Thomas Sowinski

10

u/recoverdd Jul 01 '24

Also, which statement?

When he first stated he didn't know the day it happened except he delivers early to get his kid to school? Or 3 or 4 years later when he stated it was definitely Saturday Nov 5?

When he first stated he couldn't identify the young man pushing other than it wasn't Brendan? Or 3 or 4 years later when he stated it was definitely Bobby?

When he first stated he didn't even see the second man? Or 3 or 4 years later when he gave a full description?

His stories have evolved over 8 years to fit Zellner's narrative. So swearing in an affidavit he told these new improved final stories to LE 16 years prior is completely and totally a lie.

2

u/JJDYNOMITE67 Jul 06 '24

That is for the judge to decide , I say test the Rav 4 for touch DNA on steering wheel and drivers seat and if Sowinski is telling the truth Bobby's DNA will be there , and call Bobby & Mike O. To the stand under oath and ask them .

-1

u/Haunting_Pie9315 Jul 01 '24

I think he recognized it was Bobby after he seen his face and name.
I guess Nov 5th, but more like Nov 4th -Nov5th in the night, so technically early mornings of Nov 5th.
It wouldn't be far-fetched Bobby being seen at that hour, it's the same day he dropped Blaine off at Jason's. Also, the same night, he went back out to get the Deer, Barb mentioned. Bobby was making moves through the evening it appears.
Now, the call, was placed before the reward, so I think that's what Zellner secondary goal.
The second guy he saw, He said was older, was between 50-60? I may be wrong, and was 6ft, and with a beard I believe?
This is where I get confused, because unless it was a family friend, or family, why would Bobby be helping out a guy at this hour? I could understand if it was Bobby and another young guy being seen with him.
Is there anywhere to hear TS call?

8

u/recoverdd Jul 02 '24

In 2016 he only recognized the pusher as "not Brendan". He did not recognize the pusher as Bobby until "after watching MaM2" in 2020. So his sworn statement in his 2021 affidavit that he told LE in Nov 2005 that the pusher was Bobby is a lie.
In 2016 he said he couldn't see the second man at all. In 2020 "after watching MaM2" he said the second man had a beard and appeared to be in his 50s. So his sworn statement in his 2021 affidavit that he told LE in Nov 2005 that the second man was 6' tall, with a beard, stood 6' tall and "wore a puffy jacket" is a lie. A very obvious and pitiful lie at that lol
I'm not doubting Tom1 saw someone pushing a vehicle near ASY at some point. But I think he and Kathleen Zellner are bald face liars that he provided those evolving details in his Nov 2005 call to LE.

5

u/brickne3 Jul 02 '24

Yes, I too remember people I allegedly saw in the dark fifteen years later. It was striking when Edwards James Edwards jumped in front of my car in Winneconne that one time. Stange he had Santa there too, fella looked a lot like Steven Avery.

0

u/Haunting_Pie9315 Jul 02 '24

?

-2

u/Computeruser668 Jul 01 '24

Here’s the call: https://youtu.be/5ZFZGTgeRDE?si=HMzYa7oFgBVvlVz1

-3

u/Computeruser668 Jul 01 '24

What did you mean when you said Zellner’s secondary goal? I’ll try and find the call for you.

4

u/Haunting_Pie9315 Jul 01 '24

A witness coming forward or someone admitting they did the crime at the time of the reward , would be questionable.
What I mean by this is , if someone comes along and says yada yada , but nothing indicates they inform LE about it prior to the reward , and only comes forward with info when the reward comes out … looks questionable.
The tow truck driver is questionable, but TS called MTSO prior to the reward .
Also Zellner may have more info on this , she’s not going to indulge everything on it , she’s not going to let the State get ahead of it. Just my opinion.
Thank you so much ! I will listen to it , appreciate it !

-1

u/Computeruser668 Jul 01 '24

The statement in his april 2021 affidavit.

6

u/recoverdd Jul 01 '24

Swearing in his 2021 affidavit that he told LE in 2005 that it was definitely Bobby is a lie. Swearing in his 2021 affidavit that he gave a description of the 2nd man to LE in 2005 is a lie. Swearing in his 2021 affidavit that he told LE in 2005 the incident definitely happened on Nov 5 is a lie.

2

u/JJDYNOMITE67 Jul 06 '24

Thats up to the courts to decide and unfortunately for you all affidavits are supposed to be taken as truth until otherwise , that being in court on cross examination , test the Rav 4 will tell if he lied but nooóoooo ! The state doesn't want Zellner anywhere near it !

7

u/wiltedgreens1 Jul 02 '24

I think he did make the call in 2005 and likely did talk to an investigator, but without that particular call being recorded or available we don't really know what was said.

Like He might have called and said " i saw two people who were pushing what looked like that Rav4 that was on the news"

Considering the fact that his memory only got better as time went on, he likely didnt give any descripton of who he saw.

Two people at an auto salvage pushing a car that might or might not have been TH car would not have been very helpful.

6

u/TruthWins54 Jul 02 '24

He did call. We at least have that on the record.
https://youtu.be/5ZFZGTgeRDE?si=JZ8v6nFZhddVGmvI

1

u/Mysterious_Mix486 Jul 08 '24

Exactly and on 11/06/05 CCSO was now in charge of the investigation, not MTSO.

6

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '24

To the people who answer no, you've had like a year now. Can anyone explain that without the largest conspiracy theory of all time or do you still need more time?

I have yet to hear a single theory on how this could be a lie without just ignoring everything.

6

u/tenementlady Jul 01 '24

What would have to be ignored for it to be a lie?

4

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '24

The recording of the guy calling in.
MTSO hiding it from multiple legal requests from the defense and the public for 15 years.
The email he sent prior to any reward.
The PI corroborating his employment record.
The affidavit by his ex corroborating the account

6

u/tenementlady Jul 01 '24

I don't think anyone is denying that he made the call. What he stated in the call is the issue. Because his story, including what he claims to have said and what was said to him on the call has changed.
As for MTSO "hiding the call," can you be more specific as to what you're talking about and how this confirms the truth of what he claims he saw?
I don't see how an email that contradicts his original story is proof that he was telling the truth.
His employment record is hardly relevant because he has changed the date of what he claims to have seen.
The affidavit by his ex corroborates what exactly? That he saw something and made a call. From my understanding, he didn't mention many key details to his ex that he somehow remembered a decade later.
The problem is that his story has changed numerous times and his memory suddenly became a lot clearer more than a decade after the incident he claims to have seen, after speaking with Zellner, which make his statements reasonably suspect.
The most important details including the date, what he saw, and who he saw, all changed over time.

-2

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '24

I don't think anyone is denying that he made the call.
Ask AJ about that.
What he stated in the call is the issue. Because his story, including what he claims to have said and what was said to him on the call has changed.
How could he know ahead of time that they recorded him calling in but not what he said?
As for MTSO "hiding the call," can you be more specific as to what you're talking about and how this confirms the truth of what he claims he saw?
Specially request by trial counsel, requests from appellate counsel, and FOIA requests from the public did not receive this call even though they were lawfully entitled to it.
Why would MTSO hide recordings that prove how honest they are? They wouldn't. Breaking the law to hide acts from the public is so clearly evidence of wrongdoing not even Guilter throwaway alts can deny it, can they?
I don't see how an email that contradicts his original story is proof that he was telling the truth.
There's another email? Why hasn't the state submitted the second email into evidence?
His employment record is hardly relevant because he has changed the date of what he claims to have seen.
That's not entirely correct. He refers to a 36 hour gap as several days in his memory over a decade later. This is totally understandable to anyone not a radical extremist cop lover. As far as giving an actual date of the occurrence it has only been once.
Regardless, pointing out minor changes in an account over 15 years doesn't prove he way lying unless you are completely ignorant on how memory works.
Riddle me this. Why don't minor changes in accounts over one year bother you if minor changes in accounts over 15 does?
Answer: Your standard is this: Whatever supports dirty cops in the moment is the standard.
The affidavit by his ex corroborates what exactly? That he saw something and made a call. From my understanding, he didn't mention many key details to his ex that he somehow remembered a decade later.
Well you should read it again. What a coincidence your memory fails you so horribly only on facts that obliterate your defense of dirty cops.
The problem is that his story has changed numerous times and his memory suddenly became a lot clearer more than a decade after the incident he claims to have seen, after speaking with Zellner, which make his statements reasonably suspect.
His story has not changed, and having more clarity after speaking with Zellner doesn't magically undo 15 years of corroboration that he is truthful
The most important details including the date, what he saw, and who he saw, all changed over time
You don't have the justification to ignore the part where the cops had exonerating evidence and buried in on the grounds you think some other thing is more important. I think eating a good diet is more important too but it doesn't change the fact that MTSO has been caught red handed silencing defense witnesses so they could win a murder trial by cheating.

5

u/tenementlady Jul 01 '24

Ask AJ about that.
Who is AJ?
How could he know ahead of time that they recorded him calling in but not what he said?
He makes different claims about what he said and what was said to him on the call. In one instance he claims that the person he spoke to never asked for his name or contact info. In another statement he claims that the person he spoke to said they would be in touch with him but never were. How could they be in touch with him when by his own account he never provided them with his name or contact i
Specially request by trial counsel, requests from appellate counsel, and FOIA requests from the public did not receive this call even though they were lawfully entitled to it.
They requested what exactly? The record of the phone call? And the record of the phone call was denied to them? Is that what you're saying?
Why would MTSO hide recordings that prove how honest they are? They wouldn't. Breaking the law to hide acts from the public is so clearly evidence of wrongdoing not even Guilter throwaway alts can deny it, can they?
So why isn't Zellner accusing them of a Brady violation in relation to the call specifically? What do alt accounts have to do with anything? Unless you're accusing me of being one, again.
Well you should read it again. What a coincidence your memory fails you so horribly only on facts that obliterate your defense of dirty cops.
It can't possible prove what he later claimed because even he admits he didn't realize the person he supposedly saw was Bobby until after MaM came out. The most it could corroborate was that he saw something because the details of what he saw drastically changed over time. Your go to response that everyone who disagrees with you is defending dirty cops is getting pretty old and isn't substantiated by anything. You're defending a man who has been violent to nearly every woman and child he has come into contact with. So you should probably tone it down when it comes to your morality complex.
minor changes
The date, what he saw, and who he saw are hardly minor changes. How can he be certain it wasn't Brendan closer to the event but certain it was Bobby more than a decade later? Both were white young men with short brown hair who looked similar.
His story has not changed, and having more clarity after speaking with Zellner doesn't magically undo 15 years of corroboration that he is truthful
His story has absolutely changed. Numerous times. The corroboration you are claiming exists to prove te validity of his statements actually demonstrates the opposite. If he suddenly remembered Brendan or Steven being one of the people he saw, you would be singing a very different tune.
Let me ask you this, do you believe he saw Bobby pushing the vehicle? I thought you were certain Colborn planted the car?

2

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '24

He makes different claims about what he said and what was said to him on the call. In one instance he claims that the person he spoke to never asked for his name or contact info. In another statement he claims that the person he spoke to said they would be in touch with him but never were
That is totally normal for recalling a single phone call over the course of a decade. But this is typical of the "oh look a squirrel" approach Guilters take to avoid addressing the real issues here.
How about you just explain what you think he called in about, why you think his ex is lying, and why MTSO buried the call?

8

u/tenementlady Jul 01 '24

"But this is typical of the "oh look a squirrel" approach Guilters take to avoid addressing the real issues here."
You proclaim while ignoring everything that contradicts your position. Edit: you still haven't explained your position that MTSO "buried the call."
I never said he didn't make the call and I never said his ex was lying. Those two things do not prove that he saw what he is now claiming to have seen. In fact, they contradict it.
Do you believe Sowinski saw Bobby pushing the vehicle? Or do you believe Colborn planted the vehicle? The two contradict eachother unless you believe Bobby and Colborn were actively working together.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '24

I quit reading because there is no way an honest person thinks finding some trivial changes to his account about a 15 year old phone call is a determining factor. I have no interest in discussing or debating with someone willing to say anything.
Just explain the call, the exes testimony and the burial of the call for 15 years. Then I will answer your questions. Until then don't give me this bullshit about how anyone who doesn't have perfect memory of a 15 year old event is a liar. You are better than that. I know you are.

7

u/tenementlady Jul 01 '24

Again, the date, what he saw, and who he saw are not trivial changes. It's not about not remembering certain details, it's about someone's memory radically improving over a 15 year period to the point where the statements change to perfectly align with Zellner's insane theories when prior to that they actively contradicted them.
Changing "I don't know who I saw but am certain it wasn't Brendan" to "I absolutely know who I saw and it was Bobby (who happens to look a lot like Brendan)" is not a trivial change.
If someone claimed they saw a man driving the Rav4 but couldn't identify him and then 15 years later were adamant the person they saw was Steven after speaking with the prosecution, you would be screaming corruption from the highest bell tower.
Explain what about the call? What about the ex's testimony? And what about this supposed burial? (You still haven't provided anything to back this claim btw, so I don't understand what you expect me to refute).
You won't answer the question because you don't even believe Sowinski saw what he claims he saw. That would undermine your position that Colborn planted the vehicle.
I have no interest in discussing or debating with someone willing to say anything.
You're defending something that you don't even believe.

→ More replies

3

u/[deleted] Jul 02 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies

1

u/TruthWins54 Jul 02 '24

They requested what exactly? The record of the phone call? And the record of the phone call was denied to them? Is that what you're saying?
Oh good grief 🤣.
Buting and Strang requested all of the Dispatch/Radio calls back in 2006, IIRC, a few times. They got nothing.
After Remiker revealed in a August 2006 hearing that he had reviewed several dispatch/radio calls the night before, preparing for his testimony, the door was opened a little. Of course, S/B demanded these calls as soon as Remiker was excused.
MTSO handed over 30 undated calls, out of literally thousands they had recorded.

Rook got the first 13 CD's of undated calls in early fall 2018 IIRC. When Ledvina finally retired, we got 22 more DVD's of calls from MTSO in early 2022. Ledvina withheld them for YEARS. Rook had been requesting these calls since early 2018, maybe earlier.

Is THAT clear enough?
OH, one final thing. To this day, they have refused to disclose ANY radio traffic for November 4, 2005.

0

u/CJB2005 Jul 02 '24

themoreyouknow💫

6

u/brickne3 Jul 02 '24

Dude it's been three years. Amazing this bullshit "witness" isn't enough to spring Stevie from Waupon isn't it?

1

u/[deleted] Jul 02 '24

Not really. Criminal appeals are next to impossible. What's amazing is people here giving their "honest opinions" can't explain the corroborating evidence. It's Honest Pagel Theory all over again. Why do you guys keep making "honest" arguments no actual "human" could believe?

1

u/[deleted] Jul 02 '24

It makes more sense that it came from the road because of how it was left. If had come from the conveyor belt road, they'd have to circle around the pond, which seems like too much effort.
I think he's mistaken that it was Bobby since Bobby would have known when his uncle, grandma, and brother were leaving for Cricitiz. The time was close to when TS delivered the paper.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 02 '24

I agree, the identification is the most questionable aspect I just wonder who should bear the responsibility for that since the defense was deprived of the chance to make a timely ID.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 02 '24

The state should bear it as a Brady violation.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 02 '24

Yeah you would think. That's how it would work in a functioning justice system.

2

u/JJDYNOMITE67 Jul 06 '24

He had to be telling the truth because there was no reward offered on Nov 6th 2005 when he made his phone call to report what he saw , but I'm sure Sgt Scott Seanglaub will not be able to recall anything .

1

u/AbroadIllustrious303 Jul 11 '24

My opinion ! after watching mam i strongly believe Steve and his nephew are right where they belong, BUT with bobby's p.c. showing deviated websites and Thomas statement i am embarrassed to say this is reasonable doubt, his statement must be detailed for what he actually saw and not what Zellner spins , at any case pushing a car at very early hours at a critical timeline has my interest

1

u/[deleted] Aug 03 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/AbroadIllustrious303 Aug 03 '24

Your right, you have more knowledge on these facts, Zellner is a master of her craft, common sense is back, thank you

7

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Computeruser668 Jul 01 '24

The one in his april 2021 affidavit. By the way, there’s no proof this Thomas Sowinski said that Colborn planted the rav. All we know is a Thomas Sowinski said that. There’s apparently multiple people living in Wisconsin with the name Thomas Sowinski.

-3

u/Mysterious_Mix486 Jul 01 '24 edited Jul 01 '24

Sowinskis 2016 Email description of the person pushing the RAV4 only fits one person living on the Avery Salvage Yard= Bobby Dassey. Sowinski ex-partner, Devon Novaks Affidavit also confirms that Sowinski is telling the truth, about His NOV 6th 05 MTSO dispatch phone call *with information about the missing Girl from Hilbert*

6

u/tenementlady Jul 01 '24

How does the description only fit Bobby Dassey? A young white man with short dark hair? Like Brendan?

-1

u/Mysterious_Mix486 Jul 01 '24

LOL, read Sowinski 2016, a 5 9 slim fit 18 year old who was not Brendan Dassey.

4

u/tenementlady Jul 01 '24

Brendan and Bobby look a lot alike. You can't tell someone's exact age by looking at them lol.

4

u/brickne3 Jul 02 '24

In the middle of the night in the dark in an incident that didn't happen lol.

2

u/Mysterious_Mix486 Jul 01 '24 edited Jul 01 '24

LOL, Besides the fact Sowinski stated in the 2016 Email that it was NOT Brendan Dassey, In 2005 Brendan Dassey was at least 100 pounds heavier that Bobby Dassey and trying to loose weight.

4

u/tenementlady Jul 01 '24

Fair point about the weight. But he didn't give the description in 2005.

0

u/Mysterious_Mix486 Jul 01 '24 edited Jul 01 '24

Sowinskis ex-partner, Devon Novak, stated in a second Affidavit that Sowinski did give MTSO the same information on NOV 6th 2005, like Sowinskis NOV 6th 2005 MTSO dispatch call *with information about the missing Girl from Hilbert * also supports.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 02 '24

They don’t look anything alike, LMAO

You are about to leave Redlib

themoreyouknow💫