Original subtitles

I inherited this defense theory

that Steven Avery's blood in the RAV had come from the 1996 blood vial.

So, I started focusing on the viability of that theory

and if I wanted to continue with it.

We added one more experiment...

At trial, the defense got totally sandbagged on it,

because the State tested for EDTA

and refuted the arguments that the defense had made to the jury.

It's my opinion that the bloodstains that were collected from the RAV4

could not have come from the EDTA tube that was provided to us in this case.

So, we did an extensive investigation on EDTA

and determined, talking to some of the leading experts in the country,

that there was no point in retesting.

I also explored a method of determining the age of the blood

to detect whether it was '05 blood from Steven Avery

or whether it was from the 1996 blood vial.

But Dr. Reich explained to me,

"You're talking about blood that degrades

and is in a car from a 2005 murder."

So, he was cautioning me that it would be unlikely

that there would be enough blood, or any test,

that could date this blood.

So, I began to explore other places the blood could've come from.

They say they found blood evidence in the car.

Why do you think the DNA evidence is inaccurate?

Because somebody had to put it there.

I know I had a cut on my finger.

I know the blood was in my house from that, and I didn't clean it up,

and it was cleaned up.

I don't know. I'm still trying to figure it out.

How it all happened.

You know, it's puzzling.

He says an old cut reopened and bled on his sink.

Only thing I can think of is when I cut my hand,

when it broke open again.

And in the bathroom, I had...

There was blood on the sink.

You know, I woke up the next morning, it was all cleaned up.

That's...

Until right now, I'm still trying to think,

"Who cleaned it up? Who was in my house?"

For years, I mean, all the way back to 2005,

he's talked about the fact the blood was taken from his trailer

on the night of the 3rd, that he was bleeding

and that he bled in the sink and on the floor.

Hello?

- Hi. - Hi.

How are you doing?

Alright, as long as I'm sitting down.

I know what you mean. Do you feel bad? Like...

I hurt.

My legs hurt me. I can't walk hardly.

Really?

So you've gotten worse since I was here last?

Yeah.

- Have you talked to Steven? - Today, I did.

Yeah?

So, he and I went through this last week.

The order is going in to turn the stuff over to me for the testing.

- Yeah. - Good.

We did it by agreement,

because once you start litigating testing, it could take us five years.

So, we seemed to...

I won't be around here in five years, I don't think.

No, I don't want to be working on this in five years.

I just got a screwdriver here.

- Oh, you brought your own tools? - Yeah.

I'm a full-service law firm.

Yeah, so I want to go up to the trailer.

I'm gonna try to take the sink out if I can.

And, um, you have the key?

I got a key here, too. Chuckie brought it here.

Yeah. I could get it.

It's behind them paper plates on the counter.

Yeah. OK.

So, I'm gonna go up there, and then I'll come back by before I leave.

I'll just tell you what I find.

- Yeah. OK, then. - OK.

Because he said that he saw pry marks on the door.

Let me go talk to him.

- Hey, Kurt? - Yes.

You know, this thing looks like it's got a pry mark on it with...

- That door? - Yeah.

See on here?

Yeah.

It's crazy, though, that they would come to the front.

Probably somebody who's done it a bunch of times.

Yeah.

Because I think cops, they would have that.

- Because they find cars all the time. - Yeah.

And they get into them.

- Like a slim jim. - Yeah.

That's the official name for it.

- That's it? - Duh.

Here it is.

I think we just have to disconnect it.

I have to... We gotta have that surface.

- Yeah. - OK.

At least you popped it up.

Well, we'll see if the water's gonna be connected still.

I just want the wrench to actually take the pipe out.

Yeah.

- Is it moving? Good. - Yeah. Should be pretty soon.

Alright. Voilà.

- You remember his cut finger? - Mm-hmm.

Yeah.

I know it was always bleeding, breaking open.

It bled in that sink.

Well, yeah, somebody cleaned it.

Do you remember him saying that? That someone had cleaned it?

- He said something about it. - Yeah.

Because he kept trying to tell his trial attorneys

that they took the blood out of the sink, but nobody was listening to him.

Yeah, so I think that's the way it happened.

So, all that got done on the 3rd.

Oh, yeah?

Would there be any reason that Steven would have a pry bar?

Because it looks like a pry bar was used to open up his trailer.

You might call it a nail puller.

OK.

Don't close it. I'm gonna put it back in there.

Hang on a second once.

- That is a nail remover. - That's what you call it?

- Yeah. - OK.

- Alright. - I just found out something.

- What? - This is Carla, my daughter.

- Yeah? - Brendan's getting released?

- Is he? Today? - I don't know.

- You want to... Here, talk to her. - Yeah. OK.

Yeah, because maybe the judge...

Yeah, Carla. It's Kathleen. How are you?

It just came online that Judge, uh, Judge...

Duffin.

Are they gonna...

Are they gonna do it today?

Um, as soon as they get an address of where he's gonna be tonight...

- I believe so. - OK.

I don't know if it's today or tomorrow, but, yeah, it just said online.

Are they gonna release him from where he is incarcerated right now,

or are they gonna move him and then release him or can you tell?

Um, I didn't fully read the brief yet.

OK. I'll pull it up online.

Thank you. That's a...

That's great news.

Oh, yeah, yeah.

It sounded like she was gonna cry to me on the phone.

Who?

Kayla. What are you gonna do, cry?

Maybe she... Maybe it was gonna be a happy cry.

So, I just saw the court order.

They're gonna let Brendan out. He should get out today.

They're just getting the probation officer approved.

I bet Barbara's crying if she hears it already.

Does she know?

- I don't know. - You have a number?

Seems like she'd want to know.

I think her phone stays in the car. She can't take it in.

- Oh. - Yeah.

- That's it. - They're pretty strict there.

When was she supposed to get off?

Three.

Because if he can get out today, someone has to pick him up, right?

Yeah, they do.

Somebody probably wants to start driving,

because it's gonna take them a while to get there.

- And she should be the one. - She should be the one.

Well, we have to figure out where she works.

Don't you think somebody ought to go tell her?

Columbus Street.

Hmm?

Do you want to ride over there and tell her?

This'll be crazy.

Should we go this way or go straight?

Could you figure out what time they need to be there?

Because it's a couple of hours.

Yes.

So, Columbia Correctional Center.

I'm working off what they do in most places, but you never know.

Maybe they couldn't talk to her.

- Her boss will not let her leave... - Are you kidding?

Ugh, jeez...

See, I'm a little...

I don't want to crowd Northwestern, because I'm not the attorney.

Her boss is talking to Brendan's lawyer right now.

- He is? - Nirider is talking to Barb's boss.

I don't know what time it is now. Two o'clock?

It's two o'clock.

She said she'd lose her job if she walked out.

I just got home from work, and Brendan was supposed to be getting released.

But that's all I know. I don't know when.

I don't know how. I don't know nothing.

So, fill us in, Ma.

Fill you in with what? All I know is he's coming home.

That's the greatest feeling ever.

Did they say what day?

No.

Is it gonna be this week?

Don't know.

She's calling me back later.

27 News has been here at Columbia Correctional all day

waiting on Dassey's release.

But we have learned that the US Probation Office in Milwaukee,

which will supervise Dassey's release,

has to visit the home where he plans to be living first,

before he can be released.

Meanwhile, Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel said

he plans to file an emergency motion to stop Dassey's release.

No table.

Usually by twenty-five to, he'll call.

Yeah, it's getting close.

There he is.

Sit.

Hello. This is a collect call from...

Brendan.

...an inmate at the Columbia Correctional Institution.

To accept charges, press 1.

Thank you for using CenturyLink.

You may start the conversation now.

- Hello, honey. - Hello?

You hear the good news?

- Did you? - Yes.

Yeah, but I didn't get to see it.

You didn't get to see it? Why's that?

'Cause they let me out for the showers

at the same time as that news was on.

Oh, really?

Hey, buddy, can you do us a favor and talk louder?

Uh, yeah.

Yeah, but when are they gonna release me, though?

We don't know yet.

I thought it would be tonight.

Like, I'm even wearing my own personal underwear right now.

Really?

I'm wearing...

You planning on getting out?

Yeah, I...

I even put my sweatpants on.

You were really ready to go, aren't you?

So, I might... I might be out by Friday, probably.

So we're hoping. Are you excited?

- Yeah. - Yeah?

So am I.

I'll be more excited when you're here.

Yeah.

Yeah.

That I know you're out.

Yeah, you'll be more excited once I'm in your arms.

Yep.

It's probably gonna be just me and your mother.

I think they would bring my stuff to you guys first

before they release me.

You know, because when Steven was coming out,

he had Mom's hand in one hand, and the other one in...

- Jenny's. - Oh, yeah.

Jenny's.

I don't know if he even brung anything with him.

I think he left everything there.

I don't know. I don't remember.

I thought he brought his typewriter with him, didn't he?

Oh, God. I don't know. That's been too long ago.

Yeah.

So, is there a different way in there besides the front door?

Um...

Just that sally port's just right in the front, so I don't...

I don't think there is.

We're just trying to figure out a way to get you out here safely, that's all.

Yeah.

Without any news media.

- Yeah? - Yeah.

People are really frustrated.

The media is making him out as kind of a rock star and a victim,

when the real victim is Teresa Halbach.

I mean, come on, now. He's not a rock star. He's a killer.

They did what they did, and he should never get out,

and I had to pull over and call you because it just upsets me.

If there's some legal issue, OK, fine.

But these guys did it,

and, somehow, along the way, we've lost that.

Megan, we just learned about an hour ago that the Wisconsin Department of Justice

has filed a motion trying to stop Dassey's release.

He's gonna be behind those bars here for at least one more day,

as the State filed an emergency order to stop him from getting out.

Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel notes

Dassey's lawyers claim his confession was coerced.

Schimel says, even if it was,

that doesn't mean Dassey didn't actually sexually assault,

kill, and mutilate Teresa Halbach.

"Accordingly, Dassey's release should be regarded

as a serious public safety issue."

And Schimel is asking the court to make a decision on this by tomorrow.

Of course, Dassey's family has said they hope to have home by Thanksgiving.

In Portage, Nick Bohr, WISN 12 News.

This morning, Judge Duffin reviewed the State's motion

and concluded that they just rehashed what they had said before

and there was no reason for him to change his mind.

So, Judge Duffin, in his decision,

based upon the home visit, the interviews, the review of Brendan's records,

uh...

based upon all of that,

ordered that Brendan be released no later than Friday at eight o'clock.

The family is over the moon.

Brendan and his mother have spent ten Thanksgivings apart.

And the idea that he could be home by Thanksgiving is...

I mean, talk about tasting gratitude.

Some wonder why current Attorney General Brad Schimel

is fighting so hard to keep Dassey locked up.

I approach this from the perspective of the family of Teresa Halbach.

And, um, they...

they've had no opportunity to hug her on Thanksgiving.

And this is, um...

Until we sort out with certainty

whether that jury's verdict against Brendan Dassey will stand or not,

um, we need to keep him where he is.

Basically, the State is doing whatever they can

to keep this from happening.

Right now the ball is in the 7th Circuit.

Uh, good afternoon. This is Bob Dvorak calling from Milwaukee.

I'm wondering who the duty judge is this week.

I'm calling about the Dassey case.

Yeah, yeah, OK. So we don't know who it's going to.

OK, thanks.

Bye.

This is Breaking News Now

from Today's TMJ 4.

Brendan Dassey will remain in prison

pending the outcome of an appeal.

The US Court of Appeals in Chicago just made that ruling.

Now, the three-judge panel out of Chicago

didn't offer an opinion on why it issued the stay,

it simply granted it.

This is the same court that will ultimately decide

whether or not to overturn the August ruling by Judge William Duffin

that overturned Dassey's conviction.

In response to today's order,

Dassey's legal team released a statement that said,

"We are disappointed more than words can say.

The fight goes on."

Meanwhile, Steven Avery's attorney...

Brendan has to stay in prison until his appeal is resolved.

It was a blow, but, you know, Brendan's a rock here.

He's our rock.

And his faith in us, and his optimism,

is what keeps us going forward.

This is one skirmish in a series of battles

that is gonna end in the 7th Circuit,

and we're ready to fight for Brendan,

and we're confident that we're going to prevail.

Dassey and his attorneys were expecting his release

from the Columbia Correctional Institution here in Portage by Friday at 8:00 p.m.

But right now, it's clear that's not going to happen.

Steven Avery is still serving a life sentence.

He's currently being held at Waupun Correctional.

He, of course, was the focus of that documentary, Making a Murderer.

Avery's current attorney, Kathleen Zellner...

...claims new testing of some key pieces of evidence

will clear him of that murder.

Do you want this hamburger?

Get me off that goddamn camera!

I had a bad day.

Me, too.

I don't know what Barbara's gonna do with her job.

I heard she took a whole month off.

How's she gonna live? She ain't.

She got over a $1,000 house payment.

A federal appeals court has granted the State's request

to keep Brendan Dassey in prison.

Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel filed that emergency motion yesterday.

This morning, 7th District Court of Appeals

approved the motion for the stay.

The timeline is the big question here.

Federal court records show December deadlines for both sides

to file paperwork in the appeal regarding Dassey's overturned...

That all sticks in my head.

How many years of it?

There's no specific date for when a final opinion

would be issued by that three-judge panel,

but it could take several months or longer.

Brendan Dassey will remain in prison during the appeal process.

Today, the 7th District Court of Appeals overruled...

It's just another day and...

the justice ain't there yet.

The State will keep on fighting and they'll just show more stuff on TV.

He's going through the same thing I did.

You know, you got your hopes up,

and then the courts just shut you down again.

Every time you turn around, you think something's positive,

and then you just get kicked in the face again.

So, the surface of the sink is hard and flat.

And then, you know, roughly...

What was it the State expert said... the amount of blood in the car?

I believe he estimated two to three milliliters.

Something like that.

- I remember one to two milliliters. - Yeah, something like that.

So, we've got six spots in the car, but the spots are all small.

That's his estimate on it.

- Yes. I think one to two, he said. - Right.

So, let's talk about the blood in the car.

We've got a description by the Wisconsin Crime Lab

that on this carpet they found flakes.

And I'm talking about the carpet right, uh, in front of the driver's seat.

So, there were blood flakes on this carpet,

and the analyst picked those flakes up with tweezers.

Unless you have a considerable amount of blood on the carpet,

you're not gonna necessarily see flakes or a drying effect,

because with one or two drops, or three drops,

it's gonna absorb right into the carpet.

And to see flaking like that visually would be probably not very likely.

What if we open one of our tubes

and drip onto this carpet, OK?

Let's just watch what happens when we drip.

So, we're seeing very small drops because they're absorbed into the carpet.

Now, do you want me to make a larger amount?

Yeah, we could do another line larger,

and then we could drip in the sink.

So, let's try in the sink, if we just drip in there

and then we'll let it sit as we're talking,

and we can compare the two surfaces.

- Kind of like that? - Mm-hmm. Yeah.

- Then we can... - Yeah.

That's gonna take time to dry.

- Yeah. - That's for sure.

Yeah, what you're seeing, basically, is the blood drying on the fibers.

Right.

If someone were to be processing this car for blood,

I would expect that they would've taken the whole bloodstain.

- They're quite visible. - Right.

You wouldn't be taking a flake off one of these stains.

What the State has represented to me

is there were not bloodstains, there were just flakes.

She's not describing stains.

She's not picking up flakes from stains.

She's just picking up flakes,

which tells you there's no stain there.

- Which means that... - The flakes were put there.

They had to come from a different source, whether it be from somewhere above...

Although, looking at the transfer stain on the dashboard,

I don't see any evidence of that flaking.

And it's not... It would never land where this carpet is.

This carpet is between the console on the car.

The flakes are back under here. You can't see it in this picture.

It's like, between the console and the edge of the seat,

is where she's finding them, so...

That doesn't make any sense. I mean...

If there are flakes, there's gotta be a source of those flakes.

Yeah.

Because she is not saying there was a stain,

and that's highly suspicious.

I find it unusual, absolutely.

Yeah, I just think that's preposterous.

So, OK, then let's talk about this blood which...

It looks like it's flowing down. What is that?

Uh, it appears to be, to me, to be an angular passive drip stain.

That just ran down like gravity?

Well, yeah, I mean...

Actually, I've got some really good high-speed videos

that show how this is formed.

The blood drop actually hits the surface here,

and then it just kind of runs down like this and then finally stops.

That's pretty much what we're seeing there.

- Let me ask you this. - That's suspicious.

If you got into the trailer and the blood was in the sink,

could you have picked a drop up if you had this?

Because I'm trying to think the removal to the drop.

Because swabbing, you're not gonna create a drop.

Sorry to displace you again here.

- Yeah, I want to see. - Here.

- So, let's see. - Sure you can.

Oh, that's...

Yeah, that would be the better way to do it.

If it's still wet. It's gotta still be wet.

Yeah, but they got in when it was wet, so that's how you'd pull it up.

Well, here. I pulled some blood up from there.

- Yeah. - Let's see what we do here.

You'll get almost the same thing. I haven't got the same amount.

It looks just like the one there.

In fact, I think the bottom of that has probably been cut off.

That looks like what you're seeing there, right?

- It does. - Agreed?

Yep, I agree.

So, now I know that's how,

it was pulling up with a dropper.

Steven Avery described dripping on the edge of the sink and then...

The blood should eventually, you know, fragment after it...

You'll see cracks in the surface, et cetera,

and we're waiting to see when that will occur.

Alright.

- Alright. - OK.

- Ready for the scraping episode? - Yeah.

Those are a good size.

- And this one. - Yeah.

Let's try... This might be a little moist, but...

- Yeah. - Yeah, it still broke up.

I think that non-absorbent surface really...

Great.

- Quite a few in there. - Yeah, you've got a bunch.

Look at that.

- Let's put... - Yeah, I think that'll work.

If you put it in the car,

you should put it on some white paper or something so it can be seen.

I will. Yeah, we'll take... Yeah, I'll take...

Alright.

Now what we should do is what we did... We could swab up.

Do you want this swab to go...?

Yeah, these swabs we're gonna do by the ignition.

The officers that are suspected in that activity were evidence techs

who carried swabs and distilled water.

Now let's see what I got here.

- Here we go. - Oh, wow.

- How's that? - Great.

On the seats.

And then I want to see up here what...

There it is.

Could that be true, that it's just that simple?

Someone got in the trailer, wiped up the blood,

and they dripped it into the car and smeared above the ignition.

I think the defense attorneys probably underestimated

what they were up against.

And...

I think that they...

I mean, the State just has enormous resources.

They can bring in all these experts. They can...

You know, they have three attorneys at the table.

They've got all the cops working for them.

I mean, you are outgunned when you come into it.

But I still believe, if you just had a blood spatter expert...

You know, I've won cases just on blood spatter.

So, if you could take...

You could've definitively taken down one piece of evidence

and shown it was planted.

It isn't like this would've cost, um, you know,

hundreds of thousands of dollars.

You could've gotten the experts, I think, for 20 grand.

A lot of experts will help you, just, if you're in that situation.

I mean, this was child's play for Stuart James.

He could tell immediately the blood spatter testimony

was just completely wrong.

It's hard to say that someone's ineffective,

but when the State has got 14 experts and you've got two,

there's something dramatically wrong.

People ask us about the verdict and how we explain it,

and I think a lot of it was the pretrial publicity

that this particular jury just couldn't put aside.

That, and combined with the fact that... the ruling shortly before trial

that said we weren't gonna be able to point the finger at any other suspect

and present evidence of that.

Unlike a lot of cases, we had suspects, other suspects,

who could very well have done this,

and tried to present that, and...

But the court ruled against us by stretching the prior law

in a way that made it impossible for us to do that.

So, you know, I think that really handicapped us from the beginning.

Based on my research,

Wisconsin courts are more receptive to ineffective assistance claims

than maybe they are in Illinois.

If you can show that something the attorney did or did not do

undermines confidence in the outcome...

Right.

...then that's something on which a court might grant relief.

So, for example, if an attorney fails to present expert testimony

that could've supported the defense.

Or, you know, there are other cases that talk about evidence that could have shown

that the prosecution's version of events was false.

Um, you know, if that's something

a defense attorney didn't adequately investigate

or present to the jury...

I think that'll definitely apply here.

Then the defense argued the Denny standard was unconstitutional,

but it's been part of Wisconsin law since 1984.

Exactly, they did a couple of things

that I think would go into what you were discussing

about ineffective assistance of counsel.

One argument they had was that Denny doesn't apply to us,

and there's no precedent for that.

And then secondly, they said we don't have to prove motive,

uh, which there's no case law to support that type of argument.

So, what's developing here is a pattern.

Uh, I'll give you some examples.

It's a failure on the forensic evidence to follow up on what they've got.

It's a failure to follow up on leads

in the police reports with certain individuals.

The dog tracks which...

You know, the scent dogs are all over the quarry.

The cumulative effect of that

would, of course, undermine, I think, confidence in the verdict,

to just have so many things that you didn't do as the defense attorney.

Absolutely.

And there are cases that talk about cumulative error.

- Good. - In Wisconsin.

And that's something that the court will consider.

Yeah, I mean, they're successful in getting the planted evidence theory

in front of the jury,

but it just has no impact because it doesn't have any substance to it.

I mean, the blood spatter expert says he will testify

that the blood by the ignition was put on with an applicator.

You know?

I can't believe that didn't have one.

Yeah, it's... When you look at this...

Blood is planted.

When I've done murder trials,

what I want the jury to hear is my story of what happened,

and my story is gonna involve a different scenario

of who killed the victim.

And I'm going to push that. That's at the top of my list, to do that.

Because if I can convince the jury

that someone else could have committed the crime,

I'm gonna win.

When I spent time with Josh Radandt,

he was very forthcoming with me

and really went beyond what he needed to do to answer my questions.

And I believe that he was completely credible.

So, based on his alibi, which we thoroughly checked out,

based on my interview with him and the additional evidence he gave me,

I ruled him out as a Denny suspect, so I crossed him off the list.

The other thing I learned that was extremely important

was that the suspected human pelvic bones weren't on his private property.

They were on the Manitowoc gravel property.

So, we could then broaden the investigation.

It's "what" plus "why" equals "who."

What happened? Why did it happen?

If we understand why it happened, we'll know who did it.

- Mm-hmm. - I risk oversimplifying that.

But, basically, that's the pattern you want to go down.

So, doing a real thorough victimology,

you want to know everyone she's been in touch with,

um, and who they are

and what's the nature of their relationship and all of that,

especially close in time to the homicide.

Do you see, um, any risk factor elevation

with the type of job that she had?

Yes, she was going out, she was doing these AutoTrader things,

shooting photos of cars in different places and different people.

She's gonna go out and meet people she doesn't know.

But 70 to 80 percent of people who are murdered

are murdered by someone they know.

So, it's a combination of looking at that particular victim

and then looking at the people around her.

If someone's in their twenties, um, sexual relationships,

boyfriends, whatever, how many.

Right.

All those sorts of things.

Because it's when...

Those are the things that can be emotional

and trigger people to do bad things.

So, those are the areas that you want to concentrate in

and look into those private parts of her life.

You know, intimate relations and so forth,

and, you know, she's sleeping with somebody's husband.

I mean, that's a risk factor.

You know, all those things you have to really understand

to move in the right direction,

to make sure you're not on the wrong tangent.

And do families... Like, with victims of families...

Families are emotional. I understand that.

That's a delicate part, dealing with...

These are the vicarious victims in a homicide,

are the family members and friends.

And you have to deal with that artfully and compassionately with them.

But you've got a job to do,

and you've got to get in there and find out what was going on.

Otherwise, you're doing a disservice to everybody, including the victim.

So, yes, everybody close to her, in contact with her, uh, even remotely,

at the beginning has to be looked at as a potential suspect

until you can rule them out.

One of the things that we did was we created a chart

of who did they get an alibi from.

So, if we start with, you know, the married man who's getting a divorce

that she had the sexual relationship with,

and then a friend of hers described that she wanted to break that off,

but he kept calling her.

He described it as they were still great friends.

And then, of course, he provides information

that she's had sexual relations with her roommate.

Her roommate is best friends with her ex-boyfriend, so...

First of all, ex-boyfriends have to always be in the suspect pool.

The ex-boyfriend is never asked...

He says at trial, he's very forthcoming,

"No, I was never asked to provide an alibi."

The roommate was never asked to provide an alibi.

And she goes missing on the 31st,

but nobody reports that until the 3rd of November.

So, it isn't like when she doesn't come home,

the 31st, the 1st, the 2nd,

that anybody's reporting it.

It's her business colleague that finally calls the mother

and says, "I'm worried."

So, would that make you comfortable with eliminating them?

No, not at all. You can't eliminate anybody based on that.

It's a lack of investigation.

Each of those individuals have to be looked at as potential suspects.

The first thing we did was start with

who was Teresa Halbach and who was she in relationships with.

And we checked out, from her phone records

and everything we could gather, her emails,

everyone that she had had contact with,

and we did criminal background checks on them,

and then we looked at potential alibis for that day, possible motives,

the nature of the relationship.

All of that we sorted through

to refine it down to one person, two people,

uh, that might meet the Denny standard.

And at the top of my list was Ryan Hillegas.

There was tension between them.

During the summer,

she didn't even want to photograph a wedding

that she knew he was gonna be the best man in.

They broke up in 2001,

but Ryan was still coming over a lot, visiting,

and Teresa even wrote in an email in October

that she realized that Ryan was still interested in her,

was still checking her out.

It's clear to me that she's over Ryan,

but Ryan still seems interested in her.

And then after she's murdered, he's moved into her place

and he's there where there's potentially evidence.

I found that just unbelievable.

And then he's providing the most intimate details about her

to the investigators.

When you say you talked to the police, who did you speak with?

Um...

uh, let's see.

I know, uh, Thursday night, when we were at the house,

I went over after Scott called me, I went to the house,

and we kind of started calling around and calling friends then, but...

I believe it was Jerry Pagel and...

Detective Wiegert who were at the house Thursday night,

collecting belongings and asking questions.

Um, the family was there, also.

And so, did you tell Sheriff Pagel

that you had, sort of, become the coordinator of all of this?

I don't believe so. I think it was just kind of assumed.

I was kind of the contact for the whole search.

If anybody wanted to help, they were instructed to call me.

Basically, it, I guess, started with me.

Did you at some point ever go to the property, the Avery property?

- Yes. - When was that?

Jeez. Um...

We... When did we go there?

Saturday, cars. Sunday...

I'm not real sure on the dates. Um...

It was possibly that Monday or Tuesday,

which would've been the...

Let's see...

Third, fourth, fifth...

- Was that the 6th or 7th? That Monday? - Let me ask you this way.

When you went to the property, was it...

was it still, to your knowledge, in the custody of the law enforcement?

Yes.

Did you pass through any checkpoints?

Yes.

And did the officers who let you in

know that you had a relationship

as a former boyfriend with the missing woman at that point?

I... I don't know if anybody knew I was an ex-boyfriend.

Or, I guess, I never saw the relevance in it, or...

- Did Sheriff Pagel know that? - What's that?

Did Sheriff Pagel know of your relationship with her?

At that time, I don't believe so.

I think everybody just assumed I was a good friend.

He's got access to Teresa's personal possessions,

to her residence,

and then he's on the Avery property, crossing the checkpoints on November 7th.

The key, the sub-key, is discovered on the 8th in Mr. Avery's bedroom.

We think there was a sub-key at her house,

and somebody who had access to her house gave that key to the police.

We've made repeated efforts to talk to him,

and we've told him the reason we want to talk to him is to rule him out

if he can give me plausible explanations for things.

But he doesn't respond.

And one of the most suspicious parts of the case

is his story about the parking light on Teresa's vehicle.

He told the police that he had talked to family and friends

and had determined that Teresa had broken out the parking light

before October 31st,

made an insurance claim, taken a cash payout,

but she had kept the money and didn't get the car repaired.

That's interesting because that's elaborate.

And over the years, what you notice is,

people who lie usually have real elaborate lies.

So, the first thing that I checked out was,

was that parking light broken when she visited the appointments that day?

Her client, Mr. Schmitz, said that the car looked new.

The car is six years old.

Our interpretation of that was he didn't see any damage.

The car wasn't banged up or anything.

So, then we went back to the insurance company,

and they said she never made a claim about the parking light.

She made a claim about her windshield wiper,

this little, tiny expense,

but she didn't make a claim about this really significant damage

to the front of her vehicle.

But the most important thing is the missing poster,

because when you put out a description of a car,

and it was a detailed description,

if it has any body damage, you put that on there,

because that would've stood out above everything else,

if people were seeing a RAV driving around

with that whole front parking light knocked out.

So, the parking light was not damaged before she was murdered.

It is part of the events of the murder.

And Mr. Hillegas connected himself to the parking light.

And that is a huge piece of evidence

linking him to the crime.

That's not correct. I did call her...

Sorry to offend everyone,

but I'm very offended by having a client who's innocent

and is now spending, you know...

has now spent 13 years locked up for something he didn't do.

So, all of our feelings are hurt. But I'm going at it.

Wherever the Denny road and the evidence takes me,

that's where I'm going.

And if people want to get off the train, give us a call.

We're totally reasonable.

But I have no explanations for all of these things on Ryan Hillegas.

So, your attorney's got the brief all done, I guess.

- Yeah? - Yeah.

That's for the... the nor... the regular appeal, right?

That's for the 7th Circuit.

Yeah. The one in Chicago.

Yeah.

Do you know how many pages it was?

No.

- No? - No.

I haven't to Laura, so...

No, but she's good, so...

- Yeah? - Yeah.

The process in the 7th Circuit involves each side having an opportunity

to file briefs in front of the court

that spell out your argument in written form,

and then the court will review those briefs

and review the record of the proceedings that happened below

in federal court and in state court.

And then comes oral argument,

at which point lawyers from both sides will go into a courtroom

at the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago

and have an opportunity to make their points out loud

to a panel of judges who will ask questions of either side.

Brad Schimel. Brad, thanks for being on the show.

Thank you for having me, Jamie.

Um, so, you've got several areas...

Just, you know, give our viewers some idea

of, like, how much is prosecuting specific types of cases

versus government affairs and so forth.

Well, we have about 100 lawyers who work in our Division of Legal Services.

About two dozen of them do criminal prosecutions for the DA's offices

when they have a highly complex case

or a case that's gonna take tremendous resources.

And they also do the criminal appeals for the DA's offices.

And we have about 100 special agents with the Division of Criminal Investigation

who handle complex cases.

So, investigators, not just lawyers, as employees.

- Right. - OK.

We also have the three crime labs.

So, I have about 200 people that work in our crime labs

in Madison, Wausau, and Milwaukee.

We also have our Solicitor General's division.

That's working on defending our state's sovereignty

relative to the federal government.

The case is set for oral argument on Valentine's Day, 2017,

and that means that both sides will get to present their case in 20 minutes

to a panel of judges of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.

This is a federal court

that is one step below the United States Supreme Court.

It's a very important day,

and that's why we are putting so much energy

into preparing Laura for this case.

This is just the first in a series of mock arguments.

What we're trying to do is to, as best as possible,

replicate the experience that Laura's gonna have

when she steps up in front of the 7th Circuit.

One of our students is actually going to argue the case for the State.

There will be a panel of judges that I have selected,

leading law school faculty,

some who have experience in this area, some who are fresh to this case.

Because we won in the federal district court,

the State gets to go first.

He'll get questioned by the judges,

because we want to make this as real as possible

so Laura can sort of pick up on the questions

that the judge asks the State.

Laura will then get 20 minutes,

essentially defending the district court's decision in Brendan's case.

This is a hugely important day for Brendan Dassey.

When we won in federal court, in front of Judge Duffin,

that was about a one in a hundred shot.

Each step of the way you go into the court system,

the higher and higher levels of appeal, the harder it is to win.

And if we lose in the 7th Circuit,

it just makes our climb that much more difficult.

Brendan was the first case that I got assigned as a law student,

and it changed my life.

When I got assigned to Brendan's case and watched those videos,

I knew that's what I wanted to do, I had to help people like this.

I now teach the same class that I took ten years ago.

You know, it's kind of come full circle for me.

These aren't just names on a page or just legal arguments,

these are real people with families and friends.

They deserve justice and they deserve truth.

Brendan will not be in attendance at this argument.

It's very unusual for defendants to be present.

I think Brendan is, you know, unsettled by this.

I think he is cautiously optimistic

that this will be one step closer to freedom.

But he also realizes that there have been disappointments all along the way.

What has this kid been through from ages 16 to 26 now?

And, you know, it's not over.

It's not over until, um, either the government says

that we're not going to prosecute you

or, you know, a jury comes back with a not guilty verdict.

And actually, there is no statute of limitations,

come to think of it, for murder.

So, it's probably the not guilty verdict that is the only thing that's final here.

It's something Brendan's gonna live with for the rest of his life, like it or not.

Hi, this Laura Nirider. I have a question.

I'm in the process of trying to e-file my oral argument card.

There will be a panel of three judges.

We will not know that panel until the morning of the argument.

So, part of what we are doing is making sure

that she understands the viewpoints of all 11 of the judges

on the 7th Circuit,

that she's read opinions by all of those judges

on the areas that we're covering in argument,

so that she can adapt her argument if need be,

depending on who the panel is.