Making A Murderer’s Steven Avery Says His Brothers Could Have Killed Theresa Halbach

Steven Avery, the subject of the Netflix documentary series Making A Murderer, has his own theory of who murdered Theresa Halbach–his own brothers.

According to legal documents Avery filed in 2009, which were obtained by TMZ, Avery notes that his brothers Earl and Charles both have a history of sexually assault and harassment.

In the documents, Avery suggests that his brothers were jealous of the settlement he received after having been falsely accused of raping Penny Beerntsen, and had also been fighting with him over the family business. He says these issues could have motivated them to frame him.

Earl Avery had previously pled “no contest” to sexually assaulting his two daughters, and Charles Avery had previously been charged with sexually assaulting his own wife and strangling her with a telephone cord.

During the same month Theresa Halbach was murdered, several women accused Charles of aggressive behavior and stalking, with one woman claiming he would drive by her house repeatedly and then call her to tell her he’d seen her in her bathing suit.

Personally, I’d been leaning towards Scott Tadych and Bobby Dassey as the most likely suspects since watching the series, but this definitely makes me question that.

In other Making A Murderer news–Avery’s former counsel (and my future husband) Dean Strang hinted to The Daily Beast that he and Jerry Buting may well return to help Avery overturn his conviction, if that were the most effective way of helping him.

“Jerry and I both have always been in touch with Steven, on and off,” said Strang, who now leads his own law firm, Strang Bradley LLC in Madison. Buting is a partner in Buting, Williams & Stilling, S.C., an hour away in Brookfield, Wisconsin. “It’s clear that he probably needs formal legal representation [for] the specific, concrete things that a lawyer can do in the coming weeks and months.

“It would depend on what he wants, for one, and two, whether any future legal steps might involve examining whether Jerry and I dropped the ball in some way—whether we were inadequate or the legal term is ineffective, in some way. If some possible avenue of relief might be raising questions about our performance or criticizing our performance then we shouldn’t be the ones to do that.

“He’s not going to be able to pay anybody,” he added. “Money isn’t in the equation. But what is, right now in our eyes, is, what’s best for Steven?”

God, he’s a mensch.

I think we’re all hoping that Avery’s case is reexamined as a result of this series. Especially considering that after its release, a juror came out saying that they believed Avery was framed but voted guilty both in fear of repercussions from police and because they made “I’ll vote guilty on this if you vote not guilty on that” deals amongst themselves, which is definitely not a legal way to decide a case.

[The Daily Beast]