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

Discussion in 'Netflix Series: Making A Murderer' started by shadowraiths, Feb 18, 2016.

  1. shadowraiths

    shadowraiths LISK Liaison, Verified Forensic Psychology Special Moderator

    Messages:
    2,871
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    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.

    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.

    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".

    [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?
     
  2. Loading...


  3. MysticJynx

    MysticJynx Just Sayin'

    Messages:
    864
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    I think its a bunch of hearsay by inmates jealous they were still in prison and SA was exonerated. Cause you know No one in prison is guilty, laughs. at least I have heard that saying before. But I suppose I should look into the background of those prisoners and their crimes, Maybe those statements are statements they said to SA in prison.

    JMO
     
  4. missy1974

    missy1974 New Member

    Messages:
    4,069
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Do we have any information if they were given anything for their statements?

    I don't know what to think about any statements from his old buddies. Were they said? Are they made up? How were they questioned? Was it a BD type interrogation? (we'll give you the answers we want, you just need to agree) Who talked to these inmates? lots of questions.
     
  5. Sustained

    Sustained Justice for Travis

    Messages:
    1,613
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I view the inmates' statements as I do the interrogation statements from BD. All fiction ...
     
  6. hoshizora

    hoshizora New Member

    Messages:
    265
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I have done a bit of research on these inmates:

    Jesse Werlein: Attempted first degree murder of Gary Sol in 1985. The wife (Deborah Sol) was also convicted. Sol's defense claimed Werlein was infatuated with her and did the shooting on his own accord because he thought he was doing her a favour. It's also claimed he lived in a fantasy world and psychiatric testimony states he has "an anti-social personality disorder". I also read he was granted a new trial in 2012 but I haven't seen anything about the new trial. He was 22 years old at the time of his sentencing in 1985.

    Sources:
    https://news.google.com/newspapers?...AIBAJ&sjid=TioEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5972,2260115&hl=en
    http://law.justia.com/cases/wisconsin/court-of-appeals/1987/86-0470-cr-5.html

    Anthony Myers: The only person I can find is an Anthony Meyers. Convicted of first degree intentional homicide in 2009 of his mothers partner, Shon Potshaider. He had stabbed Potshaider and Potshaider later died in hospital. He is serving a 30 year sentence. He was 19 at the time. However since he was charged in 2009 I doubt it's him but I can't find an "Anthony Meyers" from WI. I found an Anthony Myers from FL but I don't think it's him either because he was sentenced in 2011

    Sources:
    http://www.wsaw.com/news/sunrise7/headlines/42953597.html
    http://fox11online.com/news/crime/appeal-denied-in-oshkosh-homicide-case

    ETA: I have found an Anthony Myers from SC who was convicted in 1998 of murder but since it's SC and not WI I don't know what to think.

    Daniel Ludke: The only thing I can find is an appeal from 2001 where it says he impersonated a police officer.

    Sources: https://www.wicourts.gov/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3010

    So make of it what you will, I really doubt Anthony Meyers is the right guy but I find it very interesting two of them have appealed their sentences and have been granted a retrial.
     
  7. galaxygal

    galaxygal New Member

    Messages:
    253
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Unreliable witnesses.
     
  8. Itsmevkb

    Itsmevkb New Member

    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I tend to believe there is some truth to their statements. Although I do think that prisoners will be inclined to say almost anything if they think it will benefit them, being seen as a prison snitch generally doesn't bode well for them. Most times when you have inmates ratting out other inmates, it's when those guys are in jail awaiting trials and sentencing and not after they've been in prison for years already convicted of their crimes. It's a lot easier to ask for a lighter sentence in your case if you agree to testify against your cellmate when you haven't yet been sentenced then asking that you be resentenced for a crime you committed many, many years ago.

    If an inmate claims his cellmate told him about a crime he committed that generally is allowed in as testimony in the trial. That's the defendant directly telling him something.

    I understand the logic that prison inmates do not make reliable witnesses and since Stephen Avery is also a prison inmate (three times over), I apply that same skepticism to anything he says as well. It's really hard to believe almost anyone in this whole mess.
     
  9. galaxygal

    galaxygal New Member

    Messages:
    253
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I just wonder if these guys had an axe to grind with Avery. What was the reason for their coming forward with this information?
     
  10. missy1974

    missy1974 New Member

    Messages:
    4,069
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I wonder more about what they would have gained from testifying. We might not ever know though, since they never did.
     
  11. Limaes

    Limaes New Member

    Messages:
    1,244
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Werlein won a new trial in 1987 and Luedke impersonated a peace officer, not a police officer for which he was sentenced for 5 years.

    Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
     
  12. LifeCitizen

    LifeCitizen New Member

    Messages:
    153
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I tend to disregard the inmates.
     
  13. oceanblueeyes

    oceanblueeyes Active Member

    Messages:
    22,145
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Isn't a peace officer and police officer the same thing?

    Luedke sure doesn't seem to be in for a violent crime so I don't know what incentive he would have to lie and all three saying practically the same thing doesn't makes sense they are all lying either, imo.

    I have always felt he premeditated this while in prison due to being convicted of a rape he didn't commit. Imo, he thought society owed him since he had already done time for it. So these three witnesses saying the same thing doesn't surprise me.

    Luedke was charged with two counts of impersonating a peace officer, as a felony, for allegedly making about ten telephone calls to various police departments, identifying himself as a law enforcement officer , and describing a situation where police help was required. Luedke entered a guilty plea and was sentenced to five years in prison on count one and a consecutive three-year term of probation on count two. Shortly thereafter, Luedke moved to withdraw his plea on the grounds that it was not knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered. The trial court denied the motion.
     
  14. Limaes

    Limaes New Member

    Messages:
    1,244
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hi OCB, I wouldn't have a clue if they're the same thing in the U.S. Where I live, only sworn Police Officers have powers of arrest. I was just going by what the judge says at this link. He says Police Officer and then corrects himself, so I am still none the wiser. Lol

    https://www.wicourts.gov/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3010

    Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
     
  15. hoshizora

    hoshizora New Member

    Messages:
    265
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thanks for clarifying about the retrial in 1987. Although I was more so going off the paragraph that oceanblueeyes is bringing up about impersonating LE.
     
  16. Sarah

    Sarah New Member

    Messages:
    194
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm pre-disposed to take any inmate statement with a HUGE pinch of salt, purely because they're really not reliable witnesses.

    The two important questions for me are:

    > Did these 3 men know one another, or did they encounter SA at different points in his incarceration? The statements would have more weight for me if they were truly independent of one another.
    and
    > Did they come forward of their own accord to volunteer that information or were they approached by somebody looking to dig some dirt on SA?

    My personal opinion, based on what we know :
    Guilty or innocent of TH's murder, there are enough suggestions of SA having a sexually domineering attitude to the opposite sex that it wouldn't seem out of character if he had been entertaining violent fantasies about women while he was in prison.
    So yes, those statements do have a ring of credibility about them to me. However, I'm also sure that lots of inmates foster various fantasies when they're inside (good and bad) that they never follow through on after their release . . . so even if true, I'm not sure how much they strengthen the case against him.

    A more speculative personal opinion :
    I don't believe that SA is disciplined, intelligent or organised enough to have specifically pre-planned TH's murder days or weeks in advance.
    I do believe that he's most likely guilty, however, I see it more as a more impulsive crime when he was presented with the opportunity to live out his fantasy in the belief that he could get away with it.
     
  17. missy1974

    missy1974 New Member

    Messages:
    4,069
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  18. oceanblueeyes

    oceanblueeyes Active Member

    Messages:
    22,145
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Since I have read and watched so many trials that did involve prison inmates testifying, I do believe these three inmates. And surprisingly when jailhouse or prison snitches testify they are believed more often than not. It goes along with what I have always thought the motive was for the murder of Theresa. I had this same belief about his motive when the trial was ongoing.

    Imo, before he even landed in prison on the rape charge I believe he had a deep seeded hatred toward women in general. He was abusive/violent and seem to target women specifically when he raged. So as he sat in prison on a rape he didn't do he thought about the revenge he would seek if he ever got out.

    I believe he has long been a twisted sexual deviant. Even before he landed in prison for the rape he was sadistically cruel to animals. I believe he was already a psychopath and prison life made it more pronounced. I also believe there is a much deeper story Brendan is too embarrassed to ever tell when it comes to the sexual things Avery did to him. Brendan reminds me of someone who was being abused(emotionally, physically, and sexually) at the time Theresa was murdered. I think he was very fearful of his abuser (Avery) who dominated and control him. Avery seem to target those he thought were weaker than him whether it was a defenseless animal, a woman, or a young teen who he knew could be easily intimidated. Psychopaths don't just want to get even. They want to do something so horrific that it makes them feel they are way ahead.

    The three who claims he had planned this all out just makes the most sense to me. He truly believed in his cold hearted evil way that society owed him one rape since he had already served many years for it. Once he had Theresa caught in his snare I believe he put her through pure hell before she finally died. She had to pay for the woman who had mistakenly thought he was her rapist and for all the other women he hated.

    I think he premeditated and fantasized about the murder he would carryout all through the years he was in prison and from the time he was released he began looking for the most vulnerable woman to murder. One he could lure to his place under false pretenses where he had total control and domination over her.

    Sadly, that became Theresa when she started coming alone to the junkyard to take photos. It was the perfect victim and the perfect setup. He had her exactly where he wanted her....on his own turf, and of course he knew there he would be able to carry out his plans by torturing, raping, murdering her, and then burning her body up just like he told the inmates he wanted to do.

    Imo, he really thought he had become 10 feet tall and bullet proof since he had been exonerated. He thought that LE would be too fearful to ever arrest him for anything again. Thank goodness, he was wrong.

    I wish they had allowed the inmates to testify since it goes to his motive but I can understand why the Judge would think it would be too prejudicial.

    I absolutely believe if he had gotten away with Theresa's murder there would have been many more victims after her.

    IMO
     
  19. missy1974

    missy1974 New Member

    Messages:
    4,069
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't know what studies show or if there is any research that shows anything, but I would like more knowledge about someone who is physically violent with loved ones (wife, gf, cousin) and the likelihood of that person then becoming violent with a random, not loved one. I'm not sure I'm wording that right, and I backspaced many times LOL

    As for the inmates... I don't know enough about what they were going to get in return for any testimony (if anything), and because they never testified, we may never know.

    I do have to say something though.... I read the Kratz documents that can be found in the Prosecutor Ken Kratz thread late last night, and then when I read some of these documents today, I don't know.... but there are some similarities, and it bothers me. (Kratz talks about having a "room" in his house.... he likes his woman submissive, s&m :scared: )
     
  20. Limaes

    Limaes New Member

    Messages:
    1,244
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thank you for taking the time to post your thoughts. I agree 100%.

    I rarely comment on Brendan but he was really hung out to dry by SA and his defense team and, sadly, his own family.

    If PS hadn't found the Rav 4, he would have been free to keep killing and I fear that he would not have let the only witness live to tell. A sad case in many ways.
     
  21. oceanblueeyes

    oceanblueeyes Active Member

    Messages:
    22,145
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I don't have the links right now but it is pretty commonly known for serial killers to be abusive to family members while growing up or even in adulthood and many of them have a love/hate relationship with their own mother. However; they tend to not murder family members but instead murder victims... which may be someone they know casually or don't know at all who are complete strangers. Many times they kill victims who reminds them of the woman/women in their life they hate.

    There are many cases though where a defendant was abusive to family members and went on to murder someone they didn't know or didn't know well.

    As far a Kratz, his personal life is just a side issue for me, and I don't think it has any relevancy to the Avery trial. I don't have to like him and don't but I don't think he had anything to do with the murder of TH nor did he frame Avery. IMO

    IMO
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice