'Making A Murderer' Update: All of the New Evidence Submitted In Latest Steven Avery Brief

New evidence has been revealed in the case of Steven Avery, subject of Making A Murderer. Avery won his right to present new evidence via appeal in February, and his lawyer, Kathleen Zellner, filed a 42-page brief on Tuesday with all of the arguments as to why Avery should have a new trial. Avery is currently serving life in prison for killing Teresa Halbach, but has always maintained his innocence. Here are all of the key pieces of evidence listed that could help get Avery a new trial.

Bones From The Gravel Pit

Alleged human bones could put a damper in the prosecution's original testimony. The prosecution said Avery killed and burned Halbach's on his property, but said human bones were found in burn barrels elsewhere, in a gravel pit. If the bones are Halbach's, it could negate the state's truth that Avery killed and disposed of Halbach on his own property.

Dassey-Janda Property

In the brief, Zellner opened up about bones found in the Dassey-Janda burn barrel. The theory she proposed in the new brief looks at Avery's family's property, which she alleged was used to transport Halbach's body to the gravel pit. The said evidence points to cadaver dogs who identified both Halbach and her car at the pit, as well as a witness who smelled the burning body in the area. There was also unidentified, male blood found at the gravel pit. In the prosecution's testimony, it was said Avery planted bones in their burn barrel.

Tire Tracks

Zellner argues there's proof that Halbach's Rav4 was planted on the Avery car lot. Allegedly no tire tracks were seen in a flyover of the property on November 4, but were visible on November 5. A flyover video is included with the brief.

Bones Given To Halbach Family

Avery was denied his motion to test the gravel pit bones for DNA. The Wisconsin Department of Justice revealed to Zellner they had been returned to the Halbach family. They, allegedly, have never been tested for DNA. Avery's prior council was allegedly never told of the transfer. Zellner's brief cited the Wisconsin Preservation of Biological Evidence Statute, which says the Department of Justice should hold onto all biological matter discovered in relation to a crime. It can only be destroyed with a notice to destroy to those who are in conviction for the crime.

The brief also argued that the return of the bones to the Halbach family is a blatant admission that the bones were human.

State's Effort To Keep Bone Transfer A Secret

The brief alleges the Wisconsin Department of Justice aimed to keep the bone's return a secret. Zellner again noted the lack of notification to Avery's previous council when the bones were returned to the Halbach family, but also said in September 2017, the State of Wisconsin agreed with Zellner to have a pelvic bone, that could be Halbach's, tested. In February, Zellner revealed an accidental phone call that was left on her phone that was supposed to be between a Wisconsin attorney and prosecutor, who said not to call Zellner back until they knew for a fact they had the pelvic bone still in possession.

Expert Testimonies

Avery's team has enlisted the help of new experts to clear up potential evidence and falsities.

Dr. John DeHaan claims Halbach's bones, which were found in Avery's own burn pit, were planted. Dr. Steven Symes and Dr. Leslie Eisenberg determined, without DNA testing, the gravel pit bones seem to be human.

Dr. Richard Selden claims there was “bad faith” on behalf of the state by returning the bones to the Halbach family. He cited missing tags, a question of if DNA could be retrieved from any without the full set, and DNA testing would have been able to provide answers, had there been access to the bones in 2018 or 2019. The brief cited this evidence, and said because of Selden's analysis, Avery's request for DNA testing would have met all of the state's requirements under Stave v. Plude.

Ken Kratz Closing Arguments

Zellner's brief takes direct aim at former Wisconsin prosecutor Ken Kratz and his closing arguments during Avery's trial. The brief argues Kratz had knowledge of the importance of the gravel pit bones and aimed to mislead the court in stating they were unimportant to Halbach's story.

Kratz is quoted in the brief. “These bones in the quarry, I'm going to take about 20 seconds to talk about, because the best anybody can say is that they are possible [sic] human. What does possible human mean? Well it means we don't know what it is. All right.”

The brief claims Kratz knew the bones were human and mislead the jury, and stated Avery's conviction “must be reversed” because of his in-court behavior.

Other Points

The brief also asked for Judge Sutkiewicz to remove herself from any and all of Avery's future proceedings, as she was formerly involved in Halbach family wrongful death lawsuit against Avery.