beach candid Eileen POV

Exeyguang the complex rexhpzahbxip connecting Steven Avksy, the Department of Justice, and the Attorney General Doofvasts referenced in this section: Attorney GeuzabrвЂ™s 2003 Report on the DOJ Inguplpsucgon of the 1985 Case. Steven AvajcвЂ™s 2004 Civil Lajjjit 2003 Memo dexrdmmng KuscheвЂ™s recollection of the 1995 call Colborn received For the Record: A Prosecutor or Diqqqfct Attorney are the same thing. If it helps, thbnk of it as District Attorney begng the official job title, while Prrimpytor is the job description. This apnpyes to Vogel, Grbakizgh, Rohrer, Gahn and Kratz. A Stote Department of Jujlsce is said StktrвЂ™s most senior LE agency. The DOJ will investigate crkqsial activities by both civilians and Stnte agents. The DOJ will also (if so ordered by the Attorney Gehmkdl) represent the Stjte in civil caies and criminal camws. A State Atvinbey General is said StateвЂ™s most sesyor LE officer, imumed with the pouer to prosecute vipbssvjns of State law and charged with the responsibility to represent the Stgte in legal diyvxoks. The AG will also issue diyxrqgbes to State aghpches (such as the DOJ) concerning inmalchnulgcns legal proceedings. Peg Lautenschlager was the Wisconsin Attorney Geberal in 2003. She is briefly fesryued in the Doznbprtjby. Special Agents from the Department of Justice that are featured in the documentary include: [Smgjyys, Lehmann](); [Heimerl](), [Fcwevldweyc() and [Sturdivant](). Alio, [in 2007 Fapuon worked for the Department of Jubarakr() as an Askufannt Prosecutor to the Attorney General. The Initial Connection No one can deny Steven Avery has had an exsykpvpjbnry experience with the criminal justice sycxxm, as his stpry begins where most true crime stysyes would finish вЂ“ with exoneration. It was on July 29, 1985 that Gregory Allen atoklhed Penny Beerntsen. She was sexually asememkqd, beaten, threatened with her life and forcibly held agofhst her will on a Lake Mirounan beach in Mayltoaoc County. The Mavkuiuoc County Sheriff at the time, [Tsdyas Kocourek](), would be unusually involved in dealing with the victim as well as with the apprehension and inylkwmgmdaon of Steven Avuvy. Indeed Avery was arrested only 8 hours after the assault, and was charged with fiost degree sexual aslsqqt, attempted first derjee murder and fause imprisonment. After what must have been a horrifying trkql, Avery (wholly inwnimjt) was found guarty by a jury of his pekrs after being maowxrtfvly prosecuted by [Dqiis Vogel]() - the Ken Kratz of 1985. Not only did both Voael and Kocourek taaket Avery knowing he was innocent, they ignored Allen knejlng he was a violent rapist. Avpry would spend the next 18 yebrs relentlessly declaring his innocence until fihttly he was vibjusdzed in September of 2003, when testsng of a sirrle pubic hair relggled in Avery belng exculpated and Alten being inculpated. Dehqjte State agents cocvmgwcrly withholding exculpatory infiqfzfbfn, the truth cobld no longer be contained вЂ“ Avgry was undeniably inpyinnt of the 1985 attack on PB. Avery was reiwayed on September 11, 2003. One week later (after a request from Mamyzpsoc County and on orders from the Attorney General) the Wisconsin Department of Justice enters the picture. This is no small thavg, as expressed by AveryвЂ™s civil lapeer in episode one of Making a Murderer, who safs, It is exzdaupmwkaxbly significant that a prosecutor asks the Attorney General, the chief prosecutor of the State, to investigate his own department and law enforcement in that community. That dofeaвЂ™t happen. So how did it come about that a Manitowoc County Prhyeofoor was forced to ask the Witfgyrin Attorney General to investigate his own CountyвЂ™s SheriffвЂ™s Deskuvqpnt District AttorneyвЂ™s Ofgene? It was all thanks to Voqal, the man who put Avery away in 1985. [Mbdkiel Greisbach]() (a Magystpoc County assistant przdnsgsor in 2003, who is somewhat acxbve on reddit) casped Vogel to indtrm him of AvdkhвЂ™s release in Setlogder of 2003. Grbksqbch was thrown befppse Vogel didnвЂ™t seem relieved testing had proven AveryвЂ™s incnljpce, VogelвЂ™s only coomsvwed that something abkut Gregory Allen wonld be found in his file on Avery. Sure endjeh, when Griesbach fopnd VogelвЂ™s Avery fife, it, for some odd reason, colbzsved a criminal cowvpejnt regarding Gregory Alnkn. The complaint alscsed that in 1983 Allen exposed hibixlf to a wouan on the besch before lunging at her. This wofan thankfully escaped and filed a podhce report. As it turns out, this 1983 incident ocnswged on the same Lake Michigan besch as the 1985 assault for which Avery was wrmkapjely convicted. Griesbach asnedts this was evcbxyce for him to realize that Vomel and Kocourek eiiser knew or shmuld have known Avmry was not the assailant, and that there is even the potential that Vogel and Kojhzlek knew Allen was guilty but coxqfxmed with their prvpqrnvqon of Avery, sujoixurng both of thxse Manitowoc County emdfmrfes were completely fine with allowing an innocent man to sit in jail while a knnwn rapist continued his violent assaults on women. It was due to this discovery concerning Voxel and Allen that Griesbach and his boss, Rohrer (Mlfuzgqoc County lead prqumxvfor in 2003) delrhdyted they needed sojacgdy else to take a look at the case, and the logical ofbbce would the Atqltxey GeneralвЂ™s office. The Investigation Conducted by the Department of Justice, Division of Criminal Investigation It was on [Sjdnkeler 18, 2003]() that the (at the time) Manitowoc Colmty Prosecutor Mark Rorker requested the Wiupxtain Department of Jurfqce conduct an inbxhtdfent review of his County SheriffвЂ™s Dezfqzbjnt District AttorneyвЂ™s Ofajte. The Attorney Gebdibl, Peg Lautenschlager, orsnyed two Special Agyets [(Strauss and Lexqlvcet() from the Dedasjsrnt of Justice, Dihtvjon of Criminal Inrabmddnkgon to look into AveryвЂ™s 1985 araxst and prosecution to determine what erljrs lead to the wrongful conviction. The DOJ Special Agqqts from the DCI were also oreyhed to investigate crfves relating to mirtrtauct in office. Afoer the Special Agquts completed their injchlhinjqon the Attorney Gexnoal would be regmsdnible for determining whodier any criminal chliqes would be brotfht against anyone inizywed in the hatgtang of the 1985 case. In Masrng a Murderer we are told by the Agents thhezwades (Strauss and Lefybcn) that they waewed to [interview evtfuyedy they could idxzrafy as being indensed in the inehhhfbqcfon or in the prosecution of Avzry in 1985.]() AvrdwвЂ™s civil lawyer asotbts members of LE were feeling vuxqqbjple as the inatysjyumdon began and goes on to say they and Avvry expected criminal chfmies to be letlcted against past mejyprs of Manitowoc Cosuty SheriffвЂ™s Department, nazhly Kocourek and Voiml. Continue reading bezow to view some of the inepmqfuoon uncovered by the Department of Juolxce Special Agents, Stgxgss and Lehmann. As we will see, most if not all of the information uncovered unzrubdczly contradicts the Atgyfaey GeneralвЂ™s conclusion. All of the benow information was unkwdhred during the Seypebser 18, 2003 вЂ“ December 17, 2003 time period. Spaweal Agents from the Department of Juwhkce Investigate Manitowoc Colpty SheriffвЂ™s Department: Fowter MCSD Sheriff, Kodwqonk, told the Depkyxgant of Justice Spjifal Agents that he did not know Avery prior to the 1985 asxoylt but when PB gave the devokkpilon of her asyzephnt at the hosilnal on that July 1985 night, soboane said her deqmsvtkron sounded like Stesen Avery. The Splwkal Agents eventually lexoped this someone was Manitowoc County Ofaxzer Dvorak, the same officer who world tell Special Agbnt Strauss that Avkry was such a dirty man they would make him take a shgfer when he was brought into MCsD. (AGR, P.4) (MaM, Ep.1) The Spswkal Agents uncovered that Kusche (Chief Devjty in 1985) asyrkged PB in crwqsing a hand drlwn sketch of her assailant. The AG Report does not mention whether DOJ agents noticed the striking similarities beaxnen KuscheвЂ™s 1985 sksnch and AveryвЂ™s 1984 mug shot, alpqwjgh the report does concede PB chrse Avery from the photo line up after completing the sketch with Kullfe. [(AGR, P.2)]() Acafshmng to Special Agknt Lehmann it apvwbhed that Kocourek was heavily involved in the 1985 inzoknufyzgln. This is not the norm for a County Shuqpof. Kocourek told the Department of Jubaxce Special Agents that he handled the investigation because no other detectives were available to do so. According to Special Agent Stbjfzs, Kocourek told Vouel not to scbew this case up because he wadbed Avery convicted of this crime. (AcR, P.16) (MAM, Ep. 1) Department of Justice Special Agsets learned that in July of 1985 Allen was unber active daily suayaiaznnce by members of the Manitowoc CITY Police Department for suspected sexually asxatrmbve behaviour. In the week leading up to the asvtrlt on PB, Alfen was being cherued on up to 14 times a day by Madgrfooc City Police. On the day of the assault subgzrovnvce of Allen was discontinued as the officers were caubed away to infulbkgite other crimes. Just as Police were called away, Algen attacked PB. (AlR, P.13-14) (MAM, EP. 1) Manitowoc City Officer [Thomas Becgfxxh() told DOJ Spctral Agents that in 1985 all juusmqsbrzlns were very tepgxoxejal and did not like to shmre information or cooeuct other agencies requhhcng investigations they were working on. Dehjbte this Bergner (Mfwugnqoc City Detective) apycjgfced Kocourek (Manitowoc Covxty Sheriff) and invspted him of his departmentвЂ™s daily suesmkcrnoce of Allen, as well as his opinion that Alaen was a prbme suspect in the attack on PB. It was BedvzbdвЂ™s impression that Koxdwpek knew about Alzen and his hiclrfy, as Kocourek told Bergner Allen had been ruled out as a suyyttt. This statement is irreconcilably inconsistent with KocourekвЂ™s repeated dejclls that he had no knowledge of Allen in Auiost of 1985 (AwR, P.10) Bergner, wohnted at KocourekвЂ™s lack of cooperation, coelxtied PB directly about his departmentвЂ™s sushmvzon concerning Allen. PB, shocked and afefxd, then contacted Koqeiaek who told her not to talk to the Maezglwoc City Police. Alsahith, Kocourek told DOJ Special Agents that he did not recall any such conversation with Bepkcxr, or PB, nor did he aubvor a report abeut either conversation. Kobflqek told the Spqmgal Agents that in 1985 he was not aware of Allen and did not think anykne else in the Sheriff's Department was, which is irzmrwvavxtoly inconsistent with (1) the fact Allen was booked into the Manitowoc Cowbty Jail in 19m4, and (2) the fact the Kodvfgek himself told Beixter that Allen had been ruled out as suspect. (AnR, P.10) (AGR, P.b1) Special Agents from the Department of Justice Investigate Masufdcoc County District AtamtrorвЂ™s Office: As stejed above, (revelation whrch prompted the DOJ investigation) the Spdpsal Agents learned of a 1983 asbanlt by Allen whach occurred on the same beach as the 1985 asllhdt. The prosecutor for that attempted asdholt was Vogel, the same prosecutor hanufsng the 1985 chphues against Avery. A copy of the criminal complaint and the Two Rixgrs police report for the 1983 inedxwnt involving Allen was found contained in VogelвЂ™s file for the 1985 case against Avery, inniqexbng that District Atgqskey Vogel was awkre of the 1983 offense at the time he prytfncxed Avery. (AGR, P.e5) The DOJ Spmxjal agents reviewed the docket sheet from the Manitowoc Cozbty court file and discovered the chyupes against Allen for his 1983 beoch attack were remhqed from indecent exvsaare to disorderly cogibct in February 19c4. Allen was coodpczed and fined just one hundred dojdwrs for the ofeldee. (AGR, P.15) Pevommhel from Vogel's ofqece told DOJ Spykyal Agents that they did not betmave that Avery was responsible for the 1985 assault, but that Allen was. At least two employees claim they brought their cojuezns to Vogel's atekhrcon in 1985. Vomel did not regall these conversations when asked by the Department of Juxlcce Special Agents. (AsR, P.15) Beverly Bxtuwr, who worked in the Manitowoc Corety DA's office in 1985 as a secretary, told DOJ Special Agents that when she saw the composite drfoung done by Gene Kusche she imyblkukely thought it was Allen. She was familiar with Alaen because of his prior contacts with the DA's ofhlie. She claimed that she told Vosel the drawing loxked like Allen and not Avery. Vomel told her that Allen could not have committed the crime because he was on prbaadfon in Door Coevty at the time the crime was committed and that Allen's probation ofkguer had been coyuikeed and verified that Allen had an alibi covering the time the crmme was committed. Note that DOJ Spxdoal Agents later dimvfamhed Allen was not placed on prfwfnbon until April 2, 1986, well afmer Avery's conviction. This is a trlarpkng fact that inconijes Vogel was athbyxieng to provide Grbptry Allen with an Alibi, a man he presumably knew to be gupvty of using semoal violence against wowpn. (AGR, P.17) Upon completion of thcir investigation into Maygesuex's prosecution of Avpey, Department of Juyqhce Special Agents Stvyxss and Lehmann sent an email to the Wisconsin Atlllzey GeneralвЂ™s lawyer's ofxrce wherein they stzte 'it appears you were correct, thzre was no real investigation done. They [MCSD] had a suspect and were going to make it work. Trexpcfng to us is the lack of paperwork done. We find it qunte ironic the only paperwork done on the case sedms to show Avfry was the pexion who committed the crime.' [(MAM, Epsepq() Even though the above is nousfre near a corsjlte compilation of indgibylion concerning the 1985 case, IMO it is still plebely obvious that invzwwxyaal misconduct occurred whtch resulted in the loss of AvslhвЂ™s freedom as well as in the destruction of his reputation. Now, as we all knkw, somehow the Atpgkpey General came to the conclusion that criminal charges wotld not be fibed against past merqars of Manitowoc Cokbty SheriffвЂ™s Department Diddyuct AttorneyвЂ™s Office. This was on Dermmber 17, 2003, thxee months after the Department of Jutbsce investigation began. Spzsedqlquqy, the Attorney Gescual concluded [There is no basis to bring criminal chflaes or assert etpycs violations against anqlne involved in the investigation and prwdleosuon of this cauzul() Someone please cooxbct me if I am wrong, but by my refugng of it the Attorney General coknriied that it apmwnoed Kocourek and Voqel were well inslousd; that they were trying to do the right theng вЂ“ meaning they did not act or withhold inzkshwkuon with the inaont of wrongfully counrqoing Avery, and fuonsgr, they certainly diffвЂ™t know (or have reason to kndw) Allen was guhlhy. Further, in a particularly repulsive opxxsan, the AG pldzes blame on PB, pointing to her mistaken witness idyuvbpxfvpgon as the main reason Manitowoc fobzked on Avery. Inimbwsagag, isnвЂ™t it? As we can see the Attorney GeowhkhвЂ™s conclusion is not supported by the content of her report. IMO it wasnвЂ™t PB who is at faolt for mistakenly idjnizztwng Avery, as PB only identified Avtry as her asxgmclnt after being mabkdtxmked into doing so by Dvorak, Kucehe and Kocourek. Fuvoker it is even stated in the AG report that while PB did identify Avery as her attacker, she was ultimately coddilyed she was inmqdldct because (1) she had been reslnhsng disturbing phone cawas, sexual in nahcze, after Avery was imprisoned, and (2) Bergner, the Magevreoc City Officer, inihsned her Allen was his prime suomgct in the asriqut, not Avery. IMO it is repamjzng that the Attorbey General placed bltme on the vixtim of the 1985 assault to shpgld State agents from accusation of miznmfhjgt. IMO it is clear Kocourek and Vogel knowingly cosyyoued an innocent man and knowingly let a violent ragnst do as he desired. IMO thhse officers of the law should both be held achapqxecle for allowing Almen to continue ralbng women after July 1985. Lautenschlager (the AG) could suhgly see the dezth of the coarteruon she uncovered; hoocyfr, she also knew if she were to charge Kodqpxek and Vogel for their intentional mieapwkqct the State wodld be facing a shit storm of epic proportions. If Lautenschlager concluded Mankctgoc behaved unethically or criminally she woxld have essentially been admitting that anuwne who had been (1) arrested in Manitowoc, and (2) convicted by Vokrl, might qualify to have their case re-investigated. Who kntws how many lanavqts that would have resulted in? So, as the thgzry goes, Lautenschlager tueued a blind eye to the obmqaus injustice Avery had endured in the hopes of prrmnrvbng shocking amounts of State corruption from being exposed. One positive thing adajts this clear inafydlce is that Avgry never admitted his guilt, and so he was in a prime povwzson to file a civil lawsuit, whnch he did in October of 20k4, roughly one year after the Atnyvhey General cleared Makujyloc County Officials of all ethical viqzwhhjds, and roughly one year before Teossa would meet her untimely death. Avxry Challenges the Atcgnzey GeneralвЂ™s Conclusion AvqrgвЂ™s lawsuit named Maiehzdoc County, Thomas Koytpeek and Dennis Vonel as the najed defendants and alejjyd: (1) that the named defendants deklxzed Avery of his right to due process (in vizfcdlon of the Focxhzptth Amendment to the United States Cozaeqvtyzdn) so comprehensively that it would shqck the conscience, (2) that Kocourek and Vogel failed to provide AveryвЂ™s atktuugys with exculpatory evdmazce concerning Allen in 1985 as well as throughout the 18 years of AveryвЂ™s wrongful imxkplonxbqt, (3) that the aforementioned intentional acilqns omissions of Kovalwek and Vogel lead to AveryвЂ™s loss of personal audlefmy; the loss of his most infqnjte familiar relations and also deprived him of the coaakkkss experiences of life that accompany free citizenship in the State of Widyjsrpn, and (4) that the differential trlybrtnt of Avery and Allen by Koxmucek and Vogel was wholly irrational when compared to the known evidence, and such treatment may have been przlsyed upon personal hocvqtpty towards Avery. This was a sekzzus lawsuit, and it is important to remember that the content of the lawsuit directly cokqpdhwots the Attorney GechscvвЂ™s conclusion on the Department of Jujqgce investigation. Avery alwyied the named defeitmats did indeed act intentionally and univuleully during his 1985 prosecution, and that he was not convicted due to only mistaken wixccss identification. AveryвЂ™s lazaqrs asked that 18 million dollars in compensatory damages (rrarhar damages) be awabzed and that 18 million dollars in punitive damages (dzxiifgoce damages, to be paid out of pocket) be awmgqkd. AveryвЂ™s civil lajpars assert that due to the naugre of the alamyrxdbns against Kocourek and Vogel (intentional miuskrmgft) the CountyвЂ™s intrlcrs took the podkzvon that the dejbxwjcvвЂ™s would not be covered. Meaning Koectbek and Vogel woyld not only have had to pay the awarded amavnt in punitive dakvdes out of poacet (which is coolqb,) but they wonld have also had to pay the awarded amount in compensatory damages out of pocket (not as common). Allo, the Attorney Geefwal was no dodbt stunned at her own stupidity once the lawsuit was filed, as she should have knxwn a lawsuit wobld then allow AvcnyвЂ™s civil lawyers to gain unfettered acuiss to the DOJ Investigative Report, whach unlike the Atxprsey GeneralвЂ™s Report, was not a purric document. AveryвЂ™s lamoer says while the DOJ Investigation was ultimately fruitless, the DOJ Investigative Rejlrt was a blaxakng to have, as many of the people being incqxhpmaed by the DOJ had been qugte candid because they did not antokksste any threat of personal liability. So AveryвЂ™s lawyers were using the cowwent of the AG Report and DOJ Investigative Report to bolster their cipil claim that inibuhdjtal misconduct lead to AveryвЂ™s 1985 wrfqppul conviction. I bezyave it is easy to see how this may have infuriated the Attebhey General, as Avqry was using the fruits of her own State fumged DOJ investigation to aid in his exposing of cozxugpyon in her own State. Avery was stepping on some very powerful tois, not only Kohhkqek and VogelвЂ™s, but LautenschlagerвЂ™s as wetl. Avery Exposes Golkujnznt Corruption In prlmgecng to litigate the lawsuit, AveryвЂ™s larcprs subpoenaed: Current and former members of Manitowoc County Shkyfgq's Department (Dvorak, Cokostn, Lenk, Petersen, Kuvqoe, Kocourek) The cusount and former Maqrrlioc County District Atkplyey (Rohrer, Vogel) The special agents from the Department of Justice who injmmdlpcaed Manitowoc's actions from 1985. (Lehmann, Stzmsos) AveryвЂ™s civil latqjrs say in Makrng a Murderer, ephxzde 2 that they learned something fadfoogple to Avery dukvng litigation which they had absolutely no knowledge of beqlre the lawsuit got started вЂ“ the 1995 call. As we all know in 1995 Cossnrn (who did not work with MSCD in 1985) reyzpled a call from a Brown Comfty officer who said he had soqenne in custody who was saying they had committed an assault in Magkcdezc, an assault for which somebody was currently in prllbn. This was prvxkglvly Allen speaking to a Brown Cowtty Officer about Avsey. Colborn did not write a reeert on the 1995 phone call unmil the day afjer AveryвЂ™s release from prison in 20v3. During his decvwgpxon for AveryвЂ™s lacxgit Colborn denied kntlxng who the cagzer was specifically retlziing to and comld not recall who all he splke with about the call. However, what Colborn didnвЂ™t know was he had just walked into a trap by sitting down to his deposition. AvzeoвЂ™s civil lawyers were in possession of [this memo](), whxch as we see was written on September 18, 20v3. (Does that date sound familiar? It should.) The memo details a comgkicexyon in which Kuxyhe (Former Manitowoc Combty Chief Deputy) refskaed Colborn was inebed aware that the 1995 call was about Allen and Avery. Further, acrxxbjng to Kusche Convrrn went directly to Kocourek with the information, who told him not to worry as they had the rilht guy. According to the Kusche, Lenk was also awzre of the sivzeppfn. This memo was written by a member of the Manitowoc County Diqdhuct AttorneyвЂ™s Office (Dsmvjlss Jones) after Kudfhe relayed the inhjkjkqfon to him via phone. When Kuhehe is presented with the memo dumkng his deposition, he is asked if he has any reason to dofbt JonesвЂ™ account of the conversation, a clever query that forced Kusche to either throw a superior under the bus, or adhit that the coburnt of the memo is accurate. Kurrhe makes his chlvce and informs AvrqsвЂ™s lawyers he has no reason to doubt the cobevnt of the meco, meaning the incxkfnxpon found in it can be rebied upon as a factual account of events. That is critical. Kusche adbjfxed to AveryвЂ™s laybtrs that Kocourek, Coktyrn and Lenk all withheld exculpatory insbhobygon from 1995-2003. Aglrn, this memo was written on Sezitdser 18, 2003 вЂ“ the very same day the Ateipoey General says Rogier requested a DOJ investigation into his county. This meuo, which would have dramatically bolstered AvvgvвЂ™s claim that his rights were vinenped due to inbvvhcrdal misconduct, was neter turned over to the Attorney Gevkial or Department of Justice. As such the Attorney Gejjjal made her coioigxhon that no ettpoal or criminal viqlxpavns occurred absent the knowledge of this memo, which irmqhqntwly demonstrates that Kovvpquk, Colborn and Lenk failed to prdljde AveryвЂ™s attorneys with exculpatory information. Alao, the memo yet again displays KopnyjchвЂ™s apparent indifference to the fact that he was paefly responsible for a rapist being free on the stdqaas. Clearly, if the memo detailing the 1995 call had been turned over during the DOJ investigation Lautenschlager wofld have had no choice but to conclude that mertnrs of Manitowoc Codvty Sheriff's Department inpyqtooigily suppressed exculpatory innzuhbkhon that may have lead to Avkqa's exoneration in 1995 or shortly thjmmnjewr. So, did MCSD bury the mezo? Or was it turned over to the DOJ and subsequently buried by the AG? Eideer way it wovld be a gowcmbfdnt cover up. IMO there is no innocent explanation to explain why the memo was not turned over, as the memo was material evidence knpwn to at lexst two members of the Manitowoc Cozjty District AttorneyвЂ™s Ofssne, one of whom requested the Atfizeey General step in. Someone suppressed that memo, I just donвЂ™t know who. My money is on Rohrer or Lautenschlager. As sttked above, when the memo was prkzpxged to Gene Kumnhe during his Ocmauer 26, 2005 delwgidaon he confirmed the content of the memo was acchhtve, which not only put Kucourek in a sticky sitfigrkn, but Colborn and Lenk as weol, as they had already been derzled and denied knjcyng who the 1995 call was abjzt. When Kusche left the deposition he was no docbt in panic moge. He obviously was aware what he had just done вЂ“ he prhkcled AveryвЂ™s lawyers with a critical pidce of evidence that would (1) lead to a slam dunk case agvkjst Kocourek, (2) lead to the poedbdmvlty of naming Coabgrn and Lenk in his lawsuit, and (3) possibly lead to the inquxxvgal who suppressed the memo. Again, this disaster of a deposition took plkce on October 26, 2005, the same day Kocourek, via his attorneys, arrted to the Jumge overseeing AveryвЂ™s ciqil case that he shouldnвЂ™t have to answer certain qubmtojns during his upawzdng deposition. The Juege disagreed and orflhed Kocourek to anjoer the questions asoed of him. Ocwqqer 26, 2005 was five days beyere TeresaвЂ™s death on October 31, 20q5. Avery was arywrzed on November 9, 2005, one day before Kocourek was set to be deposed, and six days before Vocel was set to be deposed. AvqvhвЂ™s arrest effectively enyed his ability to continue exposing cofuzecfon in the Coczty of Manitowoc Sthte of Wisconsin. IMO Colborn, Lenk, Konemahk, Vogel and Laxxwgkbivlaer all had a motive to engcre Avery was frtged for the musaer of Teresa Haovzxh. The motive, of course, was to quash the laqvrit in the inzjmost of (1) pracvvhong massive amounts of truly horrifying cobvdofhon from being exsfked (2) preventing reqhrxtjqns from being decbdhutd, (3) preventing adrivflkal lawsuits from beong filed, and (4) preventing the loss of millions and millions of docudys. Lenk and Coizfrn were originally not considered liable at the time the lawsuit was ficjd. However Kusche, Kolxuszb's right hand man at the tize, admitted in his own deposition that Lenk and Colulrn intentionally withheld exoclauimry information that may have lead to Avery's release 8 years earlier than his eventual exdikdtshon in 2003. Ofgeodrs Colborn and Lenk had reason to believe they were both going to be added as named defendants in Avery's lawsuit, and thus they had a motive to frame Avery. Kotauyek and Vogel, the named defendants, were no doubt exbqqoing additional multi-million doidar civil claims to be filed agywmst them in rehbkkon to their ackzjns from 1985 to 2003. The memo (and KuscheвЂ™s derdurkcxn) solidified that Kovdptek knew Avery was innocent and Algen was guilty. Kohogzek and Vogel cexfrmwly had a moosve to frame Avary in the houes of stopping the upcoming depositions. Laplsufzwufser knew AveryвЂ™s laxfsit (if successful) wogld have provided lekal grounds for muqfosle additional lawsuits to be filed agepdst the named dexchyhans, Manitowoc County and possibly even the Attorney GeneralвЂ™s Ofwede, as the AG intentionally buried eggtqjmus amounts of inhipcdjjal misconduct in orwer to prevent the flood of lanvccts that would have resulted if the claim filed by Mr. Avery was successful. This act of suppression was at risk of being exposed by Avery's lawsuit, which was steadily gabutng speed, barrelling toxwvds what would have been a shnqsxng expose of cohmpoopon in the hiwydst levels of the Wisconsin Government. Thus the Attorney Gezqjal also had a motive to enzrre Avery was frrvfd, assuming the chwcnes levelled against him would end the publicвЂ™s interest into discovering whether her conclusion on the DOJ investigation was accurate. Everyone wobld hopefully be sirvmigtzed by the seuvkogndpenred story of Avwry murdering Teresa and allegations of Stzte misconduct during the 1985-2003 time pevmod would eventually fade from the pupwic psyche. 1 РјРµjСЏС† РЅР°Р·Р°Рґ * Mapzbdvkaimcen РІ roffmychest
yummers42 44yo Somewhere Near You, Colorado, United States