Wisconsin





Federal District Court





That’s why even prosecutors are arguing that the Supreme Court of the United States should accept Dassey’s case for review. The prosecutors’ point: No one trusts the criminal justice system, especially after Jerry Buting’s book Illusion of Justice, and my book, Convicting Avery (which, by the way, was recently named among “ For more on the prosecutors’ argument, see page 22 (and footnote 14) of their Their point: the appearance of justice is important, and our nation’s high court needs to weigh in on Dassey’s case to restore some level of trust in our system. This smells of gross injustice.That’s whyare arguing that the Supreme Court of theshould accept Dassey’s case for review.The prosecutors’ point: No one trusts the criminal justice system, especially after Jerry Buting’s book, and my book,(which, by the way, was recently named among “ the best true crime books of 2017 ”).For more on the prosecutors’ argument, see page 22 (and footnote 14) of their brief to the Supreme Court of the United States Their point: theof justice is important, and our nation’s high court needs to weigh in on Dassey’s case to restore some level of trust in our system.





Making a Murderer season 2 on Netflix, and my forthcoming book Anatomy of a False Confession: The Interrogation and Conviction of Brendan Dassey (Rowman & Littlefield, Nov. 2018). In the book I expose the numerous tricks that government agents Wiegert and Fassbender (along with other interrogators) used to coerce the 16-year-old child Brendan Dassey to falsely confess to the murder of Teresa Halbach. For more on Dassey’s case, stay tuned forseason 2 on Netflix, and my forthcoming book(Rowman & Littlefield, Nov. 2018).In the book I expose the numerous tricks that government agents Wiegert and Fassbender (along with other interrogators) used to coerce the 16-year-old child Brendan Dassey to falsely confess to the murder of Teresa Halbach.





Illusion of Justice, Convicting Avery, and of course Making a Murderer. And most obviously, remember that silence can be golden. Until then, check out, and of courseAnd most obviously, remember that silence can be golden.

As fans ofknow, a 16-year-old kid named Brendan Dassey was railroaded into confessing to a murder that, by every measure, he had nothing to do with.Not surprisingly, the electedtrial court judge found that his “confession” was “voluntary” and therefore admissible against him at trial.(Never mind the interrogators’ dozens of threats and false promises of leniency.)Equally unsurprising, the jury bought the prosecutor’s sophistry — he famously but falsely claimed that innocent people don’t confess — and convicted Dassey as a “party to the crime” of murder and other offenses.And once again, unsurprisingly, the state appellate court rubber-stamped Dassey’s conviction in a superficial, two-paragraph “analysis” of the facts and law.But after that, things got really interesting. In a rare scenario where a state-court decision actually works its way into the federal court system, theheld that Dassey’s alleged confession was probably untruthful and, more to the point, wasTherefore, it should never have been used as evidence against him at his trial.Then, the Seventh Circuit Federal Court of Appeals agreed., the flip-flopping Seventh Circuit changed its mind.Although Dassey’s confession may have been untruthful, even involuntary, and even inadmissible, none of that matters!Instead, due to a bizarre legal standard called the “AEDPA,” the Wisconsin state appellate court’s decision might have been wrong, but it wasn’t “so wrong” as to justify a new trial.(And people say thatare the ones who parse words to their advantage!)