The fiance of Steven Avery, Jodi Stachowski, testified for the State during the trial of Brendan Dassey. One purpose of her testimony was to was to state that two telephone calls were made to Avery from the Manitowoc County Jail on 31 October, 2005.

She testified that she made two telephone calls to Steven Avery on 31 October, 2005. The calls were recorded at the Manitowoc County Jail. Court records from the Avery trial contain a stipulation that “On 10-31-05, Steven Avery spoke twice to his girlfriend, Jodi Stachowski on his cordless land line and each conversation was approximately 15 minutes. The first starting at 5:36 p.m. and the second starting at 8:57 p.m.” This was accepted by the State as factual. Stachowski said she called about 5:30 and 9:30. The defense missed an opportunity by not asking Stachowski if she heard screams or calls from a female during the first call.

The lead investigators at the Dassey trial claimed that Dassey verified that Stachowski called Avery twice in the day of the crime and that proved his confession. There was the sin of omission here since Dassey also said she didn’t call, or she called once, or two or three times. The time line that Dassey often gave was in direct conflict with the number and the times of calls.

Wisconsin Assistant Attorney General Tom Fallon gave the State’s closing rebuttal and changed the entire theory of the crime (disparaging a defense witness in the process) which made it impossible for Dassey to be present during both telephone calls. His argument was that Dassey first went to Avery’s home, then went home and talked with his mother and ate before returning to Avery’s home sometime after 6:00 P.M.

Thus, the lead investigators would have perjured themselves at trial since the first telephone call is documented as occurring this time. And, other testimony at the trial made it clear that Dassey was home during the time of the earlier call.

The other purpose of her testimony was to show that Avery and Dassey rearranged the Avery bedroom after the murder of Teresa Halbach. Stachowski recollected that the bedroom arrangement she recalled was different from a simulation. A photograph of the bedroom would have better.

There was no bedroom evidence to show the validity of the portion of the particular confession that was shown at the trial. No blood, no sweat, or DNA that placed Teresa Halbach there. But, Special Prosecutor Ken Kratz had given his televised diatribe on 2 March 2006 that recounted that version of the crime. He was locked in or risked losing face.

Presumably this furniture relocation was to use an inexpensive shampoo vacuum to completely obliterate all traces of Halbach in the Avery home. By the prosecution theory of the crime, there would be considerable blood in the Avery home and on a mattress (not to mention the clothing of Avery and Dassey).

With all the bodily fluids that would have been present with the State’s version of events used for most of Dassey’s trial, it would have taken a great deal more than an inexpensive rug shampooer to clean the hallway, bedroom, bed, and mattress.

At some point the interrogators of Brendan Dassey, Mark Wiegert of Calumet County and Tom Fassbender from the Wisconsin Department of Justice, noticed that some locations in the Dassey confessions did not match the documented layout of the Avery bedroom, although given the competence of the investigation team, it is questionable if their layout was correct.

In his fourth interrogation at the Sheboygan County Sheriff’s Department, Dassey mentioned that the bedroom layout was different when his interrogators challenged his account of some of the locations. This session could not be used at his trial since the fourth interrogation session was too troublesome for the State. Judge Jerome Fox suppressed this confession at trial per the prosecution motion.

There was no mention of furniture divots during the trial. If they were not documented, then it is likely that furniture had been moved before 31 October, 2005.

Investigators contacted Stachowski in September, 2006. The first result was that they obtained Steven Avery’s digital camera. Mark Wiegert obtained a search warrant to examine the camera. He used a statement from Wisconsin Special Agent James Holmes to justify the search, but the claim by Holmes was flawed(1). No information was released of the results.

Stachowski testified that she was in jail from August of 2005 for a period of seven months. Her recollection of the bedroom layout of August 2005 was different from the documented layout in November, 2005.

Now, if the testimony of Stachowski at the Dassey trial were correct, then there would be no way that Avery could have captured images of the crime unless Avery had somehow smuggled the camera into the Manitowoc County Jail. If she obtained it from the Avery home after the investigation, which would be another major oversight by the deputies and investigators.

Another possibility is that Stachowski wasn’t in jail for the entire time period claimed indicated at the trial. According to court records, she was arrested on 30 October, 2005, the day before that last known sighting of Teresa Halbach, and released on 20 December, 2005. Even so, if she had possession of the camera during that period, it could not have been used during the crime and the search warrant to look through the camera memory was still bogus.

She could have obtained the camera after the first search warrant was complete. As far as police overlooking the camera during searches that is possible, perhaps probable.

This is the group that sent a different amount of shell casings to the Crime Lab than were listed on the transmittal. This is the group that discovered the key the victim’s SUV during their seventh search of the Avery bedroom, and then one of those present testified that aliens had the key. This was the group that belatedly discovered the magic bullet during the second search warrant of the Avery property (the State conveniently destroyed all DNA during its testing). This was the group that found items in a burn barrel but did not discover bones adjacent to the barrel for several more days. Perhaps the camera was in a time warp along with the bones, the key, and the bullet fragment.

Court records cause a problem with Stachowski’s testimony. This gets a bit complex. It has to do with her various arrests.

On 11 May, 2004, Stachowski was arrested for operating while Intoxicated (OWI), 4th offense. This is case No. CT369. Her address was given as Waldo Avenue in Manitowoc, Wisconsin. On 17 September 2004, the charges were dismissed and refiled as 5th offense OWI in Case No. CF331.

On 22 June, 2004 Stachowski was also arrested for 4th offense OWI, a duplicate of the earlier charge. Her address was Avery Road, Two Rivers, Wisconsin. This was Case No. CT43.

The refiled charges from the May arrest also listed her address as Avery Road. There is no explanation why the earlier arrest became 5th offense, but the later arrest remained 4th offense. Another offense from 11 May, 2004, driving while revoked, became Case No. CT629 and was concurrent with CF331.

Stachowski pleaded guilty to the OWI 4th on 14 September, 2004. On 14 October, 2004 she was sentenced to 210 days in jail with Huber privileges. She was fined and owed the court $3377.00 after a payment. That sentence would place her release about the middle of April, 2005.

On 9 May, 2005, She was found guilty by jury for the OWI 5th and driving while revoked. On 17 June, 2005 Stachowski was placed on probation. She was to spend nine months in jail with good time and work release starting 15 August, 2005. Without good time credit that would give a release of May, 2006. With good time credit, the release would be in March, 2006. In neither scenario, would it be possible for her to have the Avery camera and for Avery to use the camera to photograph events on 31 October, 2005.

There is a small wrinkle. As mentioned above, she was also arrested on 30 October, 2005. The address was still Avery Road and not the Manitowoc County Jail, the address for incarcerated persons. This arrest was for nonpayment of her fine from CT369, the OWI 4th conviction. According to the court document, she was released on 20 December, 2005. It seems a bit odd to arrest a person and impose jail time while they are in jail.

This also raises the question of where she really was. At the Brendan Dassey trial, she stated that she was in jail for seven months. Yet, the record of her October 2005 arrest has her at Avery Road. So, is the court record simply more Manitowoc County sloppiness?

During the various interrogations of Brendan Dassey, investigators were interested about if he could recall when Stachowski went to jail. They also asked if Stachowski had sex with Dassey and whether Stachowski was involved with the crime. Were the investigators simply fishing or were they ignorant of the location of Stachowski during the time period?

So the Jodi Stachowski involvement with the Brendan Dassey trial raises some interesting concerns.

(1) Wiegert used a claim from Wisconsin Department of Justice Special Agent James Holmes to obtain the warrant. Holmes’ statement was indirect in that he claimed it was not unusual for perpetrators to film their crimes. However, most criminals do not document their crimes with pictures or movies. Whether Holmes was competent to make such a statement was left unanswered. No data was supplied to show he researched the matter and could produce numbers to backup the claim. It is also likely that Wiegert used a leading question to get the comment from Holmes.

Share this...

email

by Brian McCorkle