Skip to content
Steven Avery & Brendan Dassey— Case Archive
Steven Averytrial-daytrial-dayKenneth R. KratzJerome F. Butingjury_instructionsclosing_argumentDay 23 - March 14, 2007Judge Willis instructed jurors on the three remaining charges. The State and defense began closing arguments over the vehicle, burn-site, and DNA evidence; the court deferred the remaining arguments and excused two jurors.
← Day 22Steven AveryDay 24 →

Day 23 - March 14, 2007

Jury Instructions, Closing Arguments, and Juror Excusals

Judge Patrick L. Willis
12Proceedings
12Pages
0Witnesses
275Lines
Day 23 of 27
Appearing:
Kenneth R. Kratz Jerome F. Buting

Judge Willis instructed jurors on the three remaining charges. The State and defense began closing arguments over the vehicle, burn-site, and DNA evidence; the court deferred the remaining arguments and excused two jurors.

Full day summary

Before the jury entered, Judge Willis questioned juror Laura Barber about a citizen’s report concerning an evening at the Manitowoc Eagle’s Club. Barber said she had not discussed the case or expressed her views. The court later instructed jurors on the three remaining charges, explaining that the false-imprisonment count had been dismissed. The instructions addressed reasonable doubt, the defense’s framing theory, and Avery’s decision not to testify. In closing, Kratz argued that the RAV4, burn-area recoveries, witness accounts, and DNA evidence supported the State’s case. Buting disputed the proposed burn-site inference, accepted the attribution of blood in the RAV4 to Avery while questioning how it got there, and challenged the garage bullet’s DNA result. The court reminded jurors that arguments are not facts and cautioned counsel against language implying the defense had to produce evidence. After Buting suggested Bobby Dassey could have been the killer, he withdrew that phrasing; the court offered Strang an opportunity to clarify the defense’s investigative-bias argument. Citing juror fatigue, the judge deferred the remaining closings until the next morning and began sequestration. Under an agreed strike procedure, Terri Temme and Laura Barber were excused, subject to possible recall.

1. Inquiry Into Report Concerning Juror Laura Barber

Judge Willis questioned juror Laura Barber about a report from the Manitowoc Eagle's Club; she denied discussing the case or expressing her views.

→
Procedural
Inquiry Into Report Concerning Juror Laura Barber
49 lines

Judge Willis questioned juror Laura Barber about a citizen's report of possible outside discussion; she denied discussing the case, and the inquiry ended without an on-record ruling.

Highlights

Inquiry Into Report Concerning Juror Laura Barbertestimony highlightBarber said some people knew she was a juror, but she did not discuss the case or offer her views. She did not recall anyone speaking to her about guilt or innocence and said she tried not to listen to others' comments.

2. Final Instructions Confirmed with Counsel

Judge Willis reviewed the final jury instructions with counsel before the jury entered on Day 23, then announced he would read them before closing arguments.

→
Procedural
Final Instructions Confirmed with Counsel
16 lines

Counsel confirmed the final jury instructions, with the defense noting requested instructions the court had not given, before the jury returned for instructions and closing arguments.

3. Final Jury Instructions

Judge Willis gave jury instructions on Day 23, addressing the remaining charges, the defense theory, and the State’s burden of proof.

→
Jury Instruction
Final Jury Instructions
4 lines

The court instructed jurors on three remaining charges, reasonable doubt, the framing defense, evidence evaluation, and Avery's right not to testify.

Highlights

Final Jury Instructionsprocedural actionThe court told jurors that the false-imprisonment count had been dismissed and identified the three remaining charges.Final Jury Instructionsjury eventThe court instructed jurors that evidence supporting the defense theory that others tried to frame Avery required acquittal on homicide and corpse mutilation if it raised a reasonable doubt.

4. Written Instructions and Closing-Argument Logistics

The court directed jurors to set aside their written instructions during closing arguments and explained the order of argument.

→
Procedural
Written Instructions and Closing-Argument Logistics
24 lines

The court directed jurors to set aside their written instructions during closings unless an attorney asked them to consult a passage, then explained the order of arguments.

5. State’s Closing Argument (Part 1)

Kenneth Kratz began the State’s closing argument on Day 23, addressing the RAV4 and other physical evidence before the court called a break.

→
Closing
State’s Closing Argument by Kenneth Kratz Kenneth R. Kratz
21 lines

Kratz began the State's closing with the RAV4, blood and DNA evidence, and burned electronics; an objection led the court to remind jurors that argument is not fact.

Highlights

State’s Closing Argument by Kenneth KratzobjectionStrang objected to Kratz's description of facts as uncontested. The court reminded jurors that closing arguments are not facts and that whether a point is uncontested depends on their interpretation of the evidence.State’s Closing Argument by Kenneth Kratz“The fact, for example, that one side said something is uncontested, may not necessarily make it so.”— Patrick L. WillisThe court's caution after the defense challenged Kratz's repeated characterization of facts as uncontested.

6. Argument on Uncontested Facts and Defendant’s Silence

Strang objected to Kratz’s use of “uncontested,” saying it risked suggesting Avery had to testify or present evidence. Judge Willis cautioned against language implying the defense had to produce evidence.

→
Procedural
Argument on “Uncontested Facts” and Defendant’s Silence
16 lines

Strang objected to the State's “uncontested facts” phrasing during closing; the judge found no improper comment so far but cautioned against implying Avery had to testify or produce evidence.

7. State’s Closing Argument (Part 2)

Kratz resumed the State's closing argument on Day 23, reviewing evidence concerning Halbach's visit, the burn area, and DNA testing before requesting guilty verdicts on the three remaining charges.

→
Closing
State’s Closing Argument Resumes Kenneth R. Kratz
33 lines

Kratz completed the State's closing by linking its timeline, burn-area, firearm, and DNA arguments and requesting guilty verdicts on the three remaining charges.

Highlights

State’s Closing Argument ResumesotherKratz used witness accounts of the fire and the burn-area recoveries to argue that Avery burned Halbach's remains behind the garage.

8. Defense Closing Argument by Jerome Buting (Part 1)

Jerome Buting’s defense closing questioned the burn site and how Avery’s blood reached the RAV4, while arguing that investigative focus on Avery could have been exploited by the killer.

→
Closing
Defense Closing Argument by Jerome Buting Jerome F. Buting
6 lines

Buting advances the defense's framing theory and challenges the burn-site, RAV4, and trailer evidence while emphasizing the State's burden of proof.

Highlights

Defense Closing Argument by Jerome ButingotherButing accepts the attribution of blood in the RAV4 to Avery but disputes how it arrived there, emphasizing unidentified fingerprints and the absence of Avery's identified prints.Defense Closing Argument by Jerome Buting“Because although we offer you a theory of defense, that does not mean that we take on the burden of proof.”— Jerome F. ButingSeparates the proposed defense explanation from the State's burden.

9. Objection to Pretrial-Publicity References in Defense Closing

During the defense closing on Day 23, the judge directed Buting to avoid further references to pretrial publicity after Kratz objected. The judge found that Buting's earlier comments required no corrective action.

→
Procedural
Objection to Pretrial-Publicity References in Defense Closing
21 lines

The judge barred further references to pretrial publicity in the defense closing but declined corrective action for comments already made.

10. Defense Closing Argument by Jerome Buting (Part 2)

Buting resumed the defense closing, challenging the garage and vehicle evidence before withdrawing a disputed suggestion about Bobby Dassey.

→
Closing
Defense Closing Argument Resumes Jerome F. Buting
39 lines

Buting challenges the key, RAV4 blood, bullet DNA, and EDTA evidence as he argues the investigation left reasonable doubt; a third-party-liability objection interrupts his closing.

Highlights

Defense Closing Argument ResumesotherButing challenges the garage bullet's connection to Halbach and attacks the reliability of its DNA result because the test control was contaminated.Defense Closing Argument ResumesobjectionAfter Buting suggests Bobby Dassey could have been the killer, Kratz objects on third-party-liability grounds. Buting withdraws the phrasing, and the court lets him continue, leaving the objection for later discussion.

11. Objection to Third-Party Liability Argument

Kratz objected to Buting's reference to Bobby Dassey during closing argument; Judge Willis left the scope of the prior order unresolved and gave Strang an opportunity to clarify the defense's point.

→
Procedural
Objection to Third-Party Liability Argument
20 lines

The court distinguished its third-party-evidence order from closing argument and offered the defense a chance to clarify its investigative-bias point.

Highlights

Objection to Third-Party Liability Argumentprocedural actionRather than give the requested admonishment, the court gave Strang an opportunity to clarify in his closing that the defense's point was a failure to investigate other people, not evidence that they committed the crime.

12. Alternate-Juror Strike Agreement and Excusals

Judge Willis adjourned the remaining closing arguments until the next morning over concern about juror fatigue, then began sequestration and addressed the excusal of alternate jurors.

→
Procedural
Alternate-Juror Strike Agreement and Excusals
26 lines

The parties agreed to strike two jurors, and the judge adjourned closing arguments, began sequestration, and identified Terri Temme and Laura Barber for excusal.

Highlights

Alternate-Juror Strike Agreement and Excusalsprocedural actionThe parties agreed that each would exercise an additional peremptory strike instead of selecting alternate jurors by lot; Avery confirmed his agreement.Alternate-Juror Strike Agreement and Excusalsprocedural actionConcerned that fatigue would interfere with jurors’ attention to the remaining closing arguments, the judge adjourned until the next morning and began sequestration.Alternate-Juror Strike Agreement and ExcusalsrulingThe judge identified Terri Temme and Laura Barber as the excused jurors and barred media access to them until a verdict because they might be recalled.
← Day 22Steven AveryDay 24 →