Detective Dave Remiker and Manitowoc County Sheriff’s deputy Melia Prange violated departmental rules when the jury was sequestered for the trial of Brendan Dassey, nephew of Making a Murderer’s Steven Avery, on April 2007.
Remiker had received a reprimand from the sheriff’s office during the trial; Prange, on the other hand, was suspended for one day for breaking the rules in the incident.
As reported by Post Crescent, the jury for Dassey’s trial was called to Manitowoc. They were sequestered at the Best Western Lakefront Hotel by Manitowoc County Circuit Judge Jerome L. Fox in order to keep them away from being exposed to outside influence.
However, Prange’s husband, Lee, was given access to the jury – he was able to access the area where the jury was for at least 3.5 hours on the day in question, as indicated by the personnel files.
“Deputy Prange allowed her husband into the secured area of the jury to deliver pizza and obtain drinks,” Prange’s disciplinary report said. “This unauthorized person was in the secured area on and off from” 9 p.m. till 12:30 a.m.
Meanwhile, there has been a lot of talk about the fate of Dassey. Avery’s nephew, who was 17 the time he was convicted, was accused of acting as Avery’s accomplice and was charged with the murder of 25-year-old photographer Teresa Halbach; he subsequently went on trial on April 2007. Avery, on the other hand, was convicted in a separate trial.
Making a Murderer makers Moira Demos and Laura Ricciardi spoke about the upcoming season of the docuseries with Time Out. Demos said that Dassey’s case “is where it was when the series finished.”
“[Dassey’s] habeas petition is sitting on the federal magistrate’s desk. Everybody is awaiting the magistrate’s decision on his case,” Demos said. “There’s really no schedule or timetable for it. His lawyers told us they might have one or two days’ notice.”
However, Missouri law professor Peter Joy said the possibility of Dassey’s trial is unlikely. Despite Dassey’s lawyer’s “outrageous conduct,” it is almost impossible to prove that the standard of legal counsel was ineffective, Joy wrote in his paper.
Highlighting his opinion regarding the inefficiency of the counsel, Joy referred to the Strickland Standard. “In establishing the Strickland standard, the Court created conditions in which unequal assistance of counsel can thrive with little or no recourse for those adversely affected,” Joy wrote.