ↑ Tim Sohr: Steven Avery breaks his silence. Spiegel Online, accessed August 3, 2018 . 
21. ↑ ^{a b c d} Amelia McDonell-Parry: 'Making a Murderer': What Did Steven Avery's Neighbor See? RollingStone, accessed August 23, 2018 . 
22. ↑ Dave Mosher: The EDTA test in the Steven Avery case (English). Businessinsider, accessed June 21, 2018 . 
23. ↑ Amelia McDonell-Parry: Experts express concerns about forensic testing in the Steven Avery case. RollingStone, accessed July 1, 2018 . 
24. ↑ There was a major piece of evidence you weren't shown in 'Making a Murderer'. In: www.businessinsider.com. Business Insider, January 5, 2016, accessed August 18, 2018 . 
25. ↑ Dean Strang: Sweat DNA Evidence Left Out Of 'Making A Murderer'. In: www.losangeles.com. CBS Los Angeles, March 11, 2016; accessed August 18, 2018 . 
26. ↑ ^{a b c} Laura J. Turner: 9 of the most shocking pieces of new evidence to come from Making a Murderer Part 2. Digital Spy, accessed on October 26, 2018 . 
27. ↑ John Ferak: Quarries may hold key to Halbach's murder. Post Crescent, accessed August 3, 2018 . 
28. ↑ ^{a b} From jail to series star: Is the Netflix killer innocent? Unfassbar.es, accessed on August 18, 2018 . 
29. ↑ We spoke to a law professor about 'Making a Murderer'. In: www.vice.com. VICE, January 14, 2016, accessed December 8, 2018 . 
30. ↑ Marek Bang: Making a Murderer: What became of Steven Avery and Co.? GIGA, accessed on August 21, 2018 . 
31. ↑ Kathryn Schulz: How “Making a Murderer” goes wrong. The New Yorker, accessed August 3, 2018 . 
32. ↑ ^{a b} Tara Flower: Dismissed Steven Avery Juror Tells PEOPLE Jury Members Were Related to a Local Cop and a County Employee. People Magazine, accessed August 8, 2018 . 
33. ↑ Scott Stump: 'Making a Murderer' filmmakers: Original juror believes Steven Avery was framed. Today, accessed August 8, 2018 . 
34. ↑ ^{a b} Josh Saul: New Steven Avery Blood Spatter Tests prove he was framed, 'Making a Murderer'. Newsweek, accessed August 18, 2018 . 
35. ↑ Template error: The title parameter is required. 
36. ↑ ^{a b} Tara Flower: Steven Avery's Lawyer Zellner Offers $ 10,000 in 'Proof of Guilt' Challenge. RollingStone, accessed August 14, 2018 . 
37. ^ Attorney for Steven Avery files post-conviction motion, seeks new trial . 
38. ^ Judge denies Steven Avery's motions for new trial in death of Teresa Halbach . 
39. ↑ "Making a Murderer": Steven Avery's case is being examined. In: sueddeutsche.de , February 28, 2019, accessed on March 1, 2019.
40. ^ ^{A b} Mike Hale: Review: "Making a Murderer." True Crime on Netflix. New York Times, accessed December 29, 2015 . 
41. ↑ ^{a b c d} Behind 'Making a Murderer,' a New Documentary Series on Netflix. New York Times, accessed January 4, 2016 . 
42. ↑ Making a Murderer. In: www.rottentomatoes.com. Rotten Tomatoes, December 18, 2015, accessed January 4, 2016 . 
43. ↑ Lesley Messer: 5 Things to Know About Steven Avery From 'Making a Murderer' . In: ABC News . Retrieved February 5, 2016. 
44. ^ ^{A b} Teresa Halbach's Relatives Share Pain over Making a Murderer: 'This Is the Avery Family's Side of the Story'. In: www.people.com. People, January 16, 2016, accessed November 8, 2018 . 
45. ↑ Ryan Buxton: Dean Strang Discredits Claims Of Missing Evidence In 'Making A Murderer'. Huffington Post, accessed November 18, 2018 . 
46. ↑ ^{a b} A response to your petition on the Teresa Halbach murder case. (No longer available online.) We The People (White House), archived from the original on January 8, 2016 ; accessed on January 7, 2016 (English). Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.  
47. ^ Free Steven Avery. change.org, accessed December 8, 2018 .