All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 22, 2023 - Candace Owens
38:15
KEY FACTS Left Out in "Making a Murderer"
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
All right, guys, we're going to jump right into this.
Episode 5 of Convicting a Murderer.
I'm looking at the chatter online.
A lot of people have now been converted to the Stephen Avery is Guilty Committee, which I have been hosting.
I am the head of the Stephen Avery is Guilty Committee.
And obviously, because we finally jumped into what is at root with the $36 million lawsuit, I'm here with Brandon Tatum, perfect person to have here, former police officer, to kind of take us through the What you found to be weird, what you found not to be weird.
The first thing that I want to say right off of the top is that police officers rarely conduct a perfect investigation.
I don't know why of every field and every category of job and living, people understand that mistakes happen and things are not perfect.
When it comes to police officers, it is like, you better have done everything perfect or else you're a dirty cop.
And there seems to be nothing in between.
Right. I think that is the misnomer when it comes to the public and them not knowing exactly what is involved in investigations.
It's a very broad perspective.
There's a lot of moving parts.
There's a lot of people involved, a lot of technical things that go on.
And most people don't know that unless they do ride-alongs or they are part of the police department.
So I think that it's easily or it's easy to trick people.
And to get in the perception of police being fraudulent if there's something missed.
And I've done plenty of investigations and I've been a part of major investigations.
And there could be things that are missed and it's normal and it happens.
That's why we have qualified immunity.
You know, the fruits, if you are, you know, in a court proceeding, if you're acting in good faith, all of those things come into consideration.
So I think that that's something that people should consider is that police are not going to be perfect.
And if they're not, that doesn't mean that they're doing something wrong.
Right. And I think one of the things that I wanted to stress to people, and they definitely saw this in episode five, is just how small Manitowoc County is.
I think a lot of our perception about police officers and police forces really comes from the TV screen.
And people just think the FBI swoops in, every police force has tens of thousands of people at their disposal.
And it's just not that way when you really get to these really small towns, you know?
They're relying on the same people, We're good to go.
So let's just first jump into this clip.
In case people have not seen episode five, you can see it available on Daily Wire Plus.
But the question of people asking why Manitowoc County was involved at all.
There's a missing person and the person's car is found in Manitowoc County.
So this might be the reason why they were initially involved.
Let's watch the clip. I think Making a Murder Reviewers came away with the impression that nobody from Manitowoc County was supposed to be involved at all in the Theresa Hallback investigation.
And yet, not only were they still very much involved, but they were also the officers that were finding a lot of the important evidence.
The department that should not have been involved was very involved.
But not only their involvement, it's them hiding their involvement.
In making a murder? Sheriff Pago from Calumet is stating that the only role that Manitowoc played was to provide resources, to provide equipment.
When we needed something, they went and got us that.
You know, that's all they did.
They provided that piece of equipment, and that's their role and their only role in this investigation.
But prior to that, the fifth, the sixth, the seventh, and the eighth, I think there were at least three or four where they talked about the role that Manitowoc and other counties played.
This wasn't like it was just Calumet and Manitowoc.
The place was swarming with cops from almost the very beginning.
Our department will be...
Supported by the State Patrol, the Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department, the State.
They have provided numerous agents to aid and provide assistance to our agency and the Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department.
The Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department has been terrific as far as providing local Resources, their expertise.
Individuals from my agency, individuals from the Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department, and I have...
Nobody ever said to Manitowoc County, hey, you guys off the property.
They were clearly allowed to be on the property because they were on the property.
The truth is they were very much allowed to be involved in the investigation.
Obviously it was taking place in their county, but internally the superiors had decided maybe let's not lead this investigation.
By investigation, Calumet County was going to be doing interviews, obtaining subpoenas and search warrants, examining records, and conducting the searches.
Manitowoc County was going to assist in that process.
For example, if certain resources were needed during searches, they would have manpower that they could provide if we needed that.
And the Manitowoc District Attorney took it even a step further.
Manitowoc County District Attorney Mark Rohr said on the first day of the search of the Avery property that he did not want any Manitowoc County officers on the property without somebody else with them.
He did that to avoid any perceived conflicts of interest due to that $36 million lawsuit Avery had filed against the county.
It was Manitowoc County officials that made that decision themselves.
No one demanded it or required them to hand over the investigation or required that either Calumet officers or a DCI agent be with them at all times.
So if the prevailing belief was that officers were somehow involved because they wanted to plant evidence, then why didn't they just lead the investigation themselves like they were allowed to do?
So just make that clear again.
So Teresa, the phone call comes in that Teresa is missing from Calumet County.
And then her car is found in Manitowoc County, obviously, because it's found in Stephen Avery's lot.
And this just happens to be where Stephen Avery lives.
And the clock is ticking down.
They don't know if she's still alive.
And to make it clear to people, they had every right.
They did not actually have to pass off this investigation.
They could have led this investigation.
And internally, they said, you know what?
Obviously, it's going to look bad if we leave this investigation.
We see that her car is here.
Public perception is going to be that, oh, you know, why are your hands still here?
And so they internally make moral decisions and say, we're going to actually let Calumet lead the investigation, and we're just going to provide manpower because this lot is huge, you know?
This woman is potentially still alive.
We need to do what we can do and bring in outside forces.
And you also see that deceptive editing.
They didn't show you that they had freely admitted that in multiple press conferences that Manitowoc County was going to be assisting in the searches.
What was your perception of how they handled this as a former police officer?
Well, I think if they can go back and change it, they probably would, because it still
will be a conflict of interest.
Because you have a person who was wrongly convicted, even if they were acting in good
faith initially.
This man was going to do 32 years in prison.
Thank God for DNA, he got out.
And so what you would want to do, and this is, go back to the premise that we were talking
about before, about the perception of impropriety with police investigations.
You want to eliminate any chance, because in the court of law, the jury is going to
have to convict somebody beyond a reasonable doubt.
And when you have a conflict of interest, it could create a reasonable doubt.
And when you have Manitowoc County officers, investigators, Ending up finding key crucial items of information that literally led to probably him getting convicted would yield a conflict of interest.
So I think that it doesn't necessarily mean that they did something wrong or they were attempting to cover up or plant evidence, but it definitely...
You know, puts a question mark in people's minds of, with all of these agencies there, why did they still need to be involved?
With the superiors understanding that this could cause a conflict of interest, we need to have people following them around and making sure that this doesn't look bad.
Why wouldn't they just remove them altogether, at least in the investigatory part?
Holding the perimeter actually doing resources would be a good option, but having them in you know Stephen Avery's
home finding evidence
It created a storm that probably shouldn't have happened and in an investigation
You don't want to create that because then in court you're gonna have an appeal battle and you could get somebody off
That should be convicted so the way that I run it in my head is I think the exact
opposite way which is if this woman was actually still Alive and the difference between finding her and not
finding her as you're running against the clock Would have been why weren't more officers on the property
right and you say oh well We told all of Manitowoc County even though this was their
County to take a step back because Stephen Avery was involved
You would have had the same criticism It would have been why you knew this person was missing you
knew that this is where her car was if you had got into Her 12 hours earlier. She would have been alive and all you
had to do there's in many scenarios There's no way police can win until you actually know the
ending which is why I think these officers say Hindsight is 20 20 right at this moment. They don't know
she's dead right they don't actually they don't know that Stephen Avery is involved
It could have been any other person that was on that property it could have been his brother his cousin his
niece They have no idea and they're coming into the situation
thinking we're racing against the clock and we're trying to find this young lady
And if I was a person that was potentially distressed and on this property 40 acre lot
I'm and even if I'm the parent of someone else where I'm like sent every
single police officer because at the end of the day you're talking about money and
We can deal with the perception and the public versus somebody's life, which I would have been like, this is the priority.
We need to find this girl.
I think we're on the same page when it comes to that, and I think most people will agree with you on that.
I think that they could have been a little more strategic.
When you're talking about canvassing 40 acres, of course, every officer counts, and you can go from there.
People would understand that. But when you start getting to a more intimate investigation, meaning that you're going to now go in Stephen Avey's home, You know, now you guys are going to actually physically be in there, even though you have one person supervising you.
That person is not sitting there watching every officer, and he can't be in two places at one time.
So I think that they could have kept the officers there to canvas the lot, but then when they knew they were going to go to Stephen Avery's house, I think they should have slowed down and kind of re...
I would say reimagine, but they should have tried to reevaluate the tactics.
And this is why you want to do that, because you could possibly find evidence that will convict a person, and because you are in a conflict of interest, it could paint doubt in the jury pool.
So obviously in this case...
It didn't yield doubt enough to not get him convicted.
But in the future, as a supervisor, you want to look at those things because it's not enough to find evidence.
You want to also make sure you convict this person.
And we do it all the time in policing.
We have tactical strategies to investigating, and we have chain of command.
We do all of these things because doing an investigation at the time is not all that you think about.
You have to use big picture.
Same thing with O.J. Simpson.
I mean, he literally became a free man.
Well, I say he became a free man.
You're innocent until proven guilty.
They weren't able to prove him guilty because of things that they did on the scene.
And future investigations teach officers to say, okay, when we do this, we have to make sure we have chain of custody, even in the heat of the moment.
When we have situations on the police department where there's a murder scene, We are already thinking about how can we make sure we secure this investigation so we don't mess around and get a killer off because we made mistakes during the investigation.
But that's public perception versus the factual investigation, which is why...
I think ultimately he was convicted because, like I said, they were allowed to be on the property.
So if you're the jury and you're looking at this case and you understand, yes, I'm sure because the Netflix docuseries people are thinking that they're not supposed to be there, but they could have even led this investigation and they didn't.
They yielded it and said Calumet lead it.
I think you're right that this gave Netflix fuel without question.
Obviously we see that because there are still people that are like, well, what were they even doing on the property now?
They shouldn't have been on the property and things of that nature, but there was a reason that he got convicted, and the jury thought they acted in the right capacity, which I think you'll see more of, especially as we get into Brendan Dassey.
The Bible is the root of wisdom, inspiration, and spiritual nourishment.
The Halo app empowers you to explore the Bible's profound teachings and effortlessly incorporate them into your daily life.
A great place to start while you deepen your understanding of the Bible is to check out
Fr. Mike Schmitz's Bible in a Year, available now on the HALL-O app for brief daily readings
and reflections. Here you can dive into an extensive library of Bible reading plans accompanied by
insightful reflections and audio-guided meditations. So whether you're a seasoned Bible reader or just
starting your journey, HALL-O provides a platform for you to engage with Scripture like never before.
Studying the Bible's literary brilliance has influenced countless writers, poets,
and artists throughout history. By studying the Bible, you'll gain a deeper appreciation for the
power of storytelling, symbolism, and metaphor, enriching your understanding of literature across
all genres.
The Halo app also helps you connect with a community of like-minded individuals, sharing experiences, insights, and encouragement along the path to spiritual growth.
So download the app for free at halo.com slash candace.
I want to move now to the Netflix spin on the $36 million narrative.
Really what this gets into is Penny Bernstein, years ago, obviously, she survives a sexual assault.
And she works with somebody to create a sketch of what the person
looks like that committed this crime.
They line up a bunch of men, one of them being Stephen Avery.
Why Stephen Avery?
Because Stephen Avery is somebody local who had been in a lot of
trouble before.
Stephen Avery also was spending six years in prison for
putting a gun to his cousin via marriage and a toddler in the car.
This is not a guy that was just plucked up out of obscurity,
is what I mean to say.
Kind of looks like him.
Penny is certain this is the guy that sexually assaulted her.
Penny says, yes, 100%.
She testifies against him, says that this happens.
I think what people didn't understand and what we showed is he had a very, very, very high mountain to scale in order to win this $36 million lawsuit.
You have to be able to prove that the police officers, despite knowing pretty much that
you were not the person that was right, and this is pre-DNA evidence, so it wasn't like
they had anything to attest against, they trusted this victim, that she accurately recalled
the person, and of course, because of that, didn't widen their search.
I am convinced he would not have won the $36 million lawsuit.
I am convinced that his lawyer advised him that he would not win a $36 million lawsuit because the police weren't in it to put him in prison.
They were in it to help this woman find who aggressed her, and she was certain that he had done it, and she was incredibly remorseful for what she had done when he came out.
She said that she would live with that guilt for the rest of her life.
She genuinely made a mistake The mistake was not the police officer's mistake, which is what he would have had to prove in court.
How did you feel learning that he had settled this lawsuit, first and foremost, and about the idea that this really wasn't the police officer's fault in the first place, that Penny thought that she had the right person?
Right, yes. It's very complicated because, you know, you have the original Making the Murderer documentary where they present certain facts and it can be very confusing unless you were in the courtroom hearing both sides because it appeared, of course, his attorneys made the claim that He needed some money to continue to fight, and so he settled for $450,000 or something like that, so he can keep paying them to continue to fight.
You are 100% correct on an uphill battle.
The burden is on him to prove, you know, to a higher degree, and I think in a civil lawsuit, it'll be the preponderance of evidence, meaning he has 51% of the evidence on his side to prove that they were malice and they did something that was significant enough beyond acting in good faith, meaning that That they intentionally picked him, intentionally coerced this person, intentionally did this, and it wasn't just an accident because clearly they messed up.
But if you have a witness, point a person out of the lineup.
Yeah, how did they mess up? Because this is a pre-DNA evidence world, right?
So if they were able to test it, then you'd say, okay, you could have tested and realized that despite her testimony, she was completely wrong.
It's hard for us to imagine now because we have forensics.
The only argument that they would have is if there were other leads that they did not explore and they were malicious in it.
Meaning that if they had decided, because Stephen Avery has an incredibly terrible record of violence and burning cats and doing a lot of stuff in a small town.
Everybody knows the Averys and everybody knows that Stephen Avery has issues.
And if they started the investigation saying it must be him and then they build facts around that, that could be a way that he could win.
It's unclear if that's even the case.
It's very difficult to win an uphill battle when you have an eyewitness who gets raped
or gets sexually assaulted.
And she has a sketch expert when she's testifying what the man looked like.
The sketch expert, according to his testimony, he draws up a person and it happened to look
just like Steven Avery.
That's the reason why he was in the lineup in the first place, because the sketch artist
drew a picture that looked just like him.
Based on Penny's description, so it's like what did the police do here?
It would be very difficult, but I would say this, the only chance he would have is if
he could illustrate impropriety and it had momentum from the media.
Because if the media is putting pressure on the city, a lot of times what they would do
But in a case where you think a citizen is going to come up against a city that has tax dollars to pay for their defense, and you hire some cheap guy that don't have a lot of experience, it's going to be incredibly difficult.
That's the difference between going to trial and fighting the city versus a settlement.
And we've seen this happen in the case with Michael Brown and these other cases where the city settles and they do not have fault.
So they just give them the money because they don't want to go through the process.
That does not mean that they did anything wrong.
And so in his case, if the media could have picked it up enough to put pressure on the city, they settle with him, he would win.
It's nearly impossible for him to win if he's going to go toe-to-toe, especially him as a person.
He's not the brightest person on the block, and so he's definitely not going to be a good witness for himself.
He's not going to be able to get on the stand and articulate himself.
So I think it would have been, to your point, a very difficult position for him to actually win that amount of money.
Right. As many of you know, I am constantly traveling.
Being on the road as much as I am, I don't always sleep great at night, probably because the hotel bedding is not as comfortable as my Buffy bedding back at home.
Now that I'm getting ready to welcome another baby, I need as much sleep as I can possibly get.
Buffy's bedding is some of the softest you will ever try.
Not just that, their sheets are made from eucalyptus and are naturally cool We're good to go.
So upgrade your betting with the Breeze sheet set by Buffy.
Go to Buffy.co and use code CANDICE for 25% off your first order.
That's Buffy.co, promo code CANDICE for 25% off.
And I really think kind of one of the biggest bombs in this episode, which I think people
were surprised to learn, was that there was this concept that people had in these conspiracy
forums that the reason the cops potentially killed Teresa and did all of this stuff was
because they didn't want to pay out this $36 million loss that was going to bankrupt the
city.
And it's just so factually untrue.
It's just factually untrue.
And I tried to make the analogy of, you know, you get into a car accident, you have car
insurance.
You have car insurance.
The insurance company is going to have to pay.
Yes, the car accident is your fault.
Why would you then kill the person in the car?
This is going to bankrupt me.
No, it's not going to bankrupt you because you have car insurance, right?
And people didn't understand that the insurance company would have had to pay out this lawsuit.
Again, tremendous uphill battle for him to win it in the first place.
Secondly, if he did win it, the insurance company was going to have to pay it out.
So why on earth would the cops go through all of this effort?
Oh, my goodness, so much effort, including killing someone potentially, as some people
believed it, or disappearing her, plotting this evidence, doing all of this stuff because
they just did not, like they were just like, I care about Geico so much.
I just do not want Geico.
It gets really foolish.
I'm telling you, and you know this, obviously, and this is why you created this documentary
to kind of debunk the things that were said in the original one.
It's very difficult when you watch the original one to not think that they had it out to get him.
However, you have to be balancing your perspective.
You have to say, yeah, it sounds very compelling.
Yeah, it seems like they may have had a motive to be biased against him.
But you have to also think, it is crazy to think that they would have to use the murder
of somebody, plant bones and charred body parts.
It could happen, but it's highly unlikely that they have to go through that process
when Steven Avery was already kind of a degenerate, and it was only a matter of time before he
do something, potentially do something else to get the land him in jail, or for him not
to win this case.
And the police officers personally should not have the investment in trying to defend
the city in a lawsuit.
It's not like somehow they're going to have to pay out of their pockets.
The department may be shamed.
They already got enough shame for convicting them wrongly in the first place.
So going through murdering somebody is very difficult to believe that they may have-
Not just any kind of murder.
I mean, she was charged.
She was shot, stabbed, raped twice.
Allegedly. Thrown into a burn pit, charred in his back.
It's just a lot.
And I'm trying to think if there's ever been a case, ever, where the police officers went through that much effort to protect the insurance company.
Ever. Ever. They're a podunk.
This is kind of like a podunk town, right?
I mean, Stephen Avery, they're not very sophisticated people.
They don't have a lot of money.
And so for them to pull off the greatest framing in American history would take a lot of manpower resources and a lot of technical intelligence.
And you've got to have the family in on it, as we're starting to see.
It's like there's a lot.
The family's got eyewitness reports.
I mean, you just would literally need...
Yeah, but see Candace too, it's hard because it's like, you think, why in the world would a police department do that?
It seems possible, but not plausible.
But why would Stephen Avery do it?
The guy is literally free.
He spent 18 years in prison, much of which he was wrongly convicted of.
He was free. He was living his life.
I mean, he was going to get a little money.
I mean, $450,000 is not, for him, it's like- You should be able to answer this question because criminals, first off, criminals tend to be stupid.
You know what I mean? The recidivism rates are high for a reason.
They get right back out and they commit the next crime.
And you go, why on earth you just got out?
Why would you go within two seconds and go rob a store?
We see this. That actually makes sense.
Crime is being committed over and over and over again, and especially, which is why it was so significant in those first episodes, to unpack his history with his niece.
You're also dealing with someone who has a history of sexual deviancy, a history of violence, no doubt, you know, something from animals to human beings.
So, you know, he is the kind of person that we see that never really leaves the system, and he had it from juvie All the way back, and yeah, he would have had a little bit of money.
The family wasn't broke, even though that was kind of how making a murderer made it seem.
They had this massive lot.
They had another property that was further away.
So to understand the mind of a criminal and why they keep committing crimes is easier than to believe that that many police officers were involved in what would only be described as utter psychopathology.
You'd have to be a psychopath, really.
All of them would have to be... Nobody had a moral conscience.
We're just going to kill this girl, burn her, do all this, because we love GEICO. That's so far-fetched.
Like I said, it's possible, but it's not possible.
Criminals committing crimes? But one thing that people are not considering, too, is that, like you said, the recidivacy, right?
It happens when a person is incarcerated.
Because when you go to jail, that's not normal.
Sometimes people go and they get messed up in there.
Sometimes they go and they get cold and they probably come out angry.
And they're not the same person that they were when they went in.
And that's why people recidivate.
Because they get messed up, they get institutionalized, they become hardened, they gotta defend themselves in
prison.
So maybe Steven Avery potentially was bad, but he wasn't that bad.
But after going to prison for 18 years, and for something you didn't do for the most part, he may have
gotten out and he may have been a lot worse than when he went in.
So it's not too far-fetched to believe that when he got out, he may have been dealing with some issues.
It's not like they're going to counsel him.
It's not like somebody is consulting him and talking to him and helping him.
His IQ was very low.
Which is, by the way, criminals do tend to have a low IQ. How do you think you're going to get away with this?
They do tend to be very low IQ. So it could be very possible.
The difference between a white-collar crime and a crime on the street, you know?
And it could be very possible that...
He was impulsive. I mean, the letters he was writing in prison to his kids, when I get out, I'm going to kill your mommy.
Right. In the instance where he sees the girl there and he gets horny, and he say, I'm just going to have sex with her because, I don't know, his wife is not there.
He could have done that, and then in a sheer panic...
I mean, he could be stupid enough.
Potentially, that he would kill her, char her body, but then be dumb enough to not get rid of the other evidence, leaving himself susceptible to going to prison.
Yeah, well, he only had so much time before people were looking for her and they were calling that property, you know?
And I think one of the big things is he simply just ran out of time and that he had intended to get rid of more evidence.
And when we get into Brennan Dassey, Yeah, that's interesting.
Yeah, because Brennan Dassey, also obviously low IQ, and he couldn't have made up the things that perfectly locked in.
That's what I'm saying. The police would have then had to also brainwash Brennan Dassey.
I'm giving way too much away. I don't want to do that.
Medical establishment has been disregarding the lives of innocent babies for decades now.
Many have grown callous because it seems surreal to think that over 64 million babies have been lost.
Pre-born will not stand silent, nor should we.
We cannot stand by and let babies die at the hand of abortion, and that is why pre-born exists, to stand up for those who cannot defend themselves.
The only defense for these precious babies is their heartbeat, which begins at just three weeks and can be heard on ultrasound by five weeks.
So I was just getting on my feet and I met someone and I got pregnant and I wasn't ready.
How am I gonna raise a baby?
And I barely can take care of my daughter and myself right now.
I googled abortions and I scheduled an appointment thinking it was an abortion clinic.
They did my first ultrasound.
Seeing the ultrasound, it impacted me to the point to where I broke down crying.
The nurse reminded me that it was a blessing from God.
I was thinking about if I wanted to keep the baby or not.
When I was at the clinic, after they told me how far along I was and that the baby had a heartbeat, I cried and they gave me a minute by myself in the room.
I broke down and I prayed to God.
I asked the Lord to, when I walk out of those doors, to just give me the strength to be able to go through the pregnancy.
I made my decision at that time.
Women's Center called me out of the blue and said that they had a lot of stuff for me and they would like for me to come in.
They gave me cribs and diapers and so much stuff.
It's amazing. It touches my heart.
It makes me feel special.
It makes me feel like there's people in the world that does care.
They gave me hope, the strength to believe in myself, that I could do it.
Treasure I chose because I know that she was a gift from God and she's just gonna be a treasure.
I'm super grateful that I'm able to go down this journey with my daughter and I'm just super glad that I didn't have abortion.
I've learned how to trust God, how to listen to God and to trust myself and to do the right thing and not be selfish.
It feels amazing.
When a mother making the ultimate choice hears her baby's heartbeat and sees the precious life
inside of her, the majority of the time she will choose life. By sponsoring an ultrasound for a
mother, you are being the voice of preborn. Please join preborn in the cause for life for just $28.
You might be the difference between the life and death of a child.
To donate, dial pound 250 and say the keyword baby. That's pound 250 baby.
Or you can go to preborn.com slash Candace.
That's preborn.com slash Candace.
I do want to quickly discuss Colburn because I think that he was, Colburn and Lank, definitely fingered by the Making a Murderer.
These are the dirty cops. I want to say we're off the bat.
I met this guy. Like, the concept of him being a dirty cop.
I mean, just like a very happy-go-lucky...
Very much, I felt very bad for him.
That's what I want to say. I just felt very bad for him that he was kind of put, he was the person that was chosen to be one of the people that was chosen to be at the center of this conspiracy theory and just how much he had to endure during this time.
And just comes across to me as like a small town officer who, gosh, I don't know why.
I shouldn't have done that. I shouldn't have done, you know.
But let's just take a look at another clip from the show regarding Colburn and Officer Lenk's involvement.
Right. You've gone over what is Exhibit 138.
Yes, sir. It describes you receiving a telephone call from someone who identified himself as a detective.
When I received the call, I answered the phone, Manitowoc County Jail.
I didn't say Sheriff's Office.
I said, Manitowoc County Jail, Officer Colbert.
He must have assumed that I was a police officer.
He didn't give me his name, he just said, I'm a detective from this agency.
The detective indicated that there was a person in custody who had made a statement about a Manitowoc County offense, correct?
Yes. Okay.
He didn't say sexual assault, and he didn't give me a name of the suspect.
And what that person In custody, it said, was that he had committed an assault in Manitowoc County and someone else was in jail for it, correct?
Yes, sir. Didn't say prison, in our jail, who may have committed an assault in your guy's jurisdiction.
Was that a matter to shrug off for you?
I didn't shrug it off, sir.
I did what the caller asked me to do, connect him to a detective.
I think I said to him, you're probably going to want to talk to a detective.
I said, let me transfer you, and then transferred the call.
That was the end of it.
It wasn't within your jurisdiction to take it any further, correct?
No, sir. When I watched Making a Murderer, I can tell you right out that I thought he was absolutely wrong about how he handled it.
He should have followed up, absolutely.
Did you ever write a report about that?
No, I did not, sir.
I felt like that coupled with the fact that the report was written after the fact really bothered me.
Well, actually you did, didn't you?
It was about eight years later, wasn't it?
I wrote a statement on it, yes sir.
After I transferred the call, I really didn't think about it because on an average time working four hours in that control, you probably transfer 20 to 30 phone calls in a four-hour period, you know, every time you work in there.
Of course Andy Colburn didn't initially make a report when he took this phone call.
This isn't a huge gotcha moment that making a murderer was trying to make it out to be.
Because Andy Colburn was not a police officer at that time.
He was just working at the jail.
His job was to literally transfer phone calls.
Let me ask you this.
As you sit here today, Sergeant Colburn, do you even know whether that call was about Mr.
Stephen Avery? No, I don't.
So I think people that watched Making a Murderer came away with the impression that Coburn was a police officer at the time who answered a phone call.
So he was involved, knew that this guy had called regarding Stephen Avery, and declined to file a report.
Actually, turns out, he was literally just working in the phone control room.
He was transferring calls.
He gets a phone call. There's no names that are mentioned.
And he does the right thing and transfers it to a detective who should have then made a report.
Just not within his job title to make a report regarding this.
And they really were able to convince viewers that it somehow was.
Right. And I think that that's problematic, right?
Because they shouldn't have left out that important detail.
Because even when I watched it, I thought he was a cop.
Because when he's being deposed, he's wearing uniform.
Tricky. Tricky editing.
Right. He had made mention that he was an officer to the person on the phone.
Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm.
To say anything, because it's above his pay grade.
A person talking to a detective need to refer to a supervisor or a detective.
They wouldn't say, oh, let me get the information, because they have no idea what a detective need.
They have no idea the functionality of the police department, and they have no idea what cases are being investigated.
So they made it out to seem like he was a functioning officer that had something to do with Stephen Avery, or it was known that Stephen Avery was wrongly convicted.
And he's getting this call in, and he's like, I don't want to say nothing, because we got the guy.
And we don't want to mess this up and look bad.
When, in fact, from what you've been able to prove, which is crucial, that this guy wasn't an officer.
He wasn't in the capacity to take a case report.
He did exactly what he should have done, referred him to a detective.
Now, the detective associated with this, whatever he did...
Right....should be counted as a problem or not.
That dude working in the jail is not going to know any details about Stephen Avery.
There's probably people call all the time and make false reports, lie, try to get out
of jail by claiming that they committed crimes that they didn't.
And they said assault, they didn't even specifically say sexual assault.
Right.
Assault can be a physical assault.
You could have meant you punched somebody in the face and ran away and somebody else
got in trouble for it.
So he just transferred the call.
And this became such a huge conspiracy theory that he was somehow involved in the Stephen Avery case when it was first going on, and he just simply wasn't.
But which one is more sexy?
It's that you think he a cop and he's got the real killer on the phone and he's like, don't tell anybody.
And so, of course, omission of certain things that lets you do the deductive reasoning to lead yourself into believing something that's not true.
Yeah, absolutely. Well, that's it.
I think it should have been called instead of making a murder, just making it sexy.
We're just trying to make it sexy for you guys.
Making the murder sexy. And they did.
They were successful. They made the murder sexy, and people were invested, and they believed in it.
And it's so great to just be getting so many tweets from people that are saying, like, I'm completely mind-blown.
Everything that I thought actually is not the way that it is.
All right, guys, we are going to have to wrap there.
Episode 6 airs next Thursday, and we have a little teaser for you guys.
I hope I didn't give away too many spoilers.
Take a look. Coming up on Convicting a Murderer.
The key was the biggest piece of evidence that viewers to this day believe was planted.
It was a story that was really tailor-made for Hollywood.
It was on TV constantly saying, it's Manitowoc County, they're framing me.
It's gotta be a setup. Because if I didn't do it, they had a bunch of stuff.
It seemed like almost everyone believed these filmmakers.
What do we want? Justice!
What do we want? Now!
His body language comes across as very suspicious.
It looked like he was caught.
And that is exactly what the filmmakers led you to believe.
Why are you editing my courtroom testimony?
You should be still faithful to the facts.
I started to realize more and more that this was an entertainment piece.
This wasn't a piece of journalism like I thought it was going to be.
Dun dun dun!
Ladies and gentlemen, that is all the time that we have for today.
We'll see you next week.
▲
Export Selection