Second Amended Supplement to Previously Filed Motion For Reconsideration

***Defendant Steven Avery’s Second Amended Supplement to Previously Filed Motion For Reconsideration*** is a brief by Steven Avery's attorney Kathleen Zellner. It is one of four briefs that Zellner had filed to appeal the decision by the Circuit Court Judge to deny her June 2017 post-conviction motion.

## Background

In June 2017 Zellner filed her main post-conviction motion for Steven Avery, requesting him an evidentiary hearing. The motion was denied four months later. Zellner subsequently filed a number of briefs to appeal the decision by the Circuit Court Judge. In her first brief she wrote that she had an agreement with the prosecutors to test more evidence, such as the Toyota RAV4, but she hadn't notified the Judge yet. In her second and third briefs she applied a more aggressive approach, criticizing the Judge's arguments and understanding of the motion as well as delivering new evidence. This fourth brief again delivers more allegedly new evidence.

## Summary

Zellner criticizes the Judge for not having responded to her motion for relief from judgment or order, filed on 6 October, roughly 5~6 weeks prior to filing this brief.

The Judge had also not responded to the motion for reconsideration, filed on 23 October, and the amended supplement filed on 1 November. Zellner writes this is her last attempt to elicit a response from the Judge.

* ***Brady* violations**
Zellner adds further argument to her *Brady* violation claims. Zellner writes she had met with Avery's 2007 trial attorneys Jerome Buting and Dean Strang regarding the disclosure of evidence before the trial. Zellner writes that the State failed to disclose evidence related to Bobby Dassey as a potential suspect. Such evidence would be the analysis law enforcement had performed on the Dassey family computer. Buting & Strang could have used this evidence to strengthen their *Denny* motion — a motion for introducing other people as suspects. Bobby's internet searches could've been used by Buting & Strang to provide motive - a requisite for introducing alternate suspects.

Zellner writes that after analysis on the Dassey family computer was performed (by Mike Velie) co-lead investigator Tom Fassbender of the DCI received a CD from Velie entitled "Dassey's Computer, Final Report, Investigative Copy". To the best of Buting's recollection he had never seen this CD. Zellner writes that because the Dassey family computer contained important information regarding Bobby Dassey, the Velie CD must have similar information stored on it and thus would have been important to Avery's defense. Zellner notes that Bobby was the only person who was home when many of the disturbing searches for dead bodies and violent pornography were performed, though she notes that Scott Tadych had also been observed driving towards Avery’s Auto Salvage frequently during time periods when Bobby Dassey was alone.

Zellner claims that the sexually motivated searches allegedly performed by Bobby Dassey would've been admissable evidence in Avery's trial to establish the *Denny* requirement of 'Motive'.

*Sexual assault as the motive for the murder*
   Zellner writes that the assault was sexually motivated and uses Bobby's internet searches for violent and sexual images as evidence for this. Her forensic IT expert Gary Hunt detected hundreds of internet searches for sexual images and Zellner claims only Bobby Dassey can be accounted for them, because at the time these searched were performed only Bobby was home. Zellner writes that because of the amount of searches, at one time did he allegedly search 562 times in 10 days, that Bobby has a fascination with death and sexual acts that involve the infliction of pain. Zellner writes that Avery himself could not have done about 90% of these searches simply because he was already in jail. Furthermore, Avery said he never used the Dassey computer.

* **Ineffective Assistance of Counsel**
Zellner writes she previously alleged that trial defense counsel was ineffective because they did not hire a bloodstain pattern expert and a ballistic expert. Zellner has since obtained an affidavit of Dean Strang in which he concurs he had been ineffective in his representation of Avery by not hiring an expert on bloodstain patterns and ballistics.

## See also

* Affidavit of Dean Strang
* Affidavit of Jerome Buting
* Second supplemental affidavit of Gary Hunt
* Second supplemental affidavit of Gregg McCrary

## References

1. ↑ *Second Amended Supplement to Previously Filed Motion For Reconsideration*, page 1
2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 *Second Amended Supplement to Previously Filed Motion For Reconsideration*, page 2
3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 *Second Amended Supplement to Previously Filed Motion For Reconsideration*, page 3
4. ↑ *Second Amended Supplement to Previously Filed Motion For Reconsideration*, page 4
5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 *Second Amended Supplement to Previously Filed Motion For Reconsideration*, page 5
6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 *Second Amended Supplement to Previously Filed Motion For Reconsideration*, page 6
7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 *Second Amended Supplement to Previously Filed Motion For Reconsideration*, page 8
8. ↑ *Second Amended Supplement to Previously Filed Motion For Reconsideration*, page 10
9. ↑ *Second Amended Supplement to Previously Filed Motion For Reconsideration*, page 14
10. ↑ 10.0 10.1 *Second Amended Supplement to Previously Filed Motion For Reconsideration*, page 15