Have a look at this too DR

http://www.esquire.com/entertainment...w-revelations/

...I know there was that one time that we heard, that he more or less said to his mum that he would kill himself...but it didn't feel as though he really meant it to me, but more...'well you better keep this up mum, you better keep focusing on me and my innocence, type thing...his parents whole lives are more or less dedicated to him now, as they have been for the last 28yrs or whatever it is in all...an attention, that maybe he loves, as well as public attention, possibly inmate attention of an 'innocent man', a huge wave of support, plus someone falling in love with him as well, because of his situation really...

Yeah, i was thinking that too, it sounded more like a threat to his mother in a way, didn't it?

That woman and him split up now as well since the Documentary was made.

Thanks Niamh, I wondered why that wasn't brought up in court.

I also just read here http://mic.com/articles/131662/steve...rer#.GYyKZIPSJ that he covered the cat in gasoline before throwing it on the fire. My sympathies wane for his imprisonment, (guilty or not) when I read stuff like that.

I'm not sure about his ex. There was something odd about her and I got the strong impression that she was likely a socipath. She appeared devoid of any emotion and when Steve mentioned getting her child back she said, "lets get you sorted out first". Most mothers wouldn't be able to think about anything other that bringing their child home but to date, it doesn't look like she's attempted to do that. I also got the impression that she didn't seem to care about him being guilty or not. If she believed he could of been guilty during the trial, why on earth would she of stood by him for as long as she did?.

So were they both sociopaths? they say that sociopaths often relate to other sociopaths and are more likely to have successful relationships with each other.

Yeah, he did that to the cat and also, I found that while watching the Documentary they made you feel sorry for and almost like Steve was the victim in the incident where he ran his cousin off the road and pulled a gun on her just because he said that she was making up stories about him? hhhmmmm i don't know. Also, 6 years of the 18 he spent in prison originally were justified and were for that crime that he definitely committed. I read somewhere too that he was trying to get his cousin into his car that day but let her go when he realised her child was in her car.

Not sure about his ex Jodi but his first wife was threatened by him too and none of his kids have anything to do with him. Weird though that she ended up marrying Brendans dad, I think they're all just a really strange bunch

..I don't think there's a label tbh, I just think that they're a very creepy 'inbred' family in many ways..but I think Steven has a very unhealthy and disturbed mind and he got a taste of something he liked in his 18yrs of 'innocent', he stopped becoming a creep and became a full on focus of positive attention...from inside the family and from a public...

..also a gun again and what we know for sure from her remains is that Teresa was shot in the head..all of the other stuff/rape/torture etc are things we don't know ever took place....

I started reading the court transcripts, haven't even got any further than the first day yet though, reading it is a bit of a chore because all the 'umming' 'ahhing' etc was annoying to read through :laugh:

The documentary does come across as biased but then the Manitowoc Sheriffs office, Teresa's family/friends and the prosecution team were asked to take part but refused so it was never gonna come across any other way tbh.

Also whether people think he's guilty or not I'm just glad the show has blew the whole thing wide open and the corruption from the Sheriffs department and throughout the court case has came to light, they both do really deserve a new fair trial.

Yeah absolutely and for me Brendans part in all this has been much more upsetting to watch and who I'd most feel sorry for. I mean there is no doubt in my mind that his confession should have been inadmissible based solely on the behaviour of his first lawyer, that was truly disgusting

..yeah I started to read them as well Josy, I thought right I'll get this small section done now but OMG, what is that um/em/urr stuff..I've never actually noticed witnesses or lawyers doing it when we see it but it takes up 50% of court time it seems...(so I didn't get very far..)...I do agree though totally, a fair trial is everyone's entitlement....

Absolutely. Regardless of whether they were guilty or not, it wasn't a fair trial. Brendan's defence lawyer was moronic and should of been struck off for breaking every rule in the book.

..he was a failed politician apparently (the first one..)...and only took the case on for the 'fame and fortune' as it were/the publicity...he had no interest in his client, I think I read that he had admitted that...I'm not sure if he's still practicing law or not actually...

Surely he isn't if he actually came out and admitted that? Disgraceful

..I'll try to find the link but I have so many links stored and looked at so many sites and articles that specific ones are impossible to bookmark...but he had apparently just run for a State office or something and lost ..and felt that involvement in this case would help with a law career instead.../such a high profile case...he always looked in interviews as though he was preening himself for the cameras and it was all about him, not Brendan...I never liked the look of him...

He is still practising law according to this 'where are they now' article: http://bgr.com/2016/01/21/making-a-m...-lenk-colborn/

:/

..I guess it worked for him, then/his law career...I wonder if he's 'small town cases' or if he gets some of the bigger cases to represent...

who in their right mind would want him representing them though?

....yeah I know, but he's obviously still working ...I've tried to think actually before I replied, to think well maybe this or that, but no I can't think who tbh...


...(maybe Wisconsin has lots of people not in their right minds who need defence attorneys..)..sorry Alex, I the love USA...

:fan:

Kratz didn’t face a disciplinary hearing for the way he handled the Avery case but in 2010 his law license was suspended for four months and he was fined over $23,000. The disciplinary actions came after Kratz sent sexual texts to a victim of domestic abuse, while still working as the Calumet County D.A. and handling domestic abuse prosecution. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ex-da-ke...xting-scandal/

Kachinsky is still an attorney in Wisconsin, where he continues to work in juvenile defense -- though his name has recently been removed from his firm's masthead.
http://www.inquisitr.com/2658949/len...irm-hides-bio/

Avery’s defense lawyer, Dean Strang still practices law and is also a lecturer at The University of Wisconism. He’s also had some of his work published including a book ‘Worse Than The Devil: Anarchists, Clarence Darrow, and Justice in a Time Of Terror’

Jerome Buting, the other defence lawyer is still an active lawyer and despite losing that infinite case, is still doing well today.

Plus he was a court appointed lawyer so Brendan didn't get to choose.
I wanted to throw things at my tv when the judge asked Brendan if he thought
Kachinsky was doing a good job.

That Len guy was a judge for a while

..I bet your TV throwing urges started with his first words about Brandon, DR.. "we have a 16 year old who was, while morally and legally responsible, was heavily influenced by someone who was evil incarnate"
...such a... look at me, this is my moment not yours Brendon, speech and all polished and shiny/smiling into the cameras...all we were lacking was that Colgate smile sparkle... with the severity of the case, this was Brendon's life he was smiling about while he was almost checking his hair...I did warm to Dean Strang straight away though..a completely different first impression...



..yeah you're right Josy, he had run for judge/not politician and came third or something just before the trial...this was his first court appointed case, so maybe he took it because he thought it could help with his career or was told it would....