Inmate statements regarding Steven Avery's alleged plans: How important are they?

[TheDuchess]

The statements of the inmates, in the Kratz' motion to allow them as witnesses, while barring defenses motion to raise SA's wrongful conviction, was not put forth at trial.

So, this is more of a speculation thread, than anything else.

Importantly, this information was announced to the media. Though, as it turns out, the prosecution had three, not one, inmates who claimed SA planned to "abduct, rape, torture, and kill" women when he was released. Per the aforementioned document:

1. Jesse Werlein -- statements that the defendant had drawn up plans for a "torlure chamber", indicating his intent, upon being released from prison, to abduct, rape, torlure, and kili young women. Mr. Werlein provides details as to the defendant's drawings and statements.
I'd like to see the proof. The drawings that SA created. I'd also like to know when this was revealed. Was it reported to any of the correction officers at the time of the conversation? Or just when the story went so public? I'd like to know what was promised to the inmate for their testimony. I'd like to know if there is any information that was gathered that could be proven and was not already a part of the public record. I'd like to know what his crimes were. Until then, I have an extremely difficult time believing an inmates story, which is likely why it was rightfully left out of the trial.
2. Anthony Myers -- discussed r,vith Steven Avery "bondage" and tying women up, including the defendant produced diagrams of horv to bind women, demonstrating dominance and anger tor,vards women.
Same questions as above. Is there any record of these things at the time they occurred or just when the Halbach case came to light and after SA's previous exoneration. I can't imagine how angry his fellow inmates just have been when he was able to waltz out of that prison.
3. Danial Luedke -- who engaged in conversations with the defendant and received information from Avery including, "the way to get rid of a body was to burn them".​

Again, same as before. Did these inmates report any of this at the time, and if not, why not? Otherwise, simply prison talk or quite reasonably an outright lie.
[emphasis added, mine]

That said, I admittedly have mixed feelings regarding inmate statements, simply bc they have motive to tell fibs (e.g, shorter sentence, parole, etc). Even if their statements were true, I cannot see how such wouldn't fall under hearsay. That I know, last utterances and/or excited utterances, are the only exclusions to the hearsay laws.

Someone who is an attorney (I am not), is more than welcome to correct/clarify.

Ignoring the hearsay, etcetera, if their statements were true, does such play a role wrt people's belief that SA innocent? Why or why not?

All of this testimony was left out of the trial because it was all speculation, without proof, that wasn't revealed at the time and the motives of the inmates is at serious question. It was rightfully left out of the trial.

 

[missy1974]

All of this testimony was left out of the trial because it was all speculation, without proof, that wasn't revealed at the time and the motives of the inmates is at serious question. It was rightfully left out of the trial.

I'm assuming the red in the quote is your thoughts? lol

according to the defense memo.... no, they did not come forward until it was a national story..... and no, no drawings were ever produced/collected.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-c...mo-Opposing-Admission-of-Prisoners-Claims.pdf

Page 2 of the memo:
None of the inmates offer corroboration of their statements. Werlein and Myers evidently have not produced the alleged diagrams. None of the inmates reported these claims until after massive publicity about the state's murder charge against Avery.

 

[Madeleine74]

If one doesn't know Avery then how can one know what *he* would use to tie up or subdue a victim? Allegedly he drew one or more pictures of his plans for a torture chamber and talked about it to at least 1 if not more inmates...that would be a good place to look to see what SA might be thinking of using.

 

[missy1974]

http://static1.squarespace.com/stat...09db6aa60f917b1323f/1458073760109/werlein.pdf

uh huh, this guy sounds reliable LOL

This is the statement from Werlein, one of the inmates.... the one that talks about the torture chamber.

I didn't realize that he didn't come forward until December 2005.... or maybe I did, hmmm can't remember everything LOL

Also.... pretty sure this is the same guy.
http://law.justia.com/cases/wisconsin/court-of-appeals/1987/86-0470-cr-5.html

ETA: :giggle: "smurf" or "troll"

 

[Hippiemomof5]

If one doesn't know Avery then how can one know what *he* would use to tie up or subdue a victim? Allegedly he drew one or more pictures of his plans for a torture chamber and talked about it to at least 1 if not more inmates...that would be a good place to look to see what SA might be thinking of using.

Has anyone other than kratz made this claim!? I'm still waiting for proof of the disgusting tale of rape and throat slitting, he makes it hard to believe much of what he says. He's vile.

 

[missy1974]

Here is the inmate's statements.... courtesy of a poster on reddit who did a FOIA request....

http://static1.squarespace.com/stat...09db6aa60f917b1323f/1458073760109/werlein.pdf

I just posted this under the inmates claims thread.

 

[Hippiemomof5]

Here is the inmate's statements.... courtesy of a poster on reddit who did a FOIA request....

http://static1.squarespace.com/stat...09db6aa60f917b1323f/1458073760109/werlein.pdf

I just posted this under the inmates claims thread.

I apologize. I have read this. Theres so much I could say but I'll keep it simple. I still see no proof any of this actually happened. This statement is dated December of 2005. What prompted this? I find inmate statements kind of ridiculous. There's too much at play to even consider believing it as truth without any proof.

 

[missy1974]

I apologize. I have read this. Theres so much I could say but I'll keep it simple. I still see no proof any of this actually happened. This statement is dated December of 2005. What prompted this? I find inmate statements kind of ridiculous. There's too much at play to even consider believing it as truth without any proof.

in the other thread, I also shared a link to the inmates appeal..... IMO he has some mental issues, and I wouldn't take anything he said seriously... the fact that Kratz even mentions this guys story is laughable.

 

[Hippiemomof5]

in the other thread, I also shared a link to the inmates appeal..... IMO he has some mental issues, and I wouldn't take anything he said seriously... the fact that Kratz even mentions this guys story is laughable.

I read more over at Reddit too and I'm really surprised KK even mentioned it given all the other information. Ok, not THAT surprised given how I really feel about KK, but still, a little surprised. :gaah:

 

[Jaiddie]

http://static1.squarespace.com/stat...09db6aa60f917b1323f/1458073760109/werlein.pdf

The two surprising facts that stood out for me was that SA was into D&D, and that, somehow, he was able to gain enough respect from the black community (in a prison setting, no less) that they called him by his given name, while everyone else called him "Smurf" or "Troll".

I have also seen speculations in other places that the "torture chamber" could be the fish farm plans that he was working with his father on when he got out after his exoneration.

Also the fact that Avery was also into Satan worship, apparently, lol.

Edit to include more information.

 

[Madeleine74]

The interesting thing is this inmate who made these statements did not ask for a 'deal' or lessening of his sentence; he just told what he knew and it was then up to investigators to follow it up (or not). That's one thing I noticed right away. Inmates do disclose things to each other while in prison -- it can be a valuable source of information not otherwise known.

There's too much at play to even consider believing it as truth without any proof.

And yet this same standard of 'proof' is not being demanded of the "police planted evidence" claims. Where's the proof of that?

In a local case in my town a guy was on trial for murder. His defense said he wasn't really part of the actual murder itself and he wasn't even in the apartment when it occurred. There was no physical evidence linking him. Well, this murderer told 2 different inmates at the jail (inmates who didn't know each other) that he hit the woman first after she started screaming. One of the inmates came into court, testified, and the jury believed him. How rare would it be for two different inmates, who never met each other, to learn the same facts of the case from the defendant -- facts that no one knew, not even the police?

 

[missy1974]

The interesting thing is this inmate who made these statements did not ask for a 'deal' or lessening of his sentence; he just told what he knew and it was then up to investigators to follow it up (or not).

not sure why this is being discussed in this thread, however; how do you know this?

And yet this same standard of 'proof' is not being demanded of the "police planted evidence" claims. Where's the proof of that?

Just like any crime..... even if it can't be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, doesn't mean it didn't happen. The key, the bones being moved, the blood, the Rav4, etc.... there are questions, and there has been questions since the trial, these are not new.

Yeah, yeah, 12 people decided that it was not relevant and they found SA guilty.... it doesn't mean they got it right either. Because we know that a group of 12 people that we call a jury CAN be wrong too.

 

[Sarah]

I wonder whether Shadowraiths could move this over to the 'inmates' statements' thread?
I'm going to reply here anyway though, since this is where the posts are at the moment.

not sure why this is being discussed in this thread, however; how do you know this?

Seems like Werlein made this statement after his release - or at least it's implied since he "came into the Eau Claire police department" to offer his story.
Of course, we have no idea from that document what his motivation to come forward actually was, but I think it's fair to say that there was nothing in it for him in terms of a deal.

How rare would it be for two different inmates, who never met each other, to learn the same facts of the case from the defendant -- facts that no one knew, not even the police?

Knowing whether these inmates were acquaintances or came up with their stories independently of one another was actually one of my criteria for deciding how much weight to place on their version of events.
So it appears that Werlein and Meyers knew one another in prison at the time that SA was allegedly making those plans, but it would be interesting to know whether they'd continued to have any contact up to 2005 when their statements were made.