MovieChat Forums > Making a Murderer (2015) Discussion > Enjoy the brief victory... the state wil...

Enjoy the brief victory... the state will appeal and win

posted 8 years ago by wewannawii
31 replies | jump to latest

It's a state sovereignty issue... they will appeal on the grounds that a federal judge has no authority to reverse a state court system's final say in the matter absent clear constitutional error.

Brendan was EXPLICITLY told before questioning began that "we can't promise you anything" in exchange for his speaking with them.

The judge, however, opined that this EXPLICIT statement that no promises were being made was "drowned out" by other statements that could have been interpreted as IMPLIED promises of leniency.

That's debatable... subjective... his opinion... i.e. not a "clear error" as is required in a state sovereignty matter.

If they allow the decision to stand uncontested, it will set an unwelcome precedent that would impact future cases... not to mention every convict in the Seventh Circuit's jurisdiction will be lining up to appeal their convictions claiming "Yeah, they said them things to me, too."

Wisconsin will also likely be joined by Illinois and Indiana in fighting the decision. As the other two states in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, this decision impacts them as well.

[–] prometheus1816 8 years ago

It's a state sovereignty issue... they will appeal on the grounds that a federal judge has no authority to reverse a state court system's final say in the matter absent clear constitutional error.

Brendan was EXPLICITLY told before questioning began that "we can't promise you anything" in exchange for his speaking with them.

The judge, however, opined that this EXPLICIT statement that no promises were being made was "drowned out" by other statements that could have been interpreted as IMPLIED promises of leniency.

That's debatable... subjective... his opinion... i.e. not a "clear error" as is required in a state sovereignty matter.

If they allow the decision to stand uncontested, it will set an unwelcome precedent that would impact future cases... not to mention every convict in the Seventh Circuit's jurisdiction will be lining up to appeal their convictions claiming "Yeah, they said them things to me, too."

Wisconsin will also likely be joined by Illinois and Indiana in fighting the decision. As the other two states in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, this decision impacts them as well.

All of this is moot because Brendan was not read his rights, and did not understand he did not have to sit there and be told he was guilty, and was not told he could have his mother there. My guess is that if his mother was there, we wouldn't be talking about any of this because she would have nipped it in the bud before Fassbender and Weigert ever got started...as is her right as a parent of a developmentally challenged young man. This has nothing to do with other convicts or their convictions. Their convictions did not come in Manatowoc County. So it's apples and oranges. And there is clear evidence through the video tape that Brendan was coerced into incriminating himself and Avery that in and of itself is the reason the conviction was overturned. When will the police get it, they cannot unilaterally interrogate underage kids without their parents being there to say they can. They did not get Barb Tadych's permission to interrogate her son. FULL STOP! Not only that, he had ineffectual council. The same thing Michael Skakel claimed when his conviction was overturned.

Sometimes my ruminations are too confusing for someone not inside my head. -Anon

[–] FactUnderChecK 8 years ago

"we can't promise you anything"

that wasn't before - it was during. And just because you say "we can't promise you anything" doesn't cover you when 2 setences later you start making promises.

it will set an unwelcome precedent that would impact future cases

there is no precedent issue. The precedent already exists - do your homework bruv.

[–] Head_Cheese74 8 years ago

they will appeal on the grounds that a federal judge has no authority to reverse a state court system's final say in the matter absent clear constitutional error.

Wrong

Brendan Dassey's constitutional right's were violated. He had the right to a attorney when being questioned. He was a minor
Federal Courts can intervene in regards to constitutional rights..

[–] wewannawii 8 years ago

Clashing courts: Law restricts federal judges' ability to intervene in state criminal cases

Long considered a safety valve for the unjustly convicted, federal courts are now barred by legal rules from second-guessing state judges in all but the most extreme cases.

Under the new rules, federal judges may not overturn a state court decision that is merely incorrect. The state ruling must also be unreasonable, "so lacking in justification that there was an error well understood … beyond any possibility for fair-minded disagreement," the Supreme Court has said.

This required deference means state courts increasingly have the final say.

http://www.latimes.com/local/crime/la-me-courts-clash-20150906-story.html

[–] FactUnderChecK 8 years ago

The federal ruling has determined that the confession was unconstitutional - i can pull half a dozen cases almost identical to dassey where federal court has over turned convictions based on illegal and/or false confessions, with lack of any physical evidence there is almost no chance the conviction and confession would be reinstated.

I'm not going to say its impossible - but certainly unlikely.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Are we sure it was a federal judge and not a magistrate judge?
http://www.wied.uscourts.gov/sites/wied/files/documents/opinions/14cv1310%20Dassey%20v%20Dittman.pdf

However, the state courts unreasonably found that the investigators never made Dassey any promises during the March 1, 2006 interrogation.

The investigators repeatedly claimed to already know what happened on October 31 and assured Dassey that he had nothing to worry about.
These repeated false promises, when considered in conjunction with all relevant factors, most especially Dassey’s age, intellectual deficits,
and the absence of a supportive adult, rendered Dassey’s confession involuntary under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.

The Wisconsin Court of Appeals’ decision to the contrary was an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] mme3924-1 8 years ago

Are we sure it was a federal judge and not a magistrate judge?

A federal judge, CV. It says so. It was a habeas corpus appeal.

I thought you read this stuff.

[–] doggie_rodriguez 8 years ago

He doesn't like to read things that could ruin his "objectivity". 

[–] prometheus1816 8 years ago

Long considered a safety valve for the unjustly convicted, federal courts are now barred by legal rules from second-guessing state judges in all but the most extreme cases.

Under the new rules, federal judges may not overturn a state court decision that is merely incorrect. The state ruling must also be unreasonable, "so lacking in justification that there was an error well understood … beyond any possibility for fair-minded disagreement," the Supreme Court has said.

This required deference means state courts increasingly have the final say.

Your posting of this is fine and dandy, but in Brendan's case, he was questioned without a parent present, and he was not read his rights and not provided a COMPETENT lawyer prior to questioning. Miranda is the most treasured of all rights given to a potential suspect. More than not the failure to provide a suspect's Miranda warning has been proven to be the thing that gets most convictions overturned, if not inadequate council. This is Brendan Dassey to a "T". State courts don't have the final say in matters of wrongful convictions. And the one major factor you have not taken into consideration is that a granting of Habeus is quite rare and not usually granted. That is was in this case is telling....

Sometimes my ruminations are too confusing for someone not inside my head. -Anon

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

You're entitled to defence, not Perry Mason or Keanu Reeves from Devil's Advocate. If his Defence engaged in genuine negligence of their client, if Dassey's process was genuinely flawed to the point where legally the conviction is unsound, then so be it, assuming the judge is correct and hasn't erred legally. I hope it's appealed successfully as appellate courts don't address the findings of fact or nullify them, they rule on points of law usually.
Certain people seem to be equating a legally unsound conviction with an actual exoneration, so I can expect to see much conflating of the two among those who try to make a case for Dassey's factual innocence, yawn.

He was advised under miranda and still agreed to talk to the cops. See page 7 of the judge's report for details.

And you're still a murderer groupie as your deplorably callous comments regarding the victim's family prove. BARD, you might say.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] prometheus1816 8 years ago

You're entitled to defence, not Perry Mason or Keanu Reeves from Devil's Advocate. If his Defence engaged in genuine negligence of their client, if Dassey's process was genuinely flawed to the point where legally the conviction is unsound, then so be it, assuming the judge is correct and hasn't erred legally. I hope it's appealed successfully as appellate courts don't address the findings of fact or nullify them, they rule on points of law usually.
Certain people seem to be equating a legally unsound conviction with an actual exoneration, so I can expect to see much conflating of the two among those who try to make a case for Dassey's factual innocence, yawn.

He was advised under miranda and still agreed to talk to the cops. See page 7 of the judge's report for details.

Yes, on page 7 Duffin does mention that Brendan was read his Miranda rights and also signed a waiver, however, did he actually know what he was doing? Given his IQ I think not. I don't think he knew anything of what he was saying or signing. Given he asked how long he might be because he had an exam that afternoon and needed to be back at school by a certain time, I seriously doubt he knew what was happening. Hence his admission to his mother on several occasions that he kept trying to tell them he didn't do anything. You proceed on the notion that Brendan, who Duffin noted was of below average IQ, was smart enough to know what he was or wasn't doing. You proceed on the notion that Duffin was wrong in his assessment of Brendan at having the below average IQ. With all that why did Duffin grant the motion?

And you're still a murderer groupie as your deplorably callous comments regarding the victim's family prove. BARD, you might say.

I could care less for the Halbachs because it's well known that those closest to the victim are the usual suspects. Ryan Hillegas was Teresa's ex who it was known broke into her voicemails and erased them. A crime under the law I cited. Mark Halbach and Karen Halbach were not questioned and the fact that Karen Halbach left out Carmen Boutwell's suicide with her statement to the detective there were no other female relatives shows she was being deceptive. Also I have not seen one one tear from the woman. Usual if you're devastated that your daughter was just murdered. Look up Sharon Rocha, Laci Peterson's mother, Doris Tate, mother of Sharon Tate, Susan Levy, Chandra Levy's mother, and many others. And I am not a "Murder Groupie". I have not posted here before the ruling in Brendan's favour. And I saw the documentary and have seen many interviews with the Halbach family enough to make the call I have.

Sometimes my ruminations are too confusing for someone not inside my head. -Anon

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

But he said he did understand, when asked if he understood his rights as they had been given and still agreed to talk with them, remember? If he was lying, that's hardly the cops fault and doesn't constitute a violation of his rights.
Does Duffin also state that Dassey's confession is contaminated by Dassey absorbing info and apparently manipulating the cops into believing his invented stories? Doesn't that indicate so that people with low IQ's are capable of manipulation, deception and invention with specific detail, unprompted?
Or Is Dassey's low IQ only mentioned as is convenient?
Now, here's the $64,000 question as some Americans are fond of saying- isn't this a contradiction, an inconsistency in Duffin's reasoning, which could be construed as manifest illogicality, possibly grounds for a successful appeal? One wonders, eh?

Again, not interested in your insane rant against innocent victims, or your gnat like attention span and inability to absorb info as it's given, due to the evident firewall that goes off in that hybristophilliac head of yours whenever bothersome stuff bursts your creepy murderer groupie bubble. read that a million times until it finally sinks in, thanks.

Yeah you're a murderer groupie, as your attacks on murder victims and shilling for murderers highlights very aptly, there's that patented lack of self awareness, of which all murderer groupies are known for, kicking in again with you.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] mme3924-1 8 years ago

all but the most extreme cases

in this case a 48 years sentence without any evidence other than a confession and a pair of bleached jeans is pretty extreme

The state ruling must also be unreasonable

As Judge Duffin pointed out.

[–] doggie_rodriguez 8 years ago

I think having a popular Netflix documentary about it may also help with the "extreme-ness" of the case, at least subconsciously. Most cases don't have those.

[–] Head_Cheese74 8 years ago

I think having a popular Netflix documentary about it may also help with the "extreme-ness" of the case, at least subconsciously. Most cases don't have those.

Exactly. It's a hot topic in social media.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

I was wondering about that also re a federal judge actually and am not sure how this became a federal matter.

I sincerely hope they appeal successfully. Justice demands it and it might just conceivably shut up murderer groupies with their endless excuses and conspiralunacy. At least until some other scummy killer comes along who they can shill for or make excuses if one of them happens to have a low IQ.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Ro-bust 8 years ago

What does your username mean? I've seen it pop up everywhere in regards to this case/documentary.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] FactUnderChecK 8 years ago

Lol ego much? No one asked you.

[–] mme3924-1 8 years ago

Lol ego much? No one asked you

He thinks all roads lead to Rome.....

as in he is Rome.



[–] kspkap 8 years ago

cv response to the meaning of his username:

corpus vile- a person or thing fit only to be the object of an experiment. (literally: worthless body)

Andrew Conner could not have picked a more perfect username for himself:a worthless human!

Oh, he loves to use the word "hybristophilliac". Just like a pyromaniac returning to the scene of a fire! Makes you wonder...

🐘🐘🐘🐘🐘🐘🐘🐘🐘🐘
My Memory Is Just A Memory! Oh No! Not the Mind Probe!!

[–] wewannawii 8 years ago

What does your username mean?

It has a very deep and profound meaning:

wewannawii = I was trying to find a Wii for Christmas back when they first came out and were impossible to find

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0p7uJp25BlE

[–] Ro-bust 8 years ago

Lol I thought it might be that then was thinking it had some deeper meaning and couldnt possibly be something so simple.

[–] ToHelenBackAgain 8 years ago

They can appeal, but I think they'll lose. There's no state sovereignty issue. Dassey's Constitutional rights were violated. The decision cites violations under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, which inarguably did occur. Nobody's even pretending they didn't.

"You have a morbid sense of fun." "That's probably true."

[–] doggie_rodriguez 8 years ago

Nobody's even pretending they didn't.

There are a few people here that do pretend that no rights were violated b/c they need it to fit into their narrative.

[–] ToHelenBackAgain 8 years ago

LOL true

I meant no one involved in the case. The detectives testified to it.

"You have a morbid sense of fun." "That's probably true."

[–] wewannawii 8 years ago

AG Schimel Files Notice of Appeal in Dassey v. Dittmann

MADISON, WI – Today, Attorney General Brad Schimel, on behalf of Warden Michael Dittmann and the State of Wisconsin, filed a notice of appeal in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin in Dassey v. Dittmann.

On August 12, 2016, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin granted Brendan Dassey’s petition for writ of habeas corpus. The State of Wisconsin will appeal this decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Per the magistrate’s decision, the Court’s order is stayed pending the outcome of the appeal.

“We believe the magistrate judge’s decision that Brendan Dassey’s confession was coerced by investigators, and that no reasonable court could have concluded otherwise, is wrong on the facts and wrong on the law,” said Attorney General Brad Schimel. “Two state courts carefully examined the evidence and properly concluded that Brendan Dassey’s confession to sexually assaulting and murdering Teresa Halbach with his uncle, Steven Avery, was voluntary, and the investigators did not use constitutionally impermissible tactics.”

“The Halbach family has been notified of the appeal and fully supports the State’s decision to seek justice on behalf of their daughter.”

https://www.doj.state.wi.us/sites/default/files/news-media/9.9.2016_Dassey_Notice.pdf

[–] catbookss 8 years ago

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5189670/board/nest/261269872

[–] FactUnderChecK 8 years ago

schimel is going to get chewed up and spat out if he thinks relying on the original state court ruling is going to be enough.
Duffins 90+ ruling makes the 11 page state court rulings look like amateur hour.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

!
No it doesn't. As I said to you before, I don't think you've examined his report as thoroughly as you should have.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] wewannawii 7 years ago

...