ProsecutionWisconsin Department of Justice

Thomas J. Fallon

Wisconsin assistant attorney general who served as a special prosecutor in the Avery and Dassey cases.

3,259 lines·78 proceedings·2 trials

About

Special prosecutor Thomas J. Fallon examined witnesses about physical evidence in the 2007 trials of Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey. His questioning addressed the RAV4, burn-pit recovery, burned remains, firearm comparisons, and cranial fragments, while bringing out limits to particular conclusions: a dental fragment was not positively identified, and a damaged bullet could not be attributed to the examined rifle. In Avery’s trial, Fallon also challenged a defense expert’s ability to locate the original burn site and opposed renewed challenges to the property searches. The court allowed the expert’s opinion and made no new ruling at the later search hearing.

In Dassey’s trial, Fallon examined witnesses about Kayla Avery’s earlier account and recorded interviews of Dassey, and contested some proposed uses of interview answers; the court restricted use of certain February 27 answers. He cross-examined Dassey about differences between his trial testimony and recorded statements. In closing and rebuttal, Fallon argued that physical findings corroborated those statements and supported the State’s requested verdicts under party-to-a-crime instructions.

Trial Record (78)

AverySteven AveryFeb 12, 2007 – Mar 18, 2007

Prosecutor Thomas J. Fallon developed the State's physical-evidence testimony in Steven Avery's 2007 trial, particularly the burn-pit, bone, and firearm evidence. He also challenged a defense expert's burn-site opinion and defended the timing of the property searches; the court allowed the expert opinion and made no new ruling at the later search hearing.

Day 6

Feb 19, 2007

DirectJohn Ertl — DirectJohn ErtlThomas J. Fallon229lines spoken

Summary

John Ertl traced crime-lab work on the RAV4, burn areas, and nearby search sites, and explained the limits of the garage's luminol result.

CrossJohn Ertl — CrossJohn ErtlJerome F. Buting14lines spoken

Summary

Ertl was pressed on contamination, RAV4 timing, limited scene photography, negative garage-floor blood screening, and how burn pit material was collected.

RedirectJohn Ertl — RedirectJohn ErtlThomas J. Fallon39lines spoken

Summary

Ertl addressed SUV transport, hypothetical key DNA and blood cleanup, and the limits of his bloodstain expertise.

RecrossJohn Ertl — RecrossJohn ErtlJerome F. Buting5lines spoken

Summary

Buting tested Ertl's blood-evidence comparisons and key-DNA hypothetical; Ertl identified limits to his knowledge, and three exhibits were admitted.

Day 9

Feb 22, 2007

ProceduralSeated Juror’s Prior Trial Involving Detective Remiker3lines spoken

Summary

The court questioned a juror about a prior civil trial involving Detective Remiker, denied a defense motion to strike her, and limited audiovisual coverage.

Day 10

Feb 23, 2007

ProceduralRenewed search-suppression motion hearing1highlight4lines spoken

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.

Highlights (1)

procedural actionFallon opposes suppression, disputing standing over the burn areas, defending the searches as one continuous operation, and contesting the Franks and dog-delay arguments.Open in transcript →

Day 13

Feb 28, 2007

DirectThomas Sturdivant — DirectThomas SturdivantThomas J. Fallon90lines spoken

Summary

Sturdivant described finding apparent bone fragments near the burn pit, sifting debris with Crime Lab personnel, and preserving the scene; exhibits 363–371 and 373 were admitted.

CrossThomas Sturdivant — CrossThomas SturdivantDean A. Strang4lines spoken

Summary

Strang examined Sturdivant about where suspected bone fragments were found and the burn pit recovery's mapping, sifting, and photographic documentation.

DirectDonald Simley — DirectDonald SimleyThomas J. Fallon121lines spoken

Summary

Donald Simley found a Tooth No. 31 fragment very consistent with Teresa Halbach's dental x-rays, but declined to call it a positive identification.

CrossDonald Simley — CrossDonald SimleyDean A. Strang4lines spoken

Summary

Simley could not estimate the fire's temperature or duration from the dental remains, though he said the damage suggested extreme heat or prolonged exposure.

DirectLeslie Eisenberg — DirectLeslie EisenbergThomas J. Fallon186lines spoken

Summary

Eisenberg identified burned remains as those of an adult female, described skull defects she considered characteristic of gunshot injury, and distinguished confirmed human bone from fragments of uncertain origin.

CrossLeslie Eisenberg — CrossLeslie EisenbergDean A. Strang8lines spoken

Summary

Eisenberg acknowledged limits on dating the skull defects and reconstructing the bone recovery, while confirming human bone in Janda Burn Barrel No. 2.

Day 14

Mar 1, 2007

CrossLeslie Eisenberg — CrossLeslie EisenbergDean A. Strang7lines spoken

Summary

Eisenberg qualified the quarry fragments as possibly human, defended the garage-area burn pit as the most probable burn site, and acknowledged she could not rule out another site.

RedirectLeslie Eisenberg — RedirectLeslie EisenbergThomas J. Fallon1highlight13lines spoken

Summary

Eisenberg defended her garage-area burn-site opinion, qualified the gravel-pit fragments as only possibly human, and addressed whether handling had damaged the remains.

Highlights (1)

objectionStrang objected that a question about the skill needed to select bones for transport was speculative. Fallon rephrased it to ask about identifying burned human and nonhuman bone, and Eisenberg answered with a qualification for recognizable intact nonhuman bone.Open in transcript →

RecrossLeslie Eisenberg — RecrossLeslie EisenbergDean A. Strang8lines spoken

Summary

Eisenberg clarified a comparison of burned bone from three locations; the court then admitted two defense exhibits and presented a stipulation that the submitted fragments could not undergo DNA examinations.

DirectWilliam Newhouse — DirectWilliam NewhouseThomas J. Fallon87lines spoken

Summary

Newhouse linked 11 submitted casings and bullet FL to the rifle, but could not identify the particular gun that fired bullet FK.

CrossWilliam Newhouse — CrossWilliam NewhouseJerome F. Buting14lines spoken

Summary

Newhouse defended his identification of bullet FL, acknowledged other possible sources for FK, and explained why the FL peer-review record was not in his case file.

RedirectWilliam Newhouse — RedirectWilliam NewhouseThomas J. Fallon15lines spoken

Summary

Newhouse explained why he could not identify the gun that fired Item FK and defended his comparison of the Exhibit 277 bullet with the Marlin rifle.

RecrossWilliam Newhouse — RecrossWilliam NewhouseJerome F. Buting7lines spoken

Summary

Newhouse said two visible striae were insufficient on their own to identify the rifle; Buting later withdrew mismarked Exhibit 420.

Day 15

Mar 2, 2007

DirectKenneth Olson — DirectKenneth OlsonThomas J. Fallon139lines spoken

Summary

Kenneth Olson reported elemental lead near defects in two charred cranial fragments, described a limitation in examining a third, and identified charred electronic items.

RedirectKenneth Olson — RedirectKenneth OlsonThomas J. Fallon5lines spoken

Summary

Olson testified that .22-caliber bullets are almost 99 percent lead after the court allowed the redirect question.

RecrossKenneth Olson — RecrossKenneth OlsonJerome F. Buting6lines spoken

Summary

Olson described variations in bullet composition and confirmed he had not examined item FL.

Day 17

Mar 6, 2007

ProceduralStatus of pending motions and voicemail testimony3lines spoken

Summary

The court reviewed pending fair-testing, voicemail-evidence, and search-suppression matters, identifying possible argument, planned testimony, and transcript review without ruling.

DirectLynn Zigmunt — DirectLynn ZigmuntThomas J. Fallon89lines spoken

Summary

Lynn Zigmunt authenticated 1985 case-file records and described file storage and access; the court limited her testimony about unobserved visits, then admitted the identified exhibits except an unfamiliar log.

CrossLynn Zigmunt — CrossLynn ZigmuntJerome F. Buting11lines spoken

Summary

Zigmunt described gaps in file sign-in practices and supervision, then reviewed a video of the blood-vial box examination; the court limited her interpretation of its seals.

RedirectLynn Zigmunt — RedirectLynn ZigmuntThomas J. Fallon1highlight8lines spoken

Summary

Zigmunt clarified what she knew about bailiffs' keys and code access, and said other deputies could enter the inner office when buzzed in by a clerk.

Highlights (1)

objectionButing objected to a question about which deputies had keys; the court directed Fallon to establish whether Zigmunt knew.Open in transcript →

Day 18

Mar 7, 2007

ProceduralSession Opening and Counsel Appearances3lines spoken

DirectRodney Pevytoe — DirectRodney PevytoeThomas J. Fallon143lines spoken

Summary

Pevytoe described burn pit recoveries, comparisons with barrel contents, and examinations of other possible burn sites.

RedirectRodney Pevytoe — RedirectRodney PevytoeThomas J. Fallon20lines spoken

Summary

Pevytoe clarified the burn-pit excavation sequence and discussed possible tire-fire explanations while acknowledging uncertainty about black oil found in jugs.

DirectMichael Riddle — DirectMichael RiddleThomas J. Fallon133lines spoken

Summary

Riddle described RAV4 fingerprint processing, a qualified headboard identification, and the lack of identifiable prints from the vehicle and blood-vial evidence.

ProceduralHearing on Objections to Anonymous Letter16lines spoken

Summary

The court barred display or admission of an anonymous letter through the fingerprint expert but allowed limited questioning identifying the letter and its examination timing.

CrossMichael Riddle — Cross-Examination ResumedMichael RiddleJerome F. Buting4lines spoken

Summary

Riddle described usable RAV4 prints that did not match Avery, unmade comparisons with two officers' standards, and the expected presence of Avery's print on a headboard.

RedirectMichael Riddle — RedirectMichael RiddleThomas J. Fallon7lines spoken

Summary

Riddle explained the need for a known fingerprint standard and the effect of DNA swabbing on print recovery.

RecrossMichael Riddle — RecrossMichael RiddleJerome F. Buting3lines spoken

Summary

Riddle said unswabbed rifle areas might have been suitable for fingerprint examination; the court admitted Exhibits 497 and 498.

Day 19

Mar 8, 2007

ProceduralRenewed challenge to November 5 warrant searches1highlight6lines spoken

Summary

The defense and State argued over repeated searches under the November 5 warrant, particularly the burn area. The court made no new ruling.

Highlights (1)

confrontationFallon asks the court to retain its earlier suppression ruling, arguing that officers conducted one continuing search and obtained a second warrant.Open in transcript →

DirectJohn Leurquin — DirectJohn LeurquinJerome F. Buting11lines spoken

Summary

Leurquin recalled a green SUV appearing to leave the Avery Auto Salvage area on October 31, but could not identify it as Halbach's vehicle.

CrossJohn Leurquin — CrossJohn LeurquinThomas J. Fallon1highlight46lines spoken

Summary

Leurquin could not identify the green SUV as the sought vehicle, but maintained that he saw it on October 31.

Highlights (1)

testimony highlightFallon tested how closely Leurquin watched the passing SUV. Leurquin said he looked longer than a half-second but did not get a particularly good look and could not identify the driver.Open in transcript →

RecrossJohn Leurquin — RecrossJohn LeurquinThomas J. Fallon9lines spoken

Summary

Leurquin maintained his time estimate but could not specifically recall other vehicles or whether he saw the school bus.

Day 20

Mar 9, 2007

ProceduralFairgrieve burn-site opinion: expert-disclosure objection and ruling1highlight6lines spoken

Summary

The State challenged Fairgrieve's burn-site opinion as different from his expert disclosure. The court found the disclosure slightly misleading but declined to exclude the testimony or sanction the defense.

Highlights (1)

objectionOutside the jury's presence, Fallon challenged whether Fairgrieve's testimony matched the amended expert disclosure; Strang said he expected an opinion that Fairgrieve could neither identify nor exclude a burn site.Open in transcript →

CrossScott Fairgrieve — CrossScott FairgrieveThomas J. Fallon1highlight202lines spoken

Summary

Fairgrieve acknowledged moved bones and limits on his review but could neither identify the original burn site nor rule out the burn pit.

Highlights (1)

procedural actionOutside the jury's presence, Strang explained that his sidebar request was intended to prevent an answer referring to information attributed to Brendan Dassey or his separate case. Fallon agreed that such information was not germane to the rest of his cross-examination.Open in transcript →

RecrossScott Fairgrieve — RecrossScott FairgrieveThomas J. Fallon6lines spoken

Summary

Fairgrieve qualified his odor testimony on recross, and the court received a stipulation establishing the times and approximate lengths of two calls between Avery and Jodi Stachowski.

Day 21

Mar 12, 2007

ProceduralIndividual seated-juror inquiries about publicity and outside contact6lines spoken

Summary

The court questioned seated jurors about publicity and outside contact, followed up on family comments and television tickers, and recessed without ruling on juror service.

Day 22

Mar 13, 2007

Charge ConferenceFormal Jury Instruction Conference18lines spoken

Summary

The court approved a defense-theory instruction, denied separate exhibit-weight and spoliation instructions, and agreed to add prior-statement language to the jury instructions.

ProceduralRequest for Curative Instruction on Fairgrieve Cross-Examination6lines spoken

Summary

The court declined a curative instruction about Dr. Fairgrieve's expert disclosure but required the State to clarify any closing argument about his lack of a written report.

DasseyBrendan DasseyApr 16, 2007 – Apr 25, 2007

Thomas J. Fallon examined forensic and interview witnesses, cross-examined Brendan Dassey, and delivered the State's closing and rebuttal in Dassey's 2007 trial. He argued that physical evidence corroborated Dassey's recorded statements and supported party-to-a-crime liability.

Day 1

Apr 16, 2007

ProceduralMay 13 Interview Cross-Examination Dispute3lines spoken

Summary

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

Day 2

Apr 17, 2007

DirectJohn Ertl — DirectJohn ErtlThomas J. Fallon142lines spoken

Summary

Ertl described the RAV4's recovery, burned debris from a barrel and the burn pit, and the limits of garage luminol testing.

DirectWilliam Newhouse — DirectWilliam NewhouseThomas J. Fallon70lines spoken

Summary

Newhouse attributed 11 cartridge casings and one bullet to a Marlin rifle but could not identify that rifle as the source of a second, damaged bullet.

RedirectWilliam Newhouse — RedirectWilliam NewhouseThomas J. Fallon3lines spoken

Summary

Newhouse said Item FK could have come from the examined weapon, but he could not identify it as the source with certainty.

DirectKenneth Olson — DirectKenneth OlsonThomas J. Fallon83lines 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. Fallon5lines 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 132–1403lines 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. Fallon1highlight67lines 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.

Highlights (1)

impeachmentAfter the defense challenged the wording of a question about her earlier statement, Fallon restated it. Kayla acknowledged reporting that Brendan saw body parts in a fire and Teresa alive and pinned in Steven's trailer, but said both reports were untrue. She attributed what she said to confusion rather than an effort to get Brendan in trouble.Open in transcript →

RedirectKayla Avery — RedirectKayla AveryThomas J. Fallon3lines spoken

Summary

Kayla Avery could not recall whether officers approached her because of what she told school counselors.

DirectSusan Brandt — DirectSusan BrandtThomas J. Fallon30lines 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.

RedirectSusan Brandt — RedirectSusan BrandtThomas J. Fallon2lines spoken

Summary

Brandt said she did not think Kayla Avery visited the counselors just to get attention.

DirectThomas Sturdivant — DirectThomas SturdivantThomas J. Fallon81lines 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.

DirectDonald Simley — DirectDonald SimleyThomas J. Fallon89lines 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

DirectRodney Pevytoe — DirectRodney PevytoeThomas J. Fallon77lines spoken

Summary

Rodney Pevytoe described suspected remains recovered from burn-pit debris, bone material he identified within tire wire, and his qualified opinions about the fire's fuel and duration.

DirectLeslie Eisenberg — DirectLeslie EisenbergThomas J. Fallon134lines 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. Fremgen4lines 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. Fallon83lines 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. Edelstein15lines 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. Fallon37lines 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. Edelstein9lines 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.

DirectMark Wiegert — DirectMark WiegertThomas J. Fallon41lines spoken

Summary

Wiegert described how Kayla Avery's interviews prompted further questioning of Brendan Dassey and recounted what she later told investigators and wrote in Exhibit 163.

Day 5

Apr 20, 2007

ProceduralHealth-related excusal of a seated juror3lines spoken

Summary

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

DirectMark Wiegert — DirectMark WiegertThomas J. Fallon132lines 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 statements3lines 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.

CrossMark Wiegert — Cross-examination resumesMark WiegertRaymond L. Edelstein8lines 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

CrossMark Wiegert — CrossMark WiegertRaymond L. Edelstein7lines 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.

RedirectMark Wiegert — RedirectMark WiegertThomas J. Fallon17lines spoken

Summary

On redirect, Wiegert explained his views on missing blood spatter and cited physical findings he believed corroborated Brendan's interview account despite the absence of Brendan's DNA profile or fingerprints.

ProceduralExhibit matters and State rests its case5lines 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.

Day 7

Apr 23, 2007

DirectBrendan Dassey — DirectBrendan DasseyMark R. Fremgen4lines spoken

Summary

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

CrossBrendan Dassey — CrossBrendan DasseyThomas J. Fallon2highlights250lines spoken

Summary

Fallon tested Dassey's trial denials against recorded statements, his bonfire and garage-cleanup account, and drawings he made for investigators.

Highlights (2)

confrontationFallon challenged Dassey's suggestion that books supplied details in his police account, then questioned him about drawings of the bed, burn area, garage and knife. Dassey said he had made up the depictions while maintaining that he had not seen Teresa in the bedroom.Open in transcript →

impeachmentDassey denied telling Kayla he had seen body parts in the fire. Fallon confronted him with an account he attributed to Kayla's statements to counselors; Dassey said he did not know how to explain it.Open in transcript →

RedirectBrendan Dassey — RedirectBrendan DasseyMark R. Fremgen3lines spoken

Summary

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

Day 9

Apr 25, 2007

ClosingProsecution closing argument by Thomas J. FallonThomas J. Fallon4highlights9lines 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.

Highlights (4)

otherFallon frames the State's closing around whether Dassey was present and helped, then begins a chronology of Halbach's final appointments.Open in transcript →

otherFallon surveys physical evidence and prior testimony that he argues corroborate Dassey's account, including the garage bullet, RAV4, burn-pit remains, and cleanup evidence.Open in transcript →

otherFallon applies the party-to-a-crime instructions to acts he attributes to Dassey and argues for first-degree intentional homicide rather than the lesser homicide offense.Open in transcript →

otherFallon recasts Dassey's alleged participation as a series of choices and asks for guilty verdicts on all three charged offenses.Open in transcript →

RebuttalProsecution rebuttal closing argument by Thomas J. FallonThomas J. Fallon2highlights5lines spoken

Summary

Fallon rebutted challenges to Dassey's statements and the forensic gaps, played part of the March 1 interview, and requested guilty verdicts.

Highlights (2)

otherFallon invokes Kayla Avery's account and argues that Dassey's distress, rather than suggestibility, explains his confession.Open in transcript →

otherFallon answers the defense's forensic-evidence argument by offering explanations for the absence of Dassey's DNA and fingerprints.Open in transcript →