Jerome L. Fox

AverySteven AveryFeb 12, 2007 – Mar 18, 2007

In Steven Avery's 2007 trial, Judge Jerome L. Fox was identified as the judge who signed the search warrant for the Avery property.

Day 8

Feb 21, 2007

DirectDave Remiker — DirectDave RemikerKenneth R. KratzMentioned

Summary

Remiker described identifying Halbach's RAV4, assisting with property searches, recording an answering-machine message, and collecting a garage bullet fragment.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

CrossDave Remiker — CrossDave RemikerDean A. StrangMentioned

Summary

Strang tested Remiker's early focus on Avery through dispatch calls and questioned the warrant, residence searches, and gap between garage shell casings and the later bullet-fragment discovery.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

Day 10

Feb 23, 2007

ProceduralRenewed search-suppression motion hearingMentioned

Summary

The defense renewed its challenge to searches of Avery's property; the State opposed suppression, and the court deferred a decision pending further burn-pit evidence.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

DasseyBrendan DasseyApr 16, 2007 – Apr 25, 2007

Judge Jerome L. Fox presided over Brendan Dassey's 2007 trial, including rulings on corroboration of Dassey's statements and the instructions given to the jury. After the jury returned guilty verdicts on three counts, he entered judgment, revoked bail, and set sentencing.

Day 1

Apr 16, 2007

ProceduralAppearances and Jury Swearing4lines spoken

Summary

Counsel appeared, the jury was sworn, and the judge turned to planned preliminary instructions.

Jury InstructionPreliminary Jury Instructions and Offense Elements1highlight4lines spoken

Summary

Judge Fox gave preliminary instructions on juror conduct, the three charged offenses, party-to-a-crime liability, and reasonable doubt.

Highlights (1)

Quote“All 12 jurors do not have to agree on whether the defendant directly committed the crime of first degree intentional homicide or aided and abetted the commission of the crime.”— Jerome L. FoxStates the judge's instruction that jurors need not agree on which party-to-a-crime theory applies, while each must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt.Open in transcript →

OpeningState's Opening StatementKenneth R. Kratz3lines spoken

Summary

Kratz outlined the State's theory that Dassey helped Avery assault and kill Halbach, then previewed Dassey's recorded statement and evidence the State said would corroborate it.

OpeningDefense Opening StatementMark R. Fremgen5lines spoken

Summary

Fremgen previewed an alternative account of Dassey's Halloween evening and challenged the expected physical evidence and reliability of his recorded statements.

ProceduralMay 13 Interview Cross-Examination Dispute5lines spoken

Summary

The judge deferred a final ruling on whether the defense could ask an officer about Mr. Dassey's May 13 interview.

DirectKaren Halbach — DirectKaren HalbachKenneth R. Kratz4lines spoken

Summary

Karen Halbach described Teresa's life, her last family visit, the search after she went missing, and exhibits the court received.

DirectKatie Halbach — DirectKatie HalbachKenneth R. Kratz7lines spoken

Summary

Katie Halbach identified a lanyard she gave Teresa, described jeans she selected as similar to Teresa's, and said she had not seen or heard from her sister after October 30.

DirectThomas Fassbender — DirectThomas FassbenderKenneth R. Kratz14lines spoken

Summary

Fassbender described the Avery Yard search, RAV4 handling, recovered items, and Dassey's reported February 27 account of garage-floor cleanup; the court limited two exhibit admissions.

CrossThomas Fassbender — CrossThomas FassbenderRaymond L. Edelstein6lines spoken

Summary

Edelstein challenged the physical links to Dassey and elicited Fassbender's acknowledgment that he first suggested blood in the garage-floor interview.

RedirectThomas Fassbender — RedirectThomas FassbenderKenneth R. Kratz4lines spoken

Summary

Fassbender identified two tagged pairs of handcuffs from Barb Janda's bedroom and confirmed restraints were also found in Steven Avery's bedroom.

Day 2

Apr 17, 2007

ProceduralMorning Reconvening and Counsel Appearances3lines spoken

DirectWilliam Tyson — DirectWilliam TysonKenneth R. Kratz5lines spoken

Summary

William Tyson described searches of Steven Avery's trailer, identified recovered items, and explained how he swabbed the hood latch of Teresa Halbach's vehicle.

CrossKevin Heimerl — CrossKevin HeimerlMark R. Fremgen4lines spoken

Summary

Heimerl was questioned about burn-debris handling, garage-search documentation, the bullet fragment, and why the creeper was packaged rather than swabbed on site.

DirectDaniel Kucharski — DirectDaniel KucharskiKenneth R. Kratz8lines spoken

Summary

Daniel Kucharski described the garage search, shell casings, rifles, and Toyota key recovered during searches of Steven Avery's property.

RedirectDaniel Kucharski — RedirectDaniel KucharskiKenneth R. Kratz9lines spoken

Summary

Kucharski confirmed Steven Avery's firearm possession status, and the court found a follow-up question leading and suggestive.

CrossJohn Ertl — CrossJohn ErtlMark R. Fremgen4lines spoken

Summary

Fremgen questioned Ertl about limits in the RAV4 search, burn-debris collection, license-plate handling, and garage luminol testing.

RecrossWilliam Newhouse — RecrossWilliam NewhouseRaymond L. Edelstein3lines spoken

Summary

Newhouse could not say whether Item FK was just as likely not fired from the examined gun.

DirectKenneth Olson — DirectKenneth OlsonThomas J. Fallon5lines spoken

Summary

Olson reported lead near defects in two charred cranial fragments, said a bullet could be its source, and described the limits of his burned-electronics examination.

RedirectKenneth Olson — RedirectKenneth OlsonThomas J. Fallon3lines spoken

Summary

Olson explained the absence of rope fibers on a smooth headboard and identified a polypropylene film on one spindle.

ProceduralObjections and Ruling on Exhibits 132–1407lines spoken

Summary

The court received Exhibits 132–140 but reserved whether any would be shown to or sent back to the jury.

Day 3

Apr 18, 2007

ProceduralMorning reconvening and counsel appearances4lines spoken

DirectKayla Avery — DirectKayla AveryThomas J. Fallon8lines spoken

Summary

Kayla Avery disavowed earlier reports about what Brendan told her concerning a fire and Teresa Halbach, saying she had made up the account.

DirectSherry Culhane — DirectSherry CulhaneNorman A. Gahn9lines spoken

Summary

DNA analyst Sherry Culhane attributed DNA from several RAV4 items and a key to Steven Avery, and DNA from the cargo area, a Pepsi can, and a bullet fragment to Teresa Halbach; she limited her conclusion about charred tissue to a partial-profile comparison.

RecrossSherry Culhane — RecrossSherry CulhaneMark R. Fremgen3lines spoken

Summary

Culhane explained her DNA-testing choices and confirmed that shell casings, other areas of the jeans, and bedding had not received the testing defense counsel asked about.

CrossNick Stahlke — CrossNick StahlkeRaymond L. Edelstein4lines spoken

Summary

Stahlke limited what the RAV 4 stains could show about wound locations and timing, and identified scene work and blowback testing he had not performed.

DirectSusan Brandt — DirectSusan BrandtThomas J. Fallon3lines spoken

Summary

Susan Brandt recounted what Kayla Avery told school counselors about a cousin being asked to help move a body, while noting Kayla did not identify the cousin.

CrossSusan Brandt — CrossSusan BrandtMark R. Fremgen3lines spoken

Summary

Brandt acknowledged limited familiarity with Kayla; the court struck a question about Kayla's truthfulness.

CrossJodi Stachowski — CrossJodi StachowskiMark R. Fremgen3lines spoken

Summary

Stachowski confirmed that the bedroom's August configuration differed from the picture shown.

DirectThomas Sturdivant — DirectThomas SturdivantThomas J. Fallon3lines spoken

Summary

Sturdivant described suspected bone material at the burn pit, the Crime Lab's sifting and collection, and the admission of related photographs and objects.

CrossThomas Sturdivant — CrossThomas SturdivantMark R. Fremgen4lines spoken

Summary

Sturdivant placed the van seat beside the burn pit and said suspected bone material needed analysis to establish what it was.

DirectDonald Simley — DirectDonald SimleyThomas J. Fallon10lines spoken

Summary

Simley found burned tooth fragments very consistent with Teresa Halbach's dental x-rays but limited his conclusion to a probable identification.

Day 4

Apr 19, 2007

ProceduralThree trial stipulations read to the jury12lines spoken

Summary

The judge read three agreed stipulations to the jury covering Halbach's October 31 visits, Bobby Dassey's RAV4 observations, and Scott Tadych's account of an evening fire.

CrossRodney Pevytoe — CrossRodney PevytoeMark R. Fremgen3lines spoken

Summary

Pevytoe described his examination of burn-pit material and qualified what tire remains could show about the fire's timing, fuel, and heat.

DirectLeslie Eisenberg — DirectLeslie EisenbergThomas J. Fallon5lines spoken

Summary

Eisenberg identified burned remains as those of a female younger than about 30 to 35, described two skull defects she attributed to gunshots, and identified human bone in Burn Barrel No. 2.

CrossLeslie Eisenberg — CrossLeslie EisenbergMark R. Fremgen8lines spoken

Summary

Eisenberg qualified what she could determine about the gunshot wounds; the judge then read a stipulation on Dr. Jentzen's cause-of-death opinion.

DirectAnthony O'Neill — DirectAnthony O'NeillThomas J. Fallon34lines spoken

Summary

O'Neill described and played his recorded interview of Brendan Dassey; the judge allowed highlighted captions but instructed jurors to rely on the audio if the two differed.

CrossAnthony O'Neill — CrossAnthony O'NeillRaymond L. Edelstein21lines spoken

Summary

Cross-examination tested O'Neill's recollection and interview tactics; he acknowledged an unsupported medicine statement, a statement about jail, and an officer's leading trailer question.

RedirectAnthony O'Neill — RedirectAnthony O'NeillThomas J. Fallon6lines spoken

Summary

O'Neill clarified his interview tactics, said Dassey resisted the trailer suggestion, and identified a photograph that the judge admitted.

RecrossAnthony O'Neill — RecrossAnthony O'NeillRaymond L. Edelstein12lines spoken

Summary

O'Neill described limits on his knowledge and contact with Dassey; the judge received two defense-offered exhibits and an AutoTrader appointment stipulation.

Day 5

Apr 20, 2007

ProceduralHealth-related excusal of a seated juror6lines spoken

Summary

The judge announced the health-related release of a seated juror after consulting counsel.

DirectMark Wiegert — DirectMark WiegertThomas J. Fallon27lines spoken

Summary

Wiegert explained the February 27 and March 1 interviews, acknowledged deceptive questioning techniques, and discussed Dassey's drawings after the jury viewed the interview DVD.

ProceduralHearing and ruling on February 27 interview statements1highlight11lines spoken

Summary

The judge restricted defense use of Dassey's February 27 interview answers, with an exception for two cited matters, while leaving proposed questions about interview methods for later.

Highlights (1)

Quote“Thus, I'm going to -- I'm going to grant, uh, uh, the prosecution's motion here. With the exception, I believe, those were the matters on pages 556 and 604, you can go into those if you wish.”— Jerome L. FoxRecords the ruling and its stated exception.Open in transcript →

CrossMark Wiegert — Cross-examination resumesMark WiegertRaymond L. Edelstein23lines spoken

Summary

Edelstein tested Wiegert's interview tactics, gaps in the February 27 transcript, and the scientific link between listed physical items and Brendan Dassey.

Day 6

Apr 21, 2007

ProceduralMorning appearances and Wiegert's reswearing4lines spoken

CrossMark Wiegert — CrossMark WiegertRaymond L. Edelstein5lines spoken

Summary

Edelstein tested Wiegert's March 1 interview techniques and the physical corroboration for Brendan's account; Wiegert acknowledged false suggestions and explained why recovered hair was not compared.

ProceduralExhibit matters and State rests its case17lines spoken

Summary

After the court addressed Exhibits 216 and 215 and confirmed Exhibit 214 was already received, the State rested; the defense said it had issues to address before proceeding.

ProceduralCount 2 dismissal motion and ruling1highlight6lines spoken

Summary

The court denied the defense's motion to dismiss Count 2, finding sufficient corroboration of the defendant's statement at this stage.

Highlights (1)

Quote“What I believe the, uh -- the general rule is, that there has to be some material fact that corroborates, in one way or another, the confession.”— Jerome L. FoxStates the corroboration principle the judge applied before denying the motion.Open in transcript →

DirectKris Schoenenberger-Gross — DirectKris Schoenenberger-GrossMark R. Fremgen7lines spoken

Summary

Schoenenberger-Gross described Brendan Dassey's school records and language assessments; the court allowed testimony about a 2004 IEP over a relevance objection.

RedirectKris Schoenenberger-Gross — RedirectKris Schoenenberger-GrossMark R. Fremgen9lines spoken

Summary

Schoenenberger-Gross clarified Brendan's 2002 test results and 2005 IEP reading level; the court overruled a reading-level objection and received the school-record exhibits.

CrossBlaine Dassey — CrossBlaine DasseyKenneth R. Kratz4lines spoken

Summary

Kratz challenged changes in Blaine Dassey's account of Brendan's whereabouts and a person by a bonfire; Blaine also described Steven Avery putting a plastic bag into a burning barrel.

RedirectMichael Kornely — RedirectMichael KornelyMark R. Fremgen3lines spoken

Summary

Kornely favored a call time closer to 6 p.m. but acknowledged that he could not recall it precisely and may have given law enforcement an earlier estimate.

Day 7

Apr 23, 2007

colloquyCourt colloquy on Brendan Dassey’s decision to testify1highlight43lines spoken

Summary

The court examined Mr. Dassey's choice to testify, revisited it after counsel's qualifications, and received an answering-machine clip as Exhibit 225.

Highlights (1)

Quote“The Court will find, based on this record, that the, uh, decision of this defendant to testify is being made, uh, knowingly and voluntarily.”— Jerome L. FoxThe court's express finding on Mr. Dassey's decision to testify.Open in transcript →

DirectBrendan Dassey — DirectBrendan DasseyMark R. Fremgen3lines spoken

Summary

Brendan Dassey described his October 31 activities, the bonfire and garage cleanup, and his response to statements he made to investigators.

RedirectBrendan Dassey — RedirectBrendan DasseyMark R. Fremgen8lines spoken

Summary

Dassey said he had made up parts of his interview account and described how officers' reassurances affected him.

DirectMichael Riddle — DirectMichael RiddleMark R. Fremgen4lines spoken

Summary

Fingerprint examiner Michael Riddle found no match to Brendan Dassey among the RAV4 prints he compared, identified a headboard print as Steven Avery's, and described items he did not examine.

RecrossMichael Riddle — RecrossMichael RiddleNorman A. Gahn3lines spoken

Summary

Riddle confirmed that fingerprints can be removed from an item; the defense had no more witnesses that afternoon.

ProceduralRenewed motion to exclude Dr. Gordon, ruling, and separate proposed State rebuttal witnesses1highlight14lines spoken

Summary

The court denied the renewed motion to exclude Dr. Gordon, clarified the limits of his testimony, and deferred a decision on Mr. Buckley's proposed rebuttal.

Highlights (1)

Quote“Accordingly, I'm going to deny, uh, the State's motion to exclude his testimony.”— Jerome L. FoxThe court's express disposition of the renewed motion.Open in transcript →

Day 8

Apr 24, 2007

ProceduralMorning Reconvening and Appearances3lines spoken

DirectRobert H. Gordon — DirectRobert H. GordonMark R. Fremgen21lines spoken

Summary

Robert H. Gordon testified that his testing and review of interview materials led him to conclude Brendan Dassey was highly suggestible when questioned with leading questions or mild pressure. The examination also addressed disputed IQ-chart labeling and records Gordon reviewed after writing his report.

CrossRobert H. Gordon — CrossRobert H. GordonKenneth R. Kratz15lines spoken

Summary

Kratz tested Gordon's suggestibility opinion against his reports, school records, interview review, and test methods. Gordon acknowledged omissions and a possible inventory error but maintained his opinion; the court also directed a review of requested notes.

RedirectRobert H. Gordon — RedirectRobert H. GordonMark R. Fremgen4lines spoken

Summary

Gordon defended his report and test methods, acknowledged omitted examples of Brendan resisting suggestions, and clarified that suggestibility testing does not determine whether an answer is true.

RecrossRobert H. Gordon — RecrossRobert H. GordonKenneth R. Kratz4lines spoken

Summary

Gordon said a changed interview answer was consistent with getting a confession. Fremgen then moved five exhibits, and Kratz reserved a possible objection to their later use.

ProceduralOffer of Proof and Ruling on Armentrout’s Rebuttal Testimony1highlight22lines spoken

Summary

The court allowed Armentrout's expert rebuttal on Gordon's tests and opinions, subject to foundation, but excluded a proposed debate over suggestibility as a specialty.

Highlights (1)

Quote“Uh, the Court is going to permit Dr. Armentrout to testify as a rebuttal witness.”— Jerome L. FoxStates the central ruling on the State's proposed rebuttal witness.Open in transcript →

DirectJames Armentrout — DirectJames ArmentroutKenneth R. Kratz5lines spoken

Summary

On rebuttal, psychologist James Armentrout questioned the testing behind Dr. Gordon's suggestibility opinion and said he would not reach the same conclusion.

ProceduralConclusion of Testimony and Trial-Day Adjournment15lines spoken

Day 9

Apr 25, 2007

ProceduralAmendment of Count 3 to second-degree sexual assault3lines spoken

Summary

The court granted the State's unopposed motion to amend Count 3 to second-degree sexual assault as a party to the crime.

ProceduralRenewed motion to dismiss Count 3 and corroboration ruling1highlight4lines spoken

Summary

The court denied the renewed motion to dismiss amended Count 3, finding sufficient corroboration of Brendan Dassey's confession.

Highlights (1)

Quote“This is sufficient corroboration for the confession as a whole, and that whole includes the sexual assault.”— Jerome L. FoxStates the court's central reason for denying dismissal.Open in transcript →

Charge ConferenceJury-instruction conference and corroboration-instruction ruling2highlights3lines spoken

Summary

Judge Fox denied the defense's requested corroboration instruction and chose Instruction 180 on confessions and admissions.

Highlights (2)

rulingJudge Fox formally denied the defense's requested corroboration instruction, finding Instruction 180 on confessions and admissions appropriate instead.Open in transcript →

Quote“I do not believe that, uh, giving what, in effect, is a legal argument as part of the instruction as requested by the defense is appropriate under the circumstances.”— Jerome L. FoxJudge Fox explained why he rejected the defense's requested instruction.Open in transcript →

Jury InstructionCourt's substantive jury instructions1highlight8lines spoken

Summary

Judge Fox instructed the jury on the offenses, aiding and abetting, reasonable doubt, stipulated testimony, and how to assess Dassey's statements and witness credibility.

Highlights (1)

Quote“You should consider the facts and circumstances surrounding the making of each statement, along with all the other evidence, in determining how much weight, if any, the statement deserves.”— Jerome L. FoxThe instruction placed the weight of statements attributed to Dassey with the jury and directed attention to the circumstances in which they were made.Open in transcript →

ClosingProsecution closing argument by Thomas J. FallonThomas J. Fallon3lines spoken

Summary

Fallon argued that Dassey's statements were corroborated, that his alleged acts made him a party to all three crimes, and that the jury should return guilty verdicts.

ClosingDefense closing argument by Raymond L. EdelsteinRaymond L. Edelstein3lines spoken

Summary

Edelstein challenged the reliability and corroboration of Dassey's statements and urged not-guilty verdicts on all counts.

Jury InstructionFinal jury instructions and verdict forms1highlight3lines spoken

Summary

Judge Fox read the final verdict forms and deliberation directions, then arranged a juror draw and asked that audio be muted before names were broadcast.

Highlights (1)

jury eventJudge Fox read the guilty and not-guilty verdict forms for the three charged offenses and for first-degree reckless homicide as a lesser-included offense, then directed the jury to consider each count separately and reach unanimous verdicts.Open in transcript →

jury selectionJuror draw before deliberations5lines spoken

Summary

Three names were drawn; Schmidt and Edge were discharged, and the jury went out to deliberate.

VerdictVerdict reception and jury polling1highlight16lines spoken

Summary

The jury returned guilty verdicts on all three counts, and each juror confirmed the verdicts when polled.

Highlights (1)

jury eventJudge Fox read guilty verdicts on all three counts: first-degree intentional homicide, mutilating a corpse, and second-degree sexual assault, each as a party to a crime.Open in transcript →

ProceduralEntry of judgment on the verdicts1highlight2lines spoken

Summary

Judge Fox entered judgment of guilty on the jury's verdicts and asked about setting a sentencing date.

Highlights (1)

Quote“The Court will, based on these verdicts, enter judgment of guilty, uh, as reflected in the verdicts of this jury.”— Jerome L. FoxThe court's statement entering judgment of guilty.Open in transcript →

ProceduralBail revocation and sentencing preparations14lines spoken

Summary

The court revoked bail, made the presentence investigation due July 16, and set sentencing for August 6 at 9 a.m.

About

Trial Record (79)

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Highlights (1)

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Highlights (1)

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Highlights (1)

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Highlights (1)

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Highlights (1)

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Highlights (1)

Summary

Summary

Summary

Highlights (1)

Summary

Highlights (2)

Summary

Highlights (1)

Summary