Brendan Dassey “Confession” and Trial Transcripts

BrendanDasseyI am still going through all these documents (there is a LOT here), but I figured I would post them all in one place for anyone who is interested in reading them as well. What stands out to you the most? For me, it is clear that Brendan is completely guessing the answer to every question he is asked. To call it a confession is pathetic.

UPDATE: I have added new documents to this list, including official court documents on hearings, evidence, and Brendan’s judgment. Looking for documents pertaining to Steven Avery’s trial? Click here.

Brendan Dassey Interview Transcripts and Emails:

Supplemental Report: Filed 2/27/2006
Criminal Complaint: Filed 3/2/2006
Motion to Suppress: Filed 4/19/2006
Dassey Hearing: 5/4/2006
Decision on Motion to Suppress: Filed 5/12/2006
Withdrawal of Council: Filed 5/30/2006
Dassey Hearing: 8/25/2006

Brendan Dassey Trial Transcripts:

Dassey Judgment: 8/2/2007

 

You can also read the written transcripts to each episode of Making a Murderer by clicking here: Making a Murderer transcripts

 

Follow me on Twitter and on Facebook. Also check out my true crime books here, which are available in paperback, audiobook, and eBook formats.

35 thoughts on “Brendan Dassey “Confession” and Trial Transcripts

  1. This is a classic “false confession”. It’s so obvious as to border on amateurish and should have been thrown out at the earliest possible opportunity.

    • Did you actually read the testimony or are you going off Making a Murderer? If you read Dassey’s testimony he admits on stand to helping clean a large blood colored spot in Avery’s garage with gas, paint thinner, and bleach. Dassey even gave the police his bleached jeans. When questioned why he admitted to raping and killing Haibach he never says he was coerced. All he says is I don’t know. It is also clear Kayla was covering for Dassey. She told her counselors and the police the same story. When she was interviewed her parents were in the room so people can’t say she was coerced. I guarantee if the arm chair detectives actually read the entire trial documents they wouldn’t be advancing preposterous conspiracy theories.

      • I did read the transcripts of the trials and listened to all the videos. They sure seem like they are guilty. The only other reason I could think of that Brendan would be saying all these things would be for a cover up, like maybe his brother Bobby had something to do with it. Therefore Brendan would know who did it and Bobby is saying to keep his mouth shut about him and to pin it on Uncle Steven. That could be why all the inconsistent statements he was making. I also think Scott Tadyeh is involved to, he was so nervous at work and coming up with stories of having to get home to get his clothes out of the wash cause Brendan’s clothes were mixed in with blood on them. This is all just my huntch, but definitely think Brendan knows who the murderer is.

        • Clare why would Brendan say these things to cover up for someone else and go to jail for life? Does that even make sense? All evidence points to Avery. He called Halbach, he was the last to see her, electronics burned in his burn barrel, bones found in his burn pit, blood found in her car, handcuffs and shackles Dassey described in his trailer, key found in bookshelf, bullet with Halbachs blood in his garage, bullet linked to his gun, large cut on Avery’s hand and forensic testing showed large area cleaned with bleach. There is no way anyone could plant all that evidence. There comes a point when people have to stop looking to the fantastic or hunches and look at the facts of the case. Also, Avery’s and Dassey’s attorneys hired their own investigators and could find no evidence implicating anyone else or prove malfeasance by the police. So if the high priced attorney’s investigators couldn’t find anything what makes arm chair detectives so certain they are right?

          • All the evidence appears to point to Avery because that was the only line of investigation they ever made. Perhaps if they had interviewed others, or looked into any one else (Bobby Dassey, the ex boyfriend for example) they would have found other evidence pointing to someone else. Also, there is just so many flaws in each piece of evidence. The bullet did not have blood DNA. They could not prove without doubt the bullet came from his gun either, and his brother in law was spotted trying to sell the same make gun a few days after… Reading the first interview as someone else has mentioned shows gaps and responses missing. Who knows what was said to Brendan while the tapes aren’t recording? You can clearly read he’s making a large amount of it up. Also, the times change multiple times and a large amount of it is not possibly true for example his mum saw him at home. They keep on and on until they get the response they are looking for, just look at the bit about the head. Tell us…. something to do with the head…. and poor Brendan thinks they’re on about cutting her hair! And it wasn’t that they weren’t able to find any evidence linking anyone else, it was that they weren’t allowed to.

          • To Anonymous March 1: You really need to read the transcripts, and review the evidence. They absolutely proved that the bullet could only have come from Steven’s gun. No question about it. Also, they did recover Teresa’s DNA from a bullet fragment. It is that fragment that could not be linked to Avery’s gun.

            Watching the documentary leads a reasonable person to think one of two things: they either did it, or there was a serious coverup.

            Reasonable people would satisfy their intellectual curiosity, as well as exercise their rational thinking abilities, and not make a judgment based on a documentary that pushed an agenda.

            Inquisitive people would read the trial transcripts and review what the evidence actually was, not just what was shown on the show, and would certainly come to the conclusion that they did it.

            Avery and Dassey did it. There is no reasonable doubt against the weight of the evidence. There is no chance of a cover-up. They did it. Don’t be conned into give up intellectual honesty merely because a biased television show tugged at your emotions.

          • Do any of you know that Brandon Dassey’s first public defender was actually removed from Brandon’s case and on top of that disbarred and removed from ever receiving any files from the state of the public defenders office because he agreed to let Brandon be interviewed by these detectives without the presence of an attorney which was totally unethical and in no way in Brendon’s best interest. Do you also know that despite this, the judge let these confessions be entered as evidence and for the jury to see and hear. I must say on the face of it, guilty or innocent, that is in itself despicable. There was no way in hell that kid could have ever have gotten a fair trial. I also just want to add food for thought. Didn’t Steven Avery have about 34 million reasons not to disrupt his lawsuit to kill a local girl. He could have had 50 local girls once he got his settlement. The other thought. You all give these two moron’s too much credit. These people and that junk yard was filthy, I’m sorry. I don’t say this to be judgmental or mean, but it is just true. Do you really think these two morons could stab, shoot, rape, cut a throat and not leave anything behind in that trailer or garage, or creeper, or yard or anywhere. People can clean and they can clean, but I bet if I planned a murder for 6 months that I just would not get away with it. There would be a hair, a fiber, a spot of blood as small as a pin tip , I would get caught. Do you really believe that you could have a 4×4 foot spot of blood on a cement garage floor and it could be cleaned perfectly. Impossible!!! Cement is so porous and that crack. They dug it out. Don’t you know the blood would be in it. Also they searched that garage for what 9 days or months, I can’t remember, but all of a sudden they see 2 lead fragments, one with a tiny bit of Teresa’s DNA. What are these trace evident specialists blind. These people have guns all over the place. Of course you would be looking for bullets and guns inside Stevens garage or trailer. 11 shell casings. What were they waiting for xmas. And fibers. Do you think if they washed the garage with Teresas clothes there would not have been fibers stuck in the cement. Those two morons could never have cleaned those creepers, that trailer or that garage. There would have been evidence all over the place. Do you really think these people knew how to clean. The car key, please it took a week to find that big thing in that small trailer??? That was a plant by Lenk, please. We all know that. If a dept does that, I have no idea where they’re line is. They tainted the whole case, What a shame. Their disgusting behavior led to that slanted documentary in the first place and to be quite frank, I’d hate to have my life in their hands, wouldn’t you??? Such a shame. That county couldn’t afford to pay steven those millions. They had to get rid of him one way or another. Did you know that Brandon was found guilty of sexual assault and Steven wasn’t.? I’m sorry, his attorney and his mother failed to protect his best interests, legally he was never obligated to say nothing and his right to keep silent was never represented to law enforcement, just a dumb kid, guilty or innocent, he never received a fair trial. When you fire an attorney from a state public office, that’s pretty bad, and the jury never even told, but they sure saw all those pathetic confessions.

      • I read all of the transcripts, the dialogue between the investigators and Dassey is the most suggestive narrative I’ve ever come across. They were basically holding his hand and telling him what to say throughout the affair. Dassey changed his story so many times the investigators had to tell him to just say he doesn’t know something instead of making it up, because Dassey’s mythological tale was becoming increasingly inconsistent with the facts. It bothers me how the story changes drastically so many times. First he arrived around 3:40 and played nintendo for 2 hours then his Mom arrives from work around 5ish and leaves to accompany Tadych to visit his mother at the Hospital at around 5:30, but in Tadychs testimony on Steven’s trial he never mentioned leaving with Barb, all the opposite, the increasing concern with both Tydechs and Bobby Dassey’s testimony is that they were eachothers only alibi’s. And why is Tadych happy when Steven’s convicted guilty? Any presumption of innocence to Avery 1Acct would make Brendan (his now stepson’s) case redundant? Why is he even corroborating with prosecution? Another odd ball from the phonecalls that Brendan states consistently in various interviews, Bobby’s boss called to say he was going trick or treating (5:30ish) but then Brendan says he see’s Bobby at home carrying a duffel bag claiming his friend is going to take him trick or treating later at 7. Why does Bobby’s boss even call to say he’s going trick or treating? When Bobby’s actually home, and claims to be getting picked up later. And where is Tydech? And where is Barb since she’s not at the hospital and why would Brendan claim she was when Tydech claimed on trial that he went alone after taking a “vacation day”off work. When on the first most precise interview to Brendan the first thing he states is that he saw Barb at 5ish where she then left to the hospital to visit Tydachs mother. The main issue here is why are all these people lying? This kid Brendan could’ve gotten suggested to say that the power rangers came down to stab Teresa and he wouldve painted them a slide by slide movie from a subconscious underlying recap of one of the stupid video games he plays. Why wasn’t Teresa Halbachs DNA found on the keys she’s used every single day but only Avery’s Blood was found- How is it that the eleven shell casings in the garage are found 6 days into the investigation of Steven’s property of which only 2 match and only 1 is admissable and correspondingly corrupted by the analyst. How is the key that’s right next to his bed found 8 days into the investigation? The whole progression of events is very unnatural and its production of evidence so nebulous that you can’t epitomize one single conclusive fact from either one. Brendan’s trying to cover for someone, specially at the beginning with his first interview with cops from another dept. That is clear. And that person is definitely not Steven, it’s someone closer. I don’t believe Steven is without fault, but the evidence provided doesn’t inculpate him BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT OF THIS MURDER (not disregarding he might be a pedophilic retard with severe issues that an exorcist shouldn’t even bother with). I believe there is some sort of cover up and this county operates with very philistine modus operandi both judicially and customarily, that it wouldn’t be hard at all to exploit all these inconvenient circumstances – in a town where none seem to have a collective IQ above 75.

  2. I want to understand what happened between Avery’s arrest in November and February that made them want to pursue talks with Brendan. Avery, at least in the documentary speaks nothing of Dassey, either implicating his involvement or denying his involvement.

      • his mother told the police that she was concerned because her son had come home the evening of the murder with his pants covered in bleach

        • i didn’t hear that one yet! really? she told the police about him and bleach?

          so if that’s true then it would explain why he admitted to that part at the trial.

    • Kayla, his cousin had gone to her guidance counselor at school upset because Brendan had told her he had seen Steven burning a body

    • That’s a good question and one I’ve asked as well. Hmm… Seems like a female cousin and his brothers were questioned and that lead them to look closer at Brendan.

    • Dean Strang talks about this a bit. Brendan was basically Steven Avery’s alibi witness, because he was at the bonfire, Avery was acting normal, he didn’t see anything. So in going after Brendan they eliminate him as an alibi witness – but of course they take it much farther and turn him into a potential State witness.
      The fact that he was Steven’s alibi witness is also how they were able to talk to him without his mother objecting until after his statement – the whole time, she thought they were interested in him as a witness, and they certainly didn’t make an effort to set her straight. Which seems like a major ethical issue to me.

    • They wanted to question Brendan again because his cousin Kayla had went to the school counselor to talk to them about some things that Brendan had said to her about Teresa Halbach. About seeing body parts and being tied up.

  3. Pingback: Steven Avery Transcripts and Court Documents | JJ Slate

  4. Thanks for putting up these documents, Ms. Slate. I have an important question though: why is so much of what Brendan said missing from the Brendan School Confession on Feb 27, 2006?

    What I mean is, many times where Brendan answers, the only thing listed is “…………..” Then one of the cops will give a response that indicates Branden said something, and it was something the cop understood, and wants to use to further the interview. Here’s an example:

    WEIGERT: Okay, tell me again what do you see in that fire?
    BRENDAN: I …………………………..
    WEIGERT: First you see the feet? And then what?

    Obviously Brendan is responding, but what he said is not in the transcript. This happens over and over again.

    I also saw the “………..” used for the cops conversation, but far less than the Branden parts.

    I don’t believe that all the “………” were unintelligible replies, because they happen whenever key details are mentioned, and the cops understood what he said, because they had precise replies.

  5. Please. Watch this video and help me answer these 2 questions. If my hunch is correct, the answers to these 2 questions can crack this case. Unfortunately I do not have the resourcees to find the answers, nor with my position can I go snooping around asking these questions. Please share with anyone you can. Help crack this case. I’ve sent this to Zellner’s team but I think she’s looking at freeing Avery with the EDTA and not going Perry Mason/Scooby Doo and freeing him by actually catching the read bad guys. Contact me with any results. Thank you.

  6. After watching the documentary, I just couldn’t leave it at that. I had to dig deeper and listen to the Interrogations of everyone I could and read all the trial transcripts. If I was on the jury I could not say he was guilty because there’s just to much reaaonable doubt. And there are so many others out there that will agree with me and they also did the research of everything like I did.

  7. After painstakingly reading every trial transcript from both cases and numerous legal documents related to both cases, I feel confident Brendan Dassey is innocent. His “confessions” are laughable at best, but heartbreakingly pitiful at worst.

    Steven Avery on the other hand? Meh, I could care less. I invested the same amount of time reading his transcripts and reviewing interviews with several family members who he was either raping or having sex with. Just check out what Jodi Stachowski has to say about him now.

    The true tragedy here is Brendan Dassey. The detectives appeared to be using Mad Libs books to get that story from him.

    • Your theory goes out the window when you listen to Brendan confess to his mother that he was involved in the murder. His mother is not a cop, she wasn’t interrogating him or feeding him the answers she wanted. There was no reason for him to admit to her that he did it–he could have just as easily told her that he had given the cops a bunch of false answers.

  8. Here is one of Brendan’s confessions to his mother Bard recorded on the telephone:

    Barb: So did you see the body in the fire?

    Brendan: No.

    Barb: Steven says that you seen the body in the fire.

    Brendan: No.

    Barb: You know if he killed her?

    Brendan: Not that I know of.

    Barb: So then how do you know that there was a bullet shell outside of the garage?

    Brendan: Cause when Mike came up here he had pictures of it.

    • I have a feeling that call was staged since Barb recorded it. Read the transcript of the first call:

      Barb: Then Steven did do it?
      Brendan: Ya.

      Barb: Did he make you do this?
      Brendan: Ya.

      Barb: What about when I got home at 5:00 you were here,
      Brendan: Ya

      Barb: Ya. When did you go over there?
      Brendan: I went over there earlier and then came home before you did.

      Barb: Why didn’t you say something to me then?
      Brendan: I dunno, I was to scared.

      Barb: You wouldn’thave had to been scared because I would have called 911 and you wouldn’t be going back over there. If you would have been here maybe she would have been alive yet. So in those statements you did all that to her too?
      Brendan: Some of it.

      Barb: Did he make you do it?
      Brendan: Ya.

  9. Also, Can someone explain to me the inconsistency in Teresa’s DNA profiling in http://jenniferjslate.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Steven-Avery-Trial-Exhibit-311.pdf

    Examining the items retrieved from the car to send to the labs I can’t help but freak out at the oddity of this all.

    Number one I find it odd that this girl had in her whole entire car could only TWO ITEMS with her DNA on it: a little tiny “wild cherry pepsi can” (Item A#14 that renders it Teresa’s DNA ) and the only other item in the whole car that could be brought in for DNA testing was a Black Cd Case Item A#10 TO WHICH THIS GIVES NO RESULT TO.

    Follow me here…
    Again I repeat, imagine its you and its your car, in this whole car the only items you could bring in to test for DNA were really only these two items?! A can of cherry pepsi and this cd case?

    That’s so weird. Unless this car was like a day old, you should’ve been able to find endless resource of possible items to test. No makeup? No water bottles? No pens/paper to jot on? No scrunched up papers/receipts, no old gum? No house keys? She only had left in her car the weirdest can of soda in the world and a black cd case that IS NEVER MENTIONED to a conclusive result ON THE DNA TRIAL EXHIBIT.

    Is it me or is it really freakin odd that they could only find these two random ass items in the whole of her car?

    And why didn’t they give the result of Item A#10 (black Cd Case)? If one of the two items from the whole car you could test with a STAIN – mind you, I would believe it pertinent enough to exhaust all the means in the world to test this to a clear conclusion. For the love of god, this girl only had a can of cherry soda and a black cd case in the whole of her car. Her life literally amounted to these two items.

    Anyways they mention Item A#10 (Black CD Case- follow me hereee..)- (the only other item retrieved from her car) to be CONCLUSIVELY FOUND TO BEAR A BLOOD STAIN. And yet – the DNA profile of this bloodstain is never given in the whole of the report!!!!!

    Which could mean none of the DNA profiles match to this Stain- which puts another person in the car, that is NOT STEVE AVERY.

    There are note’s in the whole report attributing as to why other item’s couldn’t be tested, or if they rendered without DNA like items B#2 , A#1 , A#13 For example..

    But Item A#10 the Black Cd case, conclusively tested to be a bloodstain, the only other freakin item in the whole of her car, is completely OMITTED of a DNA result or a explanatory sidenote in the WHOLE OF THE REPORT.

    Not only that.. it get’s even freakier. Beyond freakier that this girl’s car really only had a black cd case and a cherry pepsi left on it – which is utterly impossible considering she’s had that car for years, If they (whoever killed her/ framed steve/ planted evidence/ whatever consipiracy you subscribe to) cleaned the car out of most of her belongings why would they voluntarily leave those two specific items there and why would even weirder still, the lab omit the results of the bloodstain of one of them?

    BUT WAIT, HOLD ON TO YOUR CHAIRS….

    THERE WERE 3 HAIRS BROUGHT IN FOR TESTING FROM THE CAR!!
    You never ever heard on the trial about hair being found in the vehicle right?

    BECAUSE IT WAS NEVER TESTED FOR DNA EVIDENCE.

    THIS DNA REPORT STATES HAIR ON THE FOLLOWING UNITS OF EVIDENCE BROUGHT IN FOR TESTING FROM TERESAS RAV4:

    A#5 – Hair recovered from a back seat
    A#1 – Stain from rear cargo area (also has hair on it) – (Only real physical evidence of her murder.)
    A#4- Hair from stain removed from metal frame around rear door opening

    Since A1 is the only other piece of evidence linking Teresa to this car, APART FORM THE RIDICULOUS CHERRY SODA (A-14) and that is supposedly her blood stain – Why if this same bloodstain, the only bloodstain to be found of Teresa in the whole of the car, seems to have a hair on it, WHY WOULDNT YOU TEST IT!!! Prosecution said on trial that they believed the bloodstain found in the back of the car was resembling that of bloody hair- prosecution imposed/heavily insinuated the idea that Teresa was harmed by Steven Avery on her car, which placed Teresa with “bloody hair”- in the back of her car, but why wouldn’t the Lab test the ONLY hair found alongside HER same bloodstain? It would place Teresa in an act of violence in her vehicle beyond a reasonable doubt. And the keys of her vehicle in Steven’s bedside table.

    It would be only common sense to render the result of these 3 hairs with urgency on the biggest trial of Wisconsin, UNLESS THE HAIR WAS NOT HERS.

    Anyways, this is really making My hairs stand. Why were these the only items found to be tested in her car? Unless there was a log listing all of teresa’s vehicle belongings where these two random items were somehow chosen to be inconsistenlty tested, It clearly means someone removed the other possible items that could be tested for DNA? And maybe this person left a hair in the backseat while removing everything, or left a hair by a stain on the door while exiting a car. And WHY IN THE WORLD WOULDNT YOU TEST THESE TO A CONCLUSIVE END?

    What about the two other hairs? The one in the back seat, and the one next to a stain alongside the reardoor opening?
    If there was a hair in the reardoor opening, even a tiny little shred of fiber with possible DNA on it. It would be safe to assume it was an extremely valuable finding, knowing that it was most likely the perpetrator’s DNA since in the rear door opening is where he wouldve physically stood in congruance with the lab theory that places Teresa’s ONLY blood stain in the rear cargo area!

    The report is lackluster, incongruous, omits the finality of one of the 2 REAL items brought for testing and leaves loose ends as to why they weren’t tested. All while omitting the testing altogether of the only 3 HAIRS FOUND ON THE MOST IMPORTANT CRIME SCENE THE STATE HAS SEEN.

    Such a report brought to you by the very thorough, the very methodical,stuctured,meticulous and ethical: Sherry Culhone.

    Ps: If I were Judge Willis I would’ve atleast bothered to re-read her report, and ask her if she was handing me one of those jokingly fill in the blanks worksheets.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.