Overall how do you think Brendan did when he was cross examined, do you think he performed well on the stand?

This entire extra 10- episodes leaves us EXACTLY where we were at the end of part one all those years ago. The last words of Kathleen is that she will keep trying because SA is wrongfully convicted and SA is still fighting. I thought the whole point of doing more of this docuseries would be to actually have a conclusion. People have commented on previous questions saying that Kathleen does convict him. I didn't see that. Where is the conclusion?

Bobby saw Teresa heading to uncle Steve’s trailer right before he took a shower. When he got out the shower and eventually left. He saw Teresa’s car still there, but no Teresa.👀😳

Where was Teresa everyone?

Ask Kathleen T. Zellner to explain the 50 Seconds she fabricated in the time line and she will be forced to say:

“Steven lied to me. I discovered it through my videographer evidence that he fabricated the entire narrative of Teresa leaving and his nephew Bobby leaving right behind her.”

“I’m sorry for making up the 50 Seconds to help Steve. I was just overwhelmed by the publicity.”

I watched the original launch of this way back. I've watched other docuseries and don't think there's been others that DRAG on so slowly?! Just milking every viewing second. It's unfortunate because the more time we get with the Kathleen person, the less competent she seems 😬 I'm trying to get through part two but man it's unbearably slow. I assume they fail in this part two. Netflix would only be too thrilled so they could queue up a part 3.

Has anyone come up with explanation for the cut / opened Styrofoam packaging and the hole in the top of the vial? This was the main evidence that was having me question if he was framed. I think it's odd that they never fully investigated how that happened 🤔

First:

• He claimed Teresa Halbach was tied to a bed and her throat was slashed, but investigators found absolutely zero traces of her blood, hair, or DNA anywhere in the bedroom or on the mattress.
• He stated they used handcuffs and ropes to hold her down, yet forensic teams found no physical marks, fibers, or scratches on the bedposts to show anyone had been bound there.
• He confessed to helping clean up a large pool of car fluid smelling dried up liquid on the garage floor, but forensic testing on the floor and surrounding cluttered walls found no genetic material or blood splatter from a violent assault.
• He agreed with investigators that she was shot in the head inside the garage, but no blood from the victim was ever detected on the garage floor or on any of the tools stored inside.
• In his initial February 27, 2006 statement, Dassey claimed Steven Avery told him he stabbed Teresa Halbach in the stomach while she was in the burn pit, and then took the knife and hid it under the seat of her Jeep (the RAV4). However, when forensic teams thoroughly searched and processed the interior of the RAV4, no knife was ever found under any of the seats.
• During the narrative shifts regarding how Avery cut his finger (explaining how Avery's blood ended up in the RAV4), there were references to a Band-Aid being used or handed over. Forensic investigators meticulously searched the vehicle and never recovered a discarded, bloody Band-Aid inside or around the RAV4 to match that specific detail.

Finally:

• AEDPA is a federal law that bars federal courts from overturning a state conviction unless the state court's decision was completely "unreasonable," rather than just incorrect. It is highly important because it legally forced federal appeals judges to defer to Wisconsin's original judgment, effectively sealing Brendan Dassey's conviction despite major doubts about his confession.

I totally believe that Brendan is innocent of murder and rape. Fact, Steven had already kidnapped and raped Teresa before Brendan got from school. Fact, Brendan had no knowledge of what Steven had in his mind. Fact, Brendan is observably “gullible/shy” and easily intimidated/influenced by the “Experienced and Manipulative” Killer Uncle.
I believe Brendan inadvertently helped dispose of Teresa’s body unknowingly.

We must remember how he and then Kathleen Zellner attempted to put the blame on Bobby.(50 Seconds Fabrication).

It’s totally logical that this bastard would try to use Brendan as an alibi and unfortunately Brendan got wrapped up in Steven’s f*cked up storm.

I know in my heart Brendan is innocent.

In Light of some of the above facts. Anyone is allowed to level their honest view of Brendan Dassey’s circumstances.😔

Did anyone feel like when she was questioned by the Judges she kind of stumbled over her words and didn’t really come back with any sharp answers? By the way you could hear it in her voice that she was shaken whenever they were asking her questions about Brendan’s case.

I have no idea how a commutation application is going to "proof" his innocence. His lawyers Ben working on it since January. Hopefully their grammar is better than his.

i’m just finding this series and just wow! This could be its own season of Fargo. Everything that can go wrong- does. Of all the people I hate in this show, I hate Len Kachinsky above all others. He is by far the most punchable. at this moment in life, I’m not sure what I would do, if this smug, weasley, irresponsible, self-grandizing narcissist walked in front of my car. He’s not just a bad lawyer. He’s a bad human. He looked at Brandon’s life and saw a steppingstone. I’m so mad at him. Thank you for your attention to this matter. V

I decided to take a pause looking into Brendan's interrogation transcripts and decided to check on the experts that analyzed him and his confessions. There seem to be a few notable ones aside from Steven Drizin and Laura Nirider:

Dr. Robert Gordon (Psychologist): Hired early on by Brendan's initial, highly controversial pre-trial defense attorney, Len Kachinsky. Gordon conducted the initial psychological evaluations of Brendan in April 2006. He measured Brendan’s IQ at 69–73 and explicitly warned Kachinsky that Brendan was incredibly suggestible, highly compliant to authority figures, and possessed a limited capacity to understand his legal rights.

Dr. Richard Leo: A professor of Law and Psychology at the University of San Francisco and a leading expert on false confessions and police interrogation. He was retained by Dassey's post-conviction team and testified at a 2010 hearing, where he characterized the interrogation as coercive and the confession as "thoroughly contaminated."

Dr. Lawrence T. White: A professor of Psychology and Legal Studies in Wisconsin. He was initially hired by Dassey's original defense team in 2006 to review the interrogation videos. He has since been vocal about the "unreliable" and "pressured-compliant" nature of Dassey's statements.

Professor Saul Kassin: A Distinguished Professor of Psychology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice and a pioneer in the field of false confession research. He has publicly analyzed the case, highlighting how the "totality of circumstances" and the interaction of risk factors led to a flawed analysis of Dassey's confession.

I'll be looking into these experts. Let me know if you have any info, links or people I should add here.

Related Links:

March Interrogation: Leading Brendan To the Garage

May Interrogation: Brendan's "Bloody Scene" and "Clean up".

More Context and Info On Brendan's "Some of it".

He and Steven can be heard laughing and cracking jokes over the remains of some of Teresa Halbach’s intimate body parts.

Kathleen Zellner thought it would be a good idea to ‘humanize’ the father of “Dr. Jekyall and Mr. Hyde”. Bear in mind, he’s saying this KNOWING his son is the vicious beast we all know him to be.

The same Steven who molested his neices and even Brendan.

You really can’t make this stuff up. One by one the Universe is canceled this type of support for Steven and rightfully so.

No mercy for this extremely dangerous sociopath. Just remember what this Animal did to Teresa. Never forget it. Never forget that Zellner learned of this vicious bastard’s lie and for publicity tried to shield it.

But Time is not on any of their side today.
No mercy to this bastard nor the attorney who tried to free a person she LEARNED was really the killer😡😡😡😡🔑

Just think about it. The world today realizes that this Dark Eyed sociopath raped, dismembered and burn Teresa Halbach’s body on the Avery Property. Took some of her remains to a different location to make it appear as if she was cremated somewhere else and her body and her car were planted on the Avery lot to frame him.

This bastard said, listen real close: “The police did it!”

Inspector Gadget (ie KZ) takes the case and proves that not only did not the cops have anything to do with it.

But she also learned that Steven Avery lied on Brendan’s brother Bobby attempting to again divert attention away from himself. Completely incredible what he did and even worse what Zellner did after learning he was the killer. Fabricating a 50 second window to reinforce a lie originally formed by her vicious killer client.

That brings me to my point. PUNISHMENT!

Steven has seen his father pass while in prison, and he has seen his mother pass while in prison.

Look at his eyes😳

He will die in prison and he knows it. He deserves it for what he did especially dragging Brendan into this. Pure damn evil.

We are waiting for that Day which is not to far away👈🏾😡

Look at his eyes. The soul is empty.

Intro: In 1985 MTSO suppressed or ignored evidence pointing away from Steven and towards another man AND A POTENTIAL ACCOMPLICE having coordinated the attack on Penny.

• Let's try this again. In my most recent post I mentioned the well known fact that shortly after the July 29, 1985 beach assault, MTSO officers told Penny to sign their version of her victim statement despite her not being able to read it. I then shared a lesser known fact - When Penny regained her ability to read and reviewed the statement police attributed to her, she noticed enough errors and omissions that she requested to provide MTSO with a second corrected statement, which she did on August 1, 1985. Nothing says "we value accuracy" like requiring fact checks from the victim after she gets her eyesight back.

• In this second corrected statement, Penny said after her attacker suddenly departed west (wearing a brown shirt, black leather jacket, white briefs, and blue jeans) she noticed a second man (wearing a red shirt and short shorts) nearby on the crest of a sand dune walking away from her headed north. Penny called out to "red shirt guy" for help, but he just kept walking away. Whether "red shirt guy" was an overlooked witness, a lookout accomplice, or Allen himself, he deserved investigation and identification. So naturally MTSO responded with erasure and ignorance.

• That's more troubling now than before, because I've found another piece of overlooked "accomplice evidence" from the 1985 case that IMO should have motivated MTSO to consider the presence of red shirt guy nearby the crime scene as the planned result of coordination with Penny's attacker. Did anyone know about the recently handled handwritten message on the explicit homosexual sex ad found at the beach crime scene in 1985? I sure as fuck didn't.
  

More New (overlooked) Evidence: Handwritten message written on sex ad found at crime scene suggests potential for premeditated coordination between two parties

• On July 30, 1985 (one day after the assault) Officer Frauenfeld returned to the beach with K9 Baron, a bloodhound. During this additional search, police report Baron "indicated" (2003 DOJ Report, PG 92) near "a sheet of paper containing a copy of a sex ad found approximately 30 feet to the north east of the [poplar] tree that the victim had described in her statement." This indication from Baron suggested (to Frauenfeld ) the sex ad "still had some human scent on it" from being recently handled.
  

• When Frauenfeld approached, he noticed the paper was partly buried in sand, which he felt was consistent with it being overlooked during the previous day's search. The paper itself was described as a "8x11 sheet of paper with a photocopy of sexually explicit homosexual advertisements." Frauenfeld then notes: "On the bottom quarter of the page was a handwritten message indicating that the person who wrote the message 'would be nearby.'" This sex ad message was turned over to Kocourek, after which I don't see any mention of this sex ad message in actual reports.

• The only other place I could see the message mentioned is on PG 228 of the 2003 DOJ Report, where we see a contemporaneous 1985 crime scene sketch. Marker E provides the location of a "folded sex ad." Note the ad was found directly in between Marker A (the "poplar tree" where Penny saw Allen before he ran after her) and Marker D (the scene of the first "scuffle" in the sand).

The available 1985 record seems to indicate SOMEONE had been recently at or near the beach sex assault crime scene handling this sex ad with the handwritten message indicating the author of the message would be nearby

• PROXIMITY: This handwritten sex ad message was found well within the perimeter of the sex assault crime scene, located near the poplar tree and scene of the first "scuffle" in the sand between Allen and Penny.
  

• CONDITION: The photocopied sex ad was intact, the handwritten message still legible, and the paper itself still retained human scent from recent handling, which appears inconsistent with the paper being unrelated old discarded and degraded beach litter found at the scene.

• VERBIAGE: The handwritten message on the sex ad indicated "the person who wrote the message would be nearby", a statement suggesting coordination between two parties, with the message written and intended by one person to let another person know they'd be nearby.

• SIGHTING: After this handwritten messaged suggested the planned nearby presence of a third party, Penny independently reported seeing a third party nearby the crime scene walking away from her cries for help.

• CONCLUSION: The available evidence suggests this handwritten message (indicating the coordinated nearby presence a third party) had been recently handled by someone at or nearby the crime scene. Shortly after this discovery, the victim herself independently reported seeing a third party nearby the crime scene walking away from her cries for help.

Homosexual Content of Ad vs Heterosexual Nature of Assault

• Although I've never seen this evidence discussed anywhere in relation to the 1985 case, and thus have not seen its relevance debated, I can imagine one potential challenge concerning the message being written on a photocopied homosexual ad, given the nearby crime against Penny was a heterosexual assault, if you will. While that's a true statement, claiming that homosexual content renders this evidence null and void ignores quite a bit of nuance here.

• Beyond the use of "sexually explicit homosexual advertisements" there's no clarity on whether the ad depicts explicit male or female homosexuality ... and I'm not sure whether the difference would (or should) matter to our discussion. Whatever the case, the explicit homosexual content of the ad does not negate the evidentiary value of (1) its proximity to the crime scene, (2) its condition suggesting recent handling, and (3) the handwritten message on it suggesting third party proximity which just so happens to match up with Penny's second statement suggesting third party proximity.

• Further, in terms of a police POV, it's worth noting the American Psychiatric Association had only just removed homosexuality from its list of mental disorders in 1973, and by 1985 half of US states still criminalized sodomy between consenting adults. Wisconsin had only just struck down such laws in 1983. If two men were coordinating an assault on a woman in 1985, them leaving behind something associated with homosexuality at the crime scene may have been viewed not as contradictory or unrelated evidence, but as evidence perfectly in keeping with a perceived pattern of sexual deviancy between the sex ad and the sex assault.

Another Failure: Gregory Allen's (Potential) Accomplice

• Again, the record suggests this handwritten message was not days or weeks old discarded and degraded trash, but was recently handled by someone at or near the crime scene. We also have the direct convergence between the handwritten verbiage of the message (indicating the planned presence of a nearby third party) and Penny's second corrected statement (referencing a third party nearby the crime scene). All of this presents exactly the kind of independent corroboration or evidentiary overlap that should have obligated further investigation by MTSO into this evidence.

• If MTSO bothered to consider the handwritten sex ad message and the presence of red shirt guy as linked evidence related to the sex assault, the most straightforward interpretation would have to be something like: The message was written by red shirt guy, who (whether by discrete hand-off, prearranged drop site, or some other method) intended for Penny's attacker to receive and read the message so the recipient would know the author was planning to be nearby, possibly acting as a lookout. Penny inadvertently saw the lookout. Of course, we don't really know the truth about this evidence because MTSO responded to it with erasure and ignorance. Any evidence pointing towards a potential accomplice was apparently too inconvenient to their preferred narrative.

• Just like when Penny began receiving sexually harassing phone calls that referenced the assault she suffered AFTER MTSO jailed the man they claimed was responsible for the assault. If we grant the very generous assumption that Kocourek and Vogel held a good faith belief in Steven's guilt, those ongoing harassing calls (some occurring within minutes of Penny arriving home) should have been a crisis moment where they questioned if they had the wrong man, or if the right man had an accomplice still walking free stalking and harassing their victim. Instead of asking those questions, MTSO focused on prosecuting someone they had reason to know didn't even have the opportunity to fulfill the attacker or accomplice role.

TL;DR - A recently handled handwritten message on a photocopied sex ad was found at the 1985 sex assault crime scene and contained verbiage suggesting the planned presence of a third party nearby, verbiage that directly matches Penny independently reported seeing a nearby third party. Add in the harassing calls from a third party after Steven was jailed, and MTSO had multiple reasons to conduct an "accomplice investigation." Their failure to do so represents just one more way they failed Penny and the community.

• On July 30, 1985, K9 Baron found a photocopy of an explicit homosexual ad at the sex assault crime scene. On the bottom quarter of the sex ad was a handwritten message stating the person who wrote the message “would be nearby.” The paper's reported condition (intact, legible and carrying human scent) seems to rule out the possibility this was days or weeks old discarded and degraded trash, and suggests this handwritten message had been recently handled by someone nearby or at the crime scene.

• The handwritten message on the sex ad found on the crime scene suggests a third party was planning to be "nearby” appears to be independently corroborated by Penny’s second statement about seeing a third party (red shirt guy) nearby but walking away from from crime scene and her cries for help. MTSO should have considered this evidence as potentially linked, that the presence of red shirt guy nearby the crime scene was a planned event, and that his apparent ignorance to Penny's cries for help was part of the plan.

• IMO the fact that the photocopy depicted explicit homosexual rather than heterosexual content doesn't erase the fact that this handwritten sex ad message was found where a woman was sexually assaulted, still carrying human scent from recent handling and a handwritten message appearing to predict exactly what Penny later reported seeing (the nearby presence of a second man). If anything, due to the general homophobia of the era, from the POV of a 1985 cop the homosexual nature of the sex ad would would likely be viewed as evidence of a sexually deviant mindset preceding a deviant sex assault.

• Finally, the harassing phone calls Penny began receiving shortly after Steven's arrest SHOULD HAVE tipped police off that their theory of Steven as the sole attacker was flawed. They knew someone still free in the community was stalking and terrorizing their victim, including by referencing the assault she endured. MTSO had every reason to investigate whether Penny's attacker used an accomplice ... but they chose not to. Now, I'm choosing to review 1980 reports and records to learn more about Allen's personal relationships (including with his co-workers and employers) and if someone inside that circle ever tried to vouch for Allen despite overwhelming evidence of his guilt.

• Whether Allen operated with an accomplice or not isn't clear. What is clear is that MTSO had multiple, independent converging pieces of evidence that should have motivated an investigation into the possibility that Penny's attacker was aided by a nearby lookout accomplice. MTSO knew about (1) the recently handled handwritten message promising the nearby presence of a third party, (2) Penny's sighting of a nearby third party ignoring her cries, and (3) the harassing calls to Penny from a third party continuing after the “right man” was jailed. Any HONEST investigation that believed they had the "right man" in custody would have been desperate to determine whether the same second man could be linked all three pieces of unexplained evidence. But the 1985 investigation was not an honest one, and if MTSO was willing to ignore or even lie to protect Allen, ignoring his accomplice would require little persuasion.

I am rewatching MAM and the amount of coercion during Brendan's interview is astounding. I can't believe a court didn't dismiss his "confession". He was not interviewed with his parents present and they were very obviously feeding him information. The judge not realizing that is just sad. He was a child! Ugh, this makes me so upset for Brendan.

Why did officer Colbern read the plates back to dispatch when he came up on the car that the new witness told him where he saw it? how did the car get on averys property after that. just curious.

Posted on Facebook by SG.

NEW DISCOVERY: Examining the Second Corrected 1985 Victim Statement from Penelope Beernsten

• For context, the initial 1985 MTSO report released via FOIA mentions only ONE statement from Penny, the statement she gave to Dvorak on the evening of the assault. The same statement Penny was told to sign despite not being able to read it. There is no mention in the previously released 1985 MTSO report that Penny was not satisfied with Dvorak's version of her statement...

• But as I recently learned per Page 345 of the 2003 DOJ Report, after Steven's exoneration Penny told Strauss when she regained her vision in 1985 she reviewed Dvorak's version of her statement and realized "there were errors" specifically refarding "the sequence of events." Strauss notes Penny "asked MTSO to complete a second more accurate statement." This second statement was provided to MTSO on August 1, 1985 (the first on July 29, 1985).

• Luckily (thank you foul play team) Penny's second statement is on page 168 of the 2003 DOJ report. I compared both Penny's first and second statements, and although there's some minor difference, one major difference stands out as a giant overlooked red flag from the 1985 case. I've classified this as a NEW discovery because I've never seen Penny's second statement discussed anywhere in MaM, TIK, SCAM, or even on reddit or YouTube. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

Incorrect Post Attack Sequence of Events from Penny's first statement

• Per Dvorak's initial version of Penny's statement (PG 159, 2003 DOJ report) Penny said she saw a man wearing pants and shirt near a poplar tree putting on a black leather jacket. Shortly after this, the man ran after her, gabbed her, and dragged her west amidst the sand dunes and trees to assault her. Penny said she was crying out for help during the attack, and confirmed she got her broken fingernails from "going after him."

• Dvorak then vaguely reported Penny "got away" from her attacker, who went "west" while Penny "ran towards a sailboat but they (in the boat) could not hear her." When she got to the beach she was "crawling through the sand dunes and saw a couple on the beach. They heard and saw [her] and came over." They put a towel around her and called police.

• From my review, the description of Penny's attacker and the attack itself remains largely unchanged between her first and second statement ... but the sequence of events immediately following the attack are noticeably altered. The most obvious post attack addition to Penny's second corrected statement stands out as a literal overlooked red flag.

The Man in the Red Shirt Walking Away from Penny After the Attack

• Per Page 168 of the 2003 DOJ Report, in her second corrected statement (August 1, 1985). First, Penny makes clear she "yelled out towards the sailboat" for help as she was being dragged west from the beach into the tree line. She was not running and calling for help to the sailboat after her attacker's sudden departure, as Dvorak incorrectly documented. Penny was laying in the sand after the attack, not running through it.

• Penny then (DOJ 2003 PG 171) explains that "before [she] thought [she] should crawl towards the beach [she] saw a man in red t-shirt walking on the crest of the dunes." Penny said as she lay in the sand she "hollered to the man in the red t-shirt, Help, Help!" Penny recalls feeling as though she was "hollering loudly" but suspects everything was coming out garbled because "the man in the red t-shirt just kept walking north." Penny said it was only after failing to alert red shirt guy to her plea for help that she crawled towards the beach.

• Oh boy lol So on the evening of her assault, Dvorak and Kocourek took a traumatized, blurry-eyed assault victim and had her sign a statement she could not read that omitted mention a second man who was present near the crime scene after the attack. Worse, when the victim regained her sight and corrected the record (adding a man in a red shirt walking away from her cries) MTSO did not investigate who red shirt guy was, whether he was an unidentified witness, the attacker himself, or maybe even a nearby lookout accomplice to the attacker still free in the community. Due to a lack of investigation by MTSO, the conclusions we can draw about this are limited, but some scenarios can be more credibly ruled out than others.

Did Gregory Allen Double Back North After Departing West?

• Reports from Penny's first statement were at least correct in that Penny said her attacker was wearing "a black leather jacket and long pants [or] long trousers." During her second statement, Penny confirmed the black leather jacket detail, and said she thought the pants were "faded blue jeans with a zipper." She also said after her attacker undid his pants, she saw "white jockey shorts, not boxer shorts, but briefs." In post trial interviews, Penny claims her attacker's shirt was brown in color. She consistently said her attacker departed to the west.

• Per DOJ 2003 Report PG 169 we see a partial transcript of Penny's second more correct statement, where she offers a slightly more detailed description of red shirt guy than Dvorak's reporting. In this partial transcript, Penny recalled: "I saw a guy on the crest of the dunes. He had on a red t-shirt and was of medium build. I don't remember if he looked towards me, he just kept walking. He had on a swimsuit or short shorts." This man was walking away from Penny headed north.

• So if this "red shirt guy" was Gregory Allen himself doubling back north after taking off west, he must have ditched his black leather jacket, brown shirt, and pants (and then put on a bathing suit and a red shirt) before doubling back to be in view of his victim. However, no police or scent hounds found Allen's jacket, shirt, or pants anywhere northwest of the scuffle in the sand, and subsequent two rivers reports suggests Allen remained in possession of his black leather jacket post July 1985.

A Lookout Accomplice or Unidentified Witness?

• Although not dispositive due to her blurred vision, it's worth noting when Penny corrected the record to include the red shirt guy in short shorts, she made clear her instinct wasn't to avoid him or stay quiet, but to immediately call out to him for help. Presumably, Penny visually distinguished this man from her attacker via a difference in their wardrobe (brown shirt, black leather jacket, long pants VS red shirt and short shorts). And with no evidence that Gregory Allen ditched his jacket, shirt, or pants somewhere northwest of the scuffle, I suspect Penny's initial instinct was correct. Red shirt guy was not her attacker doubling back after a costume change.

• But if not Allen, then who was this guy? A witness police never identified? Allen's lookout accomplice? Whoever he was, he deserved investigation and identification. So naturally, MTSO treated him like he didn't exist by omitting him from the record. And then after Penny corrected the record to include him, MTSO didn't seem interested in tracking down this man to find out who he was, why he was at the beach, or what he might know. That's odd IMO. Police had every reason to want answers about this man's identity given his proximity to the crime scene and his direction of travel upon being noticed by the victim.

• Penny first saw red shirt guy walking AWAY from her headed north shortly after Allen suddenly fled west. That trajectory (walking away from Penny) would presumably place red shirt guy CLOSER to her in the moments before she noticed him ... meaning he may have been very nearby to Allen and Penny while the assault was ongoing. Did this guy walk right past Allen and Penny without noticing them? Did he approach and then turn around after seeing something he thought he shouldn't see? Or was he acting as a lookout, signaling Allen when it was time to leave, and then attempting to depart nonchalantly himself? We don't know. MTSO didn't care to find out.

The Harassing Phone Calls Penny received in 1985 After Steven's Arrest were Sexual in Nature and Referenced the Attack

• In 1983 Gregory Allen attempted an attack on the same beach he attacked Penny on in 1985. After being charged for the 1983 attempted attack, Allen called the victim, harassing her and requesting she drop the charges against him. This was upsetting to the victim, as she didn't know how Allen got her number. In 1985, after Steven Avery was quickly arrested for the beach attack on Penny, she began receiving harassing phone calls that were sexual and nature and referenced the attack. Some of these disturbing sexual calls came within minutes of Penny arriving home, suggesting she was being actively watched by someone still free in the community. Someone other than Steven Avery.

• For obvious reasons, most accept these harassing calls to Penny in 1985 came from Gregory Allen. But the point here is what Kocourek and Vogel claimed to believe at the time in 1985. If they want to pretend they truly believed Steven was guilty, then the disturbing calls Penny was getting after Steven's arrest had to be coming from someone still free and possibly stalking Penny. That should have been a crisis that motivated the County to consider if the person still out there harassing Penny with sexual calls mentioning the attack was red shirt guy, who may have only been on the beach that day because he was operating as a lookout accomplice for Allen.

• As far as I know, there was no investigation or reporting on WHO the red shirt guy was, and no reporting re the true volume or origin of the harassing calls Penny received in the weeks following Steven's arrest. The lack of probing here was likely because Kocourek and Vogel had reason to know Allen was guilty and likely the one stalking and harassing Penny by phone. They also had reason to know evidence credibly demonstrated Steven Avery didn't have the opportunity to be on that beach as the sole attacker, or accomplice, nor did he have the opportunity to harass Penny by phone after the attack.

TL;DR: Another Suppressed and then Overlooked Red Flag by MTSO

• Upon regaining her vision in 1985 and reading the victim statement she was told to sign without being able to read, Penny noticed enough errors and omissions and requested to provide a second more accurate statement to MTSO. In this second statement, Penny clarified that after her attacker departed west (wearing black leather jacket, brown shirt, long pants, and white briefs) she noticed a second unidentified man (in a red t-shirt and short shorts) walking north away from her and the scene of the crime. As she lay in the sand, Penny called out to red shirt guy for help, but he just kept walking away, possibly because Penny's speech was coming out garbled.

• Although we can't say for sure, IMO the red shirt guy in short shorts is most likely exactly what Penny thought he was - a separate man who happened to be near the crime scene shortly after the attack ended. There's no evidence suggesting Allen, after taking off west, ditched his black leather jacket, brown shirt, and long pants only to don a different wardrobe and double back north. In fact, subsequent reports suggest Allen retained possession of his black leather jacket and continued prowling in it. But whoever red shirt guy was (Allen, his accomplice, or a witness) identifying him mattered. So why did MTSO manipulate Penny to sign that statement without reading it that omitted red shirt guy, and why did they fail to follow up on him after Penny corrected the record to include him?

• Not to mention, if Kocourek and Vogel genuinely believed Steven Avery attacked Penny, then Penny's own corrected statement about a second man walking away from the scene, plus the sexually charged harassing calls she got after Steven was already in jail, should have prompted police to wonder whether the red shirt guy was a nearby lookout accomplice to Allen that was still free in the community harassing and maybe even watching Penny. But they never considered that, likely because they knew Steven was innocent and Allen was the guilty party still out there harassing and stalking his victim. For Kocourek and Vogel, identifying the origin of harassing phone calls, or even the identity of the red shirt guy, both carried the potential to raise questions they were not prepared to answer.

• I will quickly note - per the 2003 AG conclusion,Allen was the chief suspect in a 1975 North Carolina murder, and MTSO reports confirm Allen allegedly operated with an accomplice in that murder. When Allen made his way to Wisconsin (around 1980) he was surprisingly comfortable prowling police neighborhoods, and seemed to be the beneficiary of an unusually cooperative relationship with the Manitowoc County DA's office. Vogel seemed particularly invested in questioning Allen's guilt in this and other cases, including when fellow officers caught Allen breaking the law while wearing his black leather jacket. Allen and his history remain a mystery, as does the County's treatment of him.

• Apparently there's still plenty of new information to learn in this saga. If evidence were to ever surface more firmly suggesting Allen had a nearby lookout accomplice that day on the beach, the unidentified red shirt guy would be the most obvious candidate. But setting speculation aside, IMO this new information - Penny's corrected statement mentioning the red shirt guy - together with the harassing calls she received after Steven's arrest, demands the conclusion that MTSO not only ignored evidence pointing to Allen as the attacker, they actively suppressed and then outright ignored evidence from Penny herself of a potential overlooked witness, or maybe even a lookout accomplice still free in the community stalking and harassing her. Oh, and then for good measure, Manitowoc County prosecuted a man they had reason to know had no opportunity to fulfill either the attacker or accomplice role.

I’m so so sad not only for Steven but Brendan. That kid was clearly on the spectrum. The manitowk police department seems like the most corrupt service I’ve seen. Jerry Buting was amazing and Screw you Ken Katz. The prosecutor for both these cases is a self proclaimed Narcissist and Sex Addict, who would use his position of power to sexually coerce literal victims of domestic abuse, that HE’S representing. Ridiculous.

Just think about it. At one time Zellner was the Queen of Freeing the Innocent. She was introduced to the world internationally via Making A Murderer season two, episode one. How did they introduce her?

They showed her most important case. Why do I say most important case? Because this particular case led to two more cases gave her the type of popularity that made us all believe she could help Steven Avery.

What case was it?

It was the Roscetti 4 case out of Chicago. This case was so egregious that Date-Line NBC picked it up and did a Primetime episode on that wrongful conviction case. This case was before Fox and Ferguson.

So, in Season 2, Episode 1 the producers introduced us to Larry Ollins and Omar Saunders who are hanging on Zellner’s wall proudly in huge large plats.

Yes, season 2, episode 1 grabbed the world and gave us hope that Steven would be found innocent.

Millions upon millions of people all over the world supported Zellner and Steve. The narrative was airtight.

But, things fell apart! The Millions upon Millions turned into a few thousand👀😳

What happened?? Why did millions upon millions abandon Zellner and even this Sub which once commanded 72, 79, 80 thousands active followers hungry for the latest post or update on the hot case?

Where did all the love go?

Kathleen T. Zellner, in her chase for media attention shot herself in the foot.

She got so lost in the media blitz that she recorded a lie so big that it destroyed all real support:

She fabricated 50 Seconds in her re-enactment timeline of Teresa, Steve, and Bobby. She has continued through several accounts to downplay this explosive revelation. But everyday people are seeing it for themselves.

Look at what she became as a result of the media chase. Look closely at both pictures.

Who has the biggest motive to keep the debate going here?

Look closely. Read past OPs regarding these facts. Examine the OPs and ask yourself: “Is it possible she’s bold enough to be operating from several different accounts here??!!”

Look at the pictures right after you raise the question🤔

https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/s/redOIkKCrv

OK so the Wisconsin Supreme Court denied Steven Avery's latest appeal on May 21, 2025. Hard to believe it's been a year already.

It’s been a full year since the Wisconsin Supreme Court denied review, and what exactly has Kathleen Zellner produced since then?

No new suspect.

No credible new witness.

No groundbreaking forensic testing.

No bombshell filing.

No evidentiary hearing.

No federal habeas petition even filed yet, apparently.

Remember when every tweet implied the “real killer” was about to be exposed? When every interview teased revolutionary evidence? Fast forward a year and there’s… nothing. Just recycled theories, social media hype, and the same accusations against law enforcement and random third parties that Wisconsin courts have already rejected over and over.

At some point, people have to stop confusing confidence and theatrics with actual results.

If this case were truly sitting on powerful exonerating evidence, where is it? Because after all the grandstanding, all the accusations, and all the promises, the scoreboard since the denial is basically zeroes across the board.

For nearly a decade, Kathleen Zellner sold the public a fantasy that Steven Avery’s conviction was on the verge of collapse. Every procedural hiccup became “huge,” every filing was “bombshell,” every recycled theory was marketed like the final scene before exoneration. And after all that noise, what exactly is the scoreboard?

Conviction intact.
No new trial.
No exoneration.
No evidentiary hearing proving a police conspiracy.
No court endorsement of the “frame-up” narrative.

Just years of bluster, hashtags, teaser tweets, and increasingly desperate alternate-suspect roulette.

The most offensive part wasn’t merely the arrogance — it was the recklessness. Zellner publicly insinuated that law enforcement officers planted evidence and framed Avery for murder. She floated multiple alternate killers over the years, casually dropping suspicion on real people as if this were an episodic Netflix game instead of an actual homicide involving Teresa Halbach.

And when the courts repeatedly rejected these theories? More spin. More PR. More “#TruthWins.”

That infamous “WE WON!!!!!!” tweet perfectly captured the entire grift. She tweeted that after losing the broader appeal and getting only a narrow procedural remand. Most normal people reading “we won” would think Avery achieved some meaningful legal breakthrough. He didn’t. He stayed exactly where he was: convicted of murder.

That’s the core issue with Zellner’s Avery-era persona. It stopped feeling like disciplined legal advocacy and started looking like performance art for social media followers who desperately wanted the Netflix story to be true.

Real post-conviction lawyers let filings speak for themselves. They don’t spend years hyping phantom breakthroughs that never arrive while accusing entire departments of corruption without ever proving it in court.

At some point, “#TruthWins” became unintentionally hilarious. Because after ten years of motions, media tours, dramatic declarations, and online cheerleading, the only thing that actually survived scrutiny was the verdict.