Brendan Dassey and False Confessions

New Posts

BigCityAccountant said:
OH MY~~~

[h=1]“They lied about it:” Prison wardens told ‘fish tale’ to law enforcement[/h]"If you've got a leader that lies, you're not gonna follow 'em. You can't trust 'em," West said.
wardens.jpeg
Michael Dittman (left), Warden at Columbia Correctional Institution. Steven Schueler (right), Deputy Warden and Green Bay Correctional Institution.

He's talking about Michael Dittmann, the warden at Columbia Correctional Institution in Portage, and Steven Schueler, deputy warden in Green Bay.

Dittmann and Schueler -- both senior managers of state correctional institutions -- tried to hide the

truth from the DNR. According to narratives detailing the law enforcement encounter, when agents asked how many fish they'd caught that day, both Dittmann and Schueler answered "eleven."
The DNR already knew that the men had been out fishing twice that day, an illegal practice known as 'double-tripping.' But, according to the case file, Dittmann "denied going fishing" in the morning and Schueler said they only caught "seven walleye" in the morning.
In fact, the men had caught their full, 18-fish limit before lunch. Then went back out, on purpose, and hooked 11 more. In Ohio, that's a fourth-degree misdemeanor and a mandatory court appearance.

"All they're doin' is covering their own people," West said.

http://fox6now.com/2017/09/14/they-lied-about-it-prison-wardens-told-fish-tale-to-law-enforcement/
Click to expand...

IMO most Govt. departments are breeding grounds for corruption & lies. The prison/judicial system falls into that category as well.
And i'm sure KZ is well aware of a lot of corruption too in the cases she handles.
It all needs a huge overhaul, and i think people these days are more aware of it through things like MAM.
 
With BD's confession i think apart from the fact he had intellectual learning difficulties, are teenage interrogations often times treated the same as adult interrogations via the Reid method?
Seeing as a teenager's brain at age 16yrs. is not fully developed yet, there has to be a different way of interrogating them all things considered, especially in someone like BD because as far as learning he had that disability on top of "teen brain", IMO.
(quote)
Jensen says scientists used to think human brain development was pretty complete by age 10. Or as she puts it, that "a teenage brain is just an adult brain with fewer miles on it."

But it's not. To begin with, she says, a crucial part of the brain — the frontal lobes — are not fully connected. Really.

"It's the part of the brain that says: 'Is this a good idea? What is the consequence of this action?' " Jensen says. "It's not that they don't have a frontal lobe. And they can use it. But they're going to access it more slowly."

That's because the nerve cells that connect teenagers' frontal lobes with the rest of their brains are sluggish. Teenagers don't have as much of the fatty coating called myelin, or "white matter," that adults have in this area.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124119468
 
The detectives completely undermined the credibility of the "confession" by conducting it in the manner that they did. If he were truly guilty, he could have told a detailed account of what supposedly happened on his own, rather than being asked specific questions and responding with two-word answers.
 
So it seems like BJ is speaking up on what happened at Fox Hills Resort.

Some snips from the article....

[FONT=&amp]Although it is believed that Brendan Dassey was interrogated at a Wisconsin hotel before his arrest, his mother says those reports are not accurate.

Barb Tadych (Barb Janda in [/FONT]Making a Murderer[FONT=&amp]) says she vividly remembers February 27, 2006. It was the day police took her son out of school and questioned him before bringing her, Brendan and her other son, Blaine, to the Fox Hills Resort, in the town of Mishicot, where she says she was threatened.

[/FONT][FONT=&amp]“Mark Wiegert paid for [the room] with his credit card,” Barb said. “And he told me if I left, they would pick me up and put me in jail.”
Wiegert hasn’t commented on whether he threatened to arrest Barb that night.

Wiegert testified at trial that night Brendan told him about the bleach stains on the pants. [/FONT][FONT=&amp]There’s one problem with Weigert’s account of what occurred at the resort, Barb says. It never happened.

[/FONT][FONT=&amp]“There was not any interrogation at Fox Hills like they said that there was,” Barb said. “They put us there so no one could talk to us. And they had a cop watching us so we wouldn’t leave. There was no meeting at the hotel.”

[/FONT][FONT=&amp]Refresh my memory here....

Did BD tell them about the pants on the way to Fox Hills according to the Calumet County documents released?

[/FONT][FONT=&amp]The investigators conducted the second interview at the Two Rivers Police Department.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]“I told them I wanted to go in with Brendan and they told me, ‘No,’ to go have a seat, that it should only take about an hour,” Barb said.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]She recounts a similar exchange ahead of the March 1 interrogation.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]“They said I declined to come in, but that was not the truth,” she said. “They told me ‘No,’ because Brendan was going to tell them a ‘gruesome story.'”[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Dassey was read his Miranda rights on his way to the March 1 interview, and reminded of those rights by Wiegert before questioning began, indicating he was a suspect, not a witness by then.

[/FONT]So refresh my memory....
Didn't Dittman say he wasn't a suspect, he was a witness? Then why did they read him his Miranda rights?

https://www.**************/4507648/...alks-about-what-happened-at-fox-hills-resort/
 
Just had a thought about why LE wanted BJ and her children to go to Fox Hills Resort. Could LE have had the room bugged, to glean more information from BD as he talked to BJ about the case?
 
After listening to the en banc hearing i was just thinking about all that was said and about parts of the crime BD confessed to. What bothers me about it though is why would BD make a false confession about not only himself, but also implicate his uncle in the crime? Don't people that make false confessions only usually implicate themselves in the crime? Why would he put uncle Steven in the frame if they are both innocent, knowing what a travesty of justice SA received in the previous wrongful conviction? It just doesn't compute for me.
 
Karinna said:
After listening to the en banc hearing i was just thinking about all that was said and about parts of the crime BD confessed to. What bothers me about it though is why would BD make a false confession about not only himself, but also implicate his uncle in the crime? Don't people that make false confessions only usually implicate themselves in the crime? Why would he put uncle Steven in the frame if they are both innocent, knowing what a travesty of justice SA received in the previous wrongful conviction? It just doesn't compute for me.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's the case at all. There are other cases where someone implicates someone else along with themselves, and it's later found to be untrue. Ryan Ferguson's case would be one such case.

There is a case in the series "Confession Tapes" on Netflix, 2 friends confess, possibly falsely (in a sting operation type of thing, not a police interrogation). I think there are other cases as well that I remember, but don't recall the specifics or who they are lol

With BD... SA was already in jail and charged with the murder... F&W kept saying they "knew" what SA did, etc. They kept saying they knew he helped, just tell them, and it will be "okay", etc.

jmo
 
It seems to me police were after evidence to use against Steven.

But the only way Brendan could help them with this would have been to have been a witness/participant in the alleged crimes.

Looking at the first (recorded) interrogation of Brendan it becomes obvious that they weren't interested in what he saw, but interested in what they wished he saw.

ETA: given the outrageous methods used on brendan as a witness, I suspect the other statements by other witnesses might also be dirty.
 
Karinna said:
After listening to the en banc hearing i was just thinking about all that was said and about parts of the crime BD confessed to. What bothers me about it though is why would BD make a false confession about not only himself, but also implicate his uncle in the crime? Don't people that make false confessions only usually implicate themselves in the crime? Why would he put uncle Steven in the frame if they are both innocent, knowing what a travesty of justice SA received in the previous wrongful conviction? It just doesn't compute for me.
Click to expand...


I would be willing to bet, that if they tried to get Brendan to confess to the crime all by himself, he would have done that. He would've confessed to faking the moon landing with Stanley Kubrick if they pushed that on him long enough. Brendan may have well believed Steven was guilty. Or maybe he didn't think the police would lie (full grown adults get furious if you say that the police lie). Or maybe he is just really easily confused and wanted to get out of the pressure they were putting on him and the easiest way to do that as far as he knew was to just give the police what they wanted.

You find that with victims of all sorts of crimes. Don't fight. Don't scream. Follow orders, get this over with as fast and with as little violence as possible. This is no different. Brendan was doing his best to hand over his wallet so he could get on with his day, just with his luck, he ran into criminals that wanted more than his wallet, they were determined to take his life from him.
 
Saul Vesalot said:
I would be willing to bet, that if they tried to get Brendan to confess to the crime all by himself, he would have done that. He would've confessed to faking the moon landing with Stanley Kubrick if they pushed that on him long enough. Brendan may have well believed Steven was guilty. Or maybe he didn't think the police would lie (full grown adults get furious if you say that the police lie). Or maybe he is just really easily confused and wanted to get out of the pressure they were putting on him and the easiest way to do that as far as he knew was to just give the police what they wanted.

You find that with victims of all sorts of crimes. Don't fight. Don't scream. Follow orders, get this over with as fast and with as little violence as possible. This is no different. Brendan was doing his best to hand over his wallet so he could get on with his day, just with his luck, he ran into criminals that wanted more than his wallet, they were determined to take his life from him.
Click to expand...

LOL at the analogies, not funny i know but yes agree, like Brendan said to his mom they got to his head or words to that effect. And good point that he could of believed that SA did do something. Poor Brendan, and i think we can't stress enough to minors that if they are ever in such a situation to exercise their constitutional right to remain silent. It's not like Brendan was even hauled in as a suspect initially, but just for questioning by LE, and i don't think they can hold you for longer than about 72 hours in a PD without arresting and charging, so maybe they need to teach kids this stuff in high school and we would see less of this type of thing happening. At the very least it should be law that a minor has to have a child advocate or lawyer present when being questioned/interrogated by LE. They could call it Brendan's Law.
 
Saul Vesalot said:
I would be willing to bet, that if they tried to get Brendan to confess to the crime all by himself, he would have done that. He would've confessed to faking the moon landing with Stanley Kubrick if they pushed that on him long enough. Brendan may have well believed Steven was guilty. Or maybe he didn't think the police would lie (full grown adults get furious if you say that the police lie). Or maybe he is just really easily confused and wanted to get out of the pressure they were putting on him and the easiest way to do that as far as he knew was to just give the police what they wanted.

You find that with victims of all sorts of crimes. Don't fight. Don't scream. Follow orders, get this over with as fast and with as little violence as possible. This is no different. Brendan was doing his best to hand over his wallet so he could get on with his day, just with his luck, he ran into criminals that wanted more than his wallet, they were determined to take his life from him.
Click to expand...
Glad to see you posting again, my friend[emoji6]

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk
 
. How in the very least did BD not have a Social Worker. It's clear this family was in need of services. In the very least the school social worker should have been present knowing his current functioning. Makes me sick.
 
Ellie9 said:
I am not sure about Steven, but I feel fairly confident that Brendan falsely confessed. For example, when asked what happened to 'her head' Brendan literally starts guessing things. "He cut her hair?" he asked. You'd think someone would remember a gunshot to the head. It came off sounding more like a student at school repeatedly trying to guess the answers to questions on an essay exam he never studied for.

However, other people noted that he started saying very graphic things about rape. I'm not sure what to think on this. Sixteen is old enough to be familiar with a lot of locker room chatter, and guys this age can be very explicit with each other when talking about girls.
SNIP

JMO.
Click to expand...

KZ has brought to light the "new" (old) evidence about the Janda/Dassey computer contents (I think SA's 2006 defense was in the fight of their legal careers and only got this report a week before the trial, and didn't have time to investigate).
It is very likely BD was exposed to scene's of graphic violent assault of women, I would bet introduced to him by BoD. BoD being the oldest brother, could have even abused BD in many ways, physically or taunting is even common among siblings.

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profil...ey-accuses-family-of-lying-deleting-evidence/

Zellner argues:

“Barb’s vehement denial that her computer had access to the internet at the time of Ms. Halbach’s disappearance is probative because it is unequivocally false. As cited in Mr. Avery’s motion for reconsideration, a forensic examination of Barb’s computer . . . shows that the computer was used to access violent images of young deceased females, rape, torture, incest, and pedophilia on the internet at times when only Bobby was home.”


Therefore, I think it is likely BD was answering the questions from graphic video(s) he had been shown or viewed in his own home in the several interogations.

Edit: I also believe BD is a person who naturally protects others, so he was trying to protect BoD, even at the risk of his own freedom and obscuring the truth. Another possibility is that he had been threatened by Bod into providing an alibi.
 
Karinna said:
After listening to the en banc hearing i was just thinking about all that was said and about parts of the crime BD confessed to. What bothers me about it though is why would BD make a false confession about not only himself, but also implicate his uncle in the crime? Don't people that make false confessions only usually implicate themselves in the crime? Why would he put uncle Steven in the frame if they are both innocent, knowing what a travesty of justice SA received in the previous wrongful conviction? It just doesn't compute for me.
Click to expand...

You ask a valid question why BD would implicate SA.

A possible answer is because BD knew SA was in custody for TH's murder, all the damning evidence was found back in early November, and his mom, BoD, and ST were likely saying SA was guilty to him, plus LE and media was blasting guilt. This was 4 months in, and BD likely believes SA is guilty by March 1st 2006.

However, rewind to BD's Nov 6 roadside police cruiser interrogation, and BD is very protective of SA in his response to questions, I feel because at that time he believes SA is innocent and that the RAV4 was planted by police (actually someone else). The key hadn't been found yet and the bones hadn't been found yet.

Edit: @missy1974 already posted this same answer a few posts up, I've implicated myself in not reading the whole thread
missy1974 said:
I don't think that's the case at all. There are other cases where someone implicates someone else along with themselves, and it's later found to be untrue. Ryan Ferguson's case would be one such case.

There is a case in the series "Confession Tapes" on Netflix, 2 friends confess, possibly falsely (in a sting operation type of thing, not a police interrogation). I think there are other cases as well that I remember, but don't recall the specifics or who they are lol

With BD... SA was already in jail and charged with the murder... F&W kept saying they "knew" what SA did, etc. They kept saying they knew he helped, just tell them, and it will be "okay", etc.

jmo
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I think the November 6 interrogation is the closest we'll get to what BD knew.

He thinks TH is still alive, so it's pretty clear he has no idea what happened to her.
 
It occurs to me that one of the reasons the police abusing their position of authority to 'persuade' Brendan to lie is that it is exactly analogous to the way others abuse their authority to overawe people (especially children and vulnerable people) into doing things they shouldn't do.

Pedophiles grooming children for sexual exploitation is one such situation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 141 more.
Total: 4,016 (members: 142, guests: 3,874)

Online statistics

Members online
142
Guests online
3,874
Total visitors
4,016
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,532
Messages
17,954,061
Members
228,522
Latest member
Cabinsleuth
Back
Top