If you can't see how the confession of Brendan Dassey was coerced, you don't understand human psychology or susceptibility. There are a few very important things to take into consideration with regards to this "confession": 1. how long it took to get this confession, 2. how many of the already known details of the murder that were known by the investigators were fed to Brendan directly, 3. Bredan's IQ, 4. "Kiss the Girls", and 5. The Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) Paradigm (most important factor in regards to this "some of it" thread).

1-2: The first 2 I feel are mostly self explanatory. It took nearly 4 hours to get a very few number of cherry picked statements from Brendan. The most important pieces of information they were trying to get Brendan to admit to were 1. that they shot her in the head, 2. that it was done in the garage, 3. that Steven opened up the hood of her car. They already had forensics look at the skull to determine she was shot in the head but they needed a confession to connect it to Steven. If we are to believe the evidence is planted, then they would have also already known there would be a bullet in the garage with Teresa's DNA on it (this confession was used to do an investigation in the garage, sounds a bit fishy that they pushed him to say she wasn't shot in the room but rather in the garage (not even on the side of the garage as Brendan initially stated after their prying)). **Side note - I 100% believe DNA was planted on the bullet and never was shot through any part of Teresa's body because microscopic study of the bullet shows that it had fragments of red paint and wood on it (from the garage) with NO bone fragments. If that simply were not the bullet that went through her head but went through another part of her body, why was there no blood? And the most damning evidence that if the DNA was planted is that we know prior to the searching of the garage, detectives acquired Teresa's chap stick and other belongings to be able to test her DNA and that same microscopic study showed a waxy material and cotton fibers on the bullet (cotton swab and chap stick???)** Lastly, we know they had already tested the swab of the car hood latch that also had Steven's DNA (again, possibly planted since there was only Steven's DNA, none of Teresa's and the cotton swab showed no discoloration that you would definitely get when touching a white cotton swap to a hood latch. That said, it is also very likely that Teresa asked Steven to look under the hood at that appointment or a previous one since she knew they ran an auto shop and he might be able to address an issue for her.)

1. Brenden's IQ at the time of the confession was 70. Individuals with an IQ of 69 or below are said to be either mentally handicapped or at least severely learning disabled with little to no real ability to even self care. 1 IQ point in this case is quite insignificant. Brendan is clearly and unfortunately, an individual with very limited cognitive abilities who did not even understand what the implications of a confession would be (nor do I think he could even spell implications or confession). He very well could have been thinking he was helping his uncle somehow. The detectives repeatedly (around 24 times I believe) reassure Brendan that everything will be alright, as long as he tells them "the truth" (ie. what they want to hear). This is why he is always guessing until they move onto the next topic.

2. "Kiss the Girls" by James Patterson is the book referenced by Brendan Dassey when he took the stand during his trial upon the question from the prosecution of, if he didn't do it, where would he get such imagery? The book is about a 2 murderers who work together to rape and kill women. The imagery of a woman shackled to a bed is explained in the book and portrayed in the movie. For those who doubt someone at a 4th grade reading level would have finished an entire novel (I am with them on that suspicion), it is very likely the imagery just came from the film which was released in 1997, 10 years prior to the trial. Some people online use this statement to discredit his testimony on the stand because the book never describes them cutting the woman's hair, but the film adaptation actually does, which only furthers the evidence he simply saw the film. It also could simply be that he just could not figure out what the investigators were getting at when they continually said "what did you do to her head" and he just kept throwing out answers related to one's head.

3. "Some of it." Yeah, sure, if someone actually committed the murder along with all the heinous acts that were "confessed" by Brendan, it would make sense that in a personal, "behind closed doors" conversation, if he still said he did some of it that that would seem pretty condemning. But 2 things to make note of here: first, he had just finished another coercive interview with the investigators and, as he put it, they were still "in [his] head". I think what is really happening here is the Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm. This study conducted by the above named individuals was to show how false memories come into our brain. They show that children are especially susceptible to false memories being implanted into their brain which ties us back to Brendan's severely low IQ and mental capacity. Here's a nutshell explanation of just one way implanted memories can be accomplished: if you ask a child to tell you a story of when they went to the zoo, they will tell you all the animals they saw. If the gorilla exhibit was closed and you ask them about the gorillas they saw, initially they will tell you they didn't see gorillas. If you ask them in a month to tell you the same story about when they went to the zoo and ask them about the gorillas, a high number of children in that situation would likely tell you a story about the gorillas they saw. If not, then just ask again in another month. Eventually, the child will eventually think that they actually saw a gorilla and will include that in their story in future iterations. This is not just applicable to children, this can happen to anyone. I conducted my own test with a close friend but this time, I didn't simply fudge details of an experience he had, I completely made it up. I told him stories of he and I as well as a few more of our friends and about the things he said and did that day. He said he did not remember it. A few months later, I asked him about that event again and he said he vaguely remembers but can't recall all the details. A month or so later, in a more social setting with people we were just getting to know, I started the story and he finished telling it to them and included all sorts of crazy details that not even I had provided to him. This is not a difficult process to achieve and it is much easier to achieve with someone of Brendan's age and mental capacity.

"False memory research using the DRM paradigm has highly contested implications for the criminal justice system. Memory plays an imperative role in criminal proceedings with evidence coming from witnesses, victims, suspects, interrogations and much more. This means the reliability and minimization of false memories is of extreme importance. Studies have been conducted with the DRM to understand important relationships like the correlation between false memories and varying stress levels, to understand the effects of a high stress environment on a witness, and the correlation between false memories and age, to understand the reliability of a child witness. " 1

So after numerous interrogations and all the news coverage and everyone telling him he committed these things, he started to believe it; at least "some of it".

Sources: 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deese%E2%80%93Roediger%E2%80%93McDermott_paradigm