A few things, First, I get that Avery was calling about selling Barb's car but that still doesn't makes sense to me as to why he gave her name. If you called would you tell them YOUR name was B Janda? Wouldn't you say oh, I'm Steven but I need pictures of a car for my sister Barb? Or, just give your name since what difference does it make who the car belongs to? Not to mention, who gives an initial? It seems to me like he said "B Janda" because he clearly couldn't say Barb because that is not a male name and he didn't want to give them his name. Second, tons of people who get interviewed by the police are read their miranda rights and either don't fully understand them or just decide it's in their best interest to go ahead and talk to the police and most times without an attorney. Are we suggesting that it shouldn't be enough to inform people of their rights but instead also give them some sort of test to make sure they completely understand? Let's face it, what that would really mean is everyone gets an attorney every time they are questioned and then we'd have to get into everyone needing a really good attorney as that can really make a difference as well. Third, I agree that there are problems with the interviews and major problems with Brendan's confession, but at the same time some of the things being pointed out are traditional police tactics and it's not like they are happening for the first time with Brendan. Telling a suspect that if they confess they will get a deal (even though the police don't have the authority to make deals) is nothing new. Heck, telling suspects you have DNA linking them to the crime even when they don't happens. In reading some of the overall reaction to the interviews (not as much here as elsewhere online) makes me wonder if people think police should sit down with suspects and just ask "what happened" and never ask any other questions for fear of being accused of asking leading questions. Fourth, I agree with the post that said that in the same way Brendan is highly suggestible to what the police what him to say, he was also probably as suggestible to doing what his uncle wanted him to do and say or not say. I have no doubt Brendan was afraid of first not complying with what Steven wanted him to do and then afraid to say anything for fear of what Steven might do if he found out. The idea that even a really bright 16 year-old would stand up to his uncle or any other related/trusted adult in a very frightening situation just seems outside the norm to me. Perhaps Brendan's 2254 petition will be at least partially successful and he'll get a new trial or some other relief. I think that might be the best scenario here as I think his case is a much bigger issue than Steven's. Even if you 100% don't believe anything Brendan says that doesn't make Steven innocent.