Making a Murderer (2015–…): Season 1, Episode 5 - The Last Person to See Teresa Alive - full transcript
As Steven's trial begins, his attorneys argue that law enforcement officials framed him and were negligent in not pursuing other leads in the case.
[Steven on phone] Now, there's a chance.
Maybe the truth will come out.
I want everybody to know I'm innocent.
You know, that's all I'm asking for.
[Buting] The State clearly
was freaked out.
Norm Gahn looks at it,
and from that point on,
you could tell that
he was extremely worried.
[indistinct chatter]
[Buting] Afterwards, Norm said,
"This changes everything."
[Gahn] The Defense intends
to bring this vial into court
and show it to the jury
to demonstrate that the vial
was tampered with by officers.
And when officers are accused
of what they're being accused of,
they deserve to have
their reputations protected.
They're good, solid, decent family men.
I'm sure everyone in this room knows them.
We have to show the world...
that the blood that
is in Teresa Halbach's car...
did not come from this vial of blood.
[Judge Willis] Mr. Buting?
After two months, they have not
been able to present the court
with one single scientifically valid test
that would somehow prove
what they would love it to prove.
There are no tests.
Even the FBI stopped doing them
because they're not reliable.
The FBI is only doing this test now
because the State is desperate.
[Gahn] Again,
I just cannot emphasize too much,
give us the chance to meet
this planting frame-up defense.
I believe it's fair
to give them a chance to do so
and that's what I'm gonna do.
- Mr. Fallon?
- Yes, and one final point.
If the Defense wants
to put forth in their defense
that they're suggesting and implying
in their pleadings today,
then they do so at their peril.
- [theme music plays]
- [geese honking]
[Strang] It is too late
to sit on the fence.
The State has all the information
it needs today.
It's had it for months to decide
whether it's calling Mr. Dassey
to prove the three charges
it added or not.
The three attorneys at this table
have had long discussions
about whether we should proceed
with all six counts
or whether we should proceed
with the four counts
that don't require
Brendan Dassey's testimony.
If put to that question today,
then it is our inclination
to proceed on the four counts that
do not require Brendan Dassey's testimony.
But if we have to start this case
swimming upstream, if you will,
in the face of some instruction
given to the jury
that they should be taking
some negative view of the State,
then we intend to proceed
on all six counts.
[Judge Willis] Mr. Strang, briefly.
All due respect to Counsel,
the State is supposed to start
every criminal case swimming upstream.
And the strong current against which
the State is supposed to be swimming
is a presumption of innocence.
That presumption of innocence
has been eroded, if not eliminated, here
by the specter of Brendan Dassey.
And here's why the court needs
to take some further curative action.
Up through the WFRV report last night,
for example,
Steven Avery has been presented as the...
The man who allegedly raped...
mutilated and murdered Teresa Halbach.
How many times will Steven Avery
be charged in Manitowoc County
with rapes he didn't commit?
This makes two.
You know, forget getting
the 18 years back on the first one.
Where do we go to get
the last ten months back?
Where do we go to get
our presumption of innocence back...
from a public who believes
and has heard time and again
that he's an alleged rapist?
Even before a murderer.
[Judge Willis] I do not believe
that the State has engaged
in any conduct to this point
which would warrant the giving
of some type of instruction
unfavorable to the State
should the State decide at this point
to dismiss some of the charges
that have been filed.
[Buting] We've got a hundred and... what
is it, 130 of these jury questionnaires?
One person, only one, has said
they think he might actually be innocent.
[Strang] "Yeah,
I'm willing to assume him innocent."
One.
Versus the more typical answer of,
"Is there any reason you... [laughs]
you think you should not be selected
to serve in this case?"
"Yes, I already think he is guilty."
Well, OK.
[Strang] "A trial is pointless"...
"Are you aware of the publicity?"
"Yes, I read everything there was on the
Internet and in the newspaper on this case
including Dassey's interview
confession with detectives." [chuckles]
Um... "This case seems
pretty much cut and dry.
I believe the defendant
is guilty as charged."
- "Have you discussed this at length..."
- There's the American spirit!
[TV plays indistinctly]
[news theme music plays]
[male reporter] Right now,
more than 15 months
after Teresa Halbach was murdered...
[female reporter] The jury is picked
and the trial of Steven Avery
is ready to begin on Monday.
Thanks for joining us.
One of the most high-profile murder trials
in Wisconsin history is set to begin.
Teresa Halbach's family
is seeking justice.
It took all week to seat a jury.
[female reporter] These jurors
range in age from 20 to 80.
They include a carpenter,
an international recording artist,
a homemaker, a mechanic,
some working, some retired.
All Manitowoc County residents.
[female reporter 2] The jury will
be bussed from Manitowoc to Chilton
each day of the trial.
It's expected to last six weeks.
How are ya?
[indistinct chatter]
[Kratz] Teresa Halbach had her whole life
in front of her
and the evidence is going to show...
that on Halloween of 2005, that all ended.
That ended in the hands
of the defendant... Steven Avery.
Who is this man? Virtually all of you
knew something about Steven Avery
before serving on this particular jury.
Mr. Avery achieved some degree
of notoriety back in 2003
when he was exonerated.
And at the close of this case,
I'm gonna point
to every one of you potential jurors
and say that has absolutely nothing
to do with this case.
When deciding who's accountable...
for the death
of 25-year-old Teresa Halbach,
Mr. Avery's past and his past exoneration
have nothing to do with this case.
The State intends to prove to you
that the defendant restrained...
murdered and mutilated Teresa Halbach.
The mutilation of this little girl...
Excuse me, not this little girl,
this young woman,
absolutely occurred
because this is what's left.
Small, tiny pieces of bone fragment.
Now, despite Mr. Avery's efforts
to completely obliterate
all these bones by burning,
to incinerate these bones completely,
this bone survived.
It's Teresa Halbach's shin bone.
It's Karen Halbach's daughter's tibia.
Remembering the humanity
of Teresa Halbach, remembering who she is,
what she meant to these people,
is an important part of this process.
Ultimately, this process includes
assigning accountability
for the murder and the mutilation
of an innocent 25-year-old young lady.
And I'll ask at the conclusion
of this case
that you return verdicts of guilty.
Thank you. Thank you, Judge.
[Judge Willis] Thank you, Mr. Kratz.
[Steven on phone]
They wouldn't look at nobody else.
They're paying all their attention to me.
And they shouldn't be doing that.
That's what they did before.
In a long trial like this,
openings are very important.
Really, probably more important
even than the closings.
Because by the time
they get to that point, um...
it's gonna be a matter of arguing
for a few of them probably.
I think most of them will probably
have already decided.
So we want to get 'em early.
Just get 'em thinking that there's
another side to this they have not heard.
All they've been hearing,
for what, 15 months,
is, you know, Teresa Halbach was burned.
Bones were found
on Steven Avery's property.
Which is a horrible fact.
But what they don't know is that
there's evidence those bones were moved.
And so...
And neither does the media.
So it's gonna be interesting
to see the reaction
when that little tidbit
finally becomes public.
The blood I'm more...
a little bit more worried about
than I was when I first discovered it
and was very happy and you know.
Because I don't trust the FBI at all
and I think that they're gonna come up
with some dishonest test
that somehow claims
that the blood in the vial
is different
than what was found at the scene.
And that'll be a little bit harder
to overcome.
I'm not worried about the key at all.
I like the key.
I'm glad they're using it. [clears throat]
It shows that if they would be willing
to go to that length of planting a key,
which I think is...
the jurors are gonna get,
then... the blood follows easily. It does.
[Strang] In 2004,
Steven Avery filed a lawsuit
seeking some recompense
for the hole in his life.
The time he had spent as an innocent man
for the crimes
that Gregory Allen committed.
In October 2005, James Lenk
and another ranking officer
of the Manitowoc County Sheriff's
Department, Sergeant Andrew Colborn,
both were pulled into the lawsuit,
questioned about
their own activity and conduct
with respect to Mr. Avery's imprisonment.
It's Thursday evening about 5:00,
November three,
when Mrs. Halbach reports Teresa missing.
That very night, Calumet is calling
the Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department
for a little bit of help.
And who do we get?
We get Sergeant Andrew Colborn.
And he's told,
"Look, two places we'd like
to sort of check out and see
if Teresa Halbach showed up on Monday:
the Zipperer residence...
and Steven Avery."
Well, that's a name that rings a bell.
You better believe.
Less than three weeks,
or about three weeks after his deposition.
And it is interesting
that of those two places
that Sergeant Colborn is asked to check
out and inquire after Teresa Halbach...
he only goes to one.
Goes to Steven Avery's home.
Out of the blue, the same night,
Lieutenant James Lenk
calls Calumet
about this missing person report.
Let's be clear.
It's in another county.
It's not even Manitowoc County at all.
And nobody has called for Lieutenant Lenk.
Nobody's called looking for him.
But the Chief Detective
of Manitowoc County
takes it upon himself that night
to call Calumet
and offer to get involved
in the missing person investigation
where one of the appointments
that was to be kept was Steven Avery.
November five, Saturday,
Pam and Nikole Sturm
find the Toyota they suspect,
correctly as it turns out, is Teresa's.
And folks, from that point forward,
before the police say
they've even opened the car,
before they say they know of any blood
of any sort, in or on the car,
before anybody even knows whether this
young woman has been hurt or killed...
the focus is on Steven Avery.
Hear it yourself.
When Detective Jacobs was calling
after the police have arrived
at the Avery property,
after Teresa's car has been found there.
[recording of phone line ringing]
[woman] Good morning, Manitowoc County
Sheriff's Department. Katie speaking.
[Jacobs] Katie,
just rolled into the parking lot.
Can you tell me,
do we have a body or anything yet?
[Katie] I don't believe so.
[Jacobs] Do we have Steven Avery
in custody, though?
[Katie] I have no idea.
This is 30 minutes
after they found the car.
Indeed, they wouldn't find
the first bone fragment for three days.
"Do we have Steven Avery
in custody, though?"
Now, if you're thinking though
that the evidence will show you
that Manitowoc County bowed out
because of the conflict of interest
after it turned the investigation
over to Calumet County...
If you're thinking that, it's reasonable,
but you're wrong.
Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department
stays very much involved
in this investigation.
The police didn't kill Teresa Halbach,
obviously.
They have that in common
with Steven Avery.
But they wanted to believe he did.
And whoever did kill her
or burned that body
exploited that tunnel vision
pretty skillfully.
In the end, after the full
and fair consideration
of everything and everyone,
the full and fair consideration
that Steven Avery
did not get from the Manitowoc County
Sheriff's Department...
we're gonna ask you to send him home.
We're gonna ask you
to send him home again.
We're gonna ask you
to get it right this time.
We're gonna ask you to set it right.
So Teresa takes a picture,
you come outside.
She and you are both outside
and you give her the money.
She goes and gets in her truck and then
gives you an Auto Trader magazine,
- is that right?
- Yeah.
OK.
Is she in the truck or out of the truck
when she gives you the magazine?
- She's in the truck.
- In the truck.
OK, then what happens next?
Then she gave me the book, shut the door,
I walked toward the house,
- I put the book on the computer.
- Mm-hm.
I came back out.
And then I was gonna
walk over by Bobby...
but then his vehicle was gone.
So you walk in the house,
you put the magazine down,
you come out and Bobby's vehicle's gone?
Bobby's vehicle's gone.
Mr. Dassey, do you know
the defendant Steven Avery?
[Bobby] Yes, he's my uncle.
You have to speak up
just a little bit, please.
Yes, he's my uncle.
And is he in the courtroom here
at this time?
Yes, he is.
Would you point him out for the record?
Tell the judge where he's seated?
[Bobby] He's right over there,
to my right.
[Kratz] Mr. Dassey,
do you know where your uncle lived?
[Bobby] Yes,
he lived right next door to us.
[Kratz] Please tell the jury
what we're looking at.
[Bobby] Well,
basically this is my mom's house. Um...
The red thing is Steven's trailer.
[Kratz] Now, Bobby, on October 31st, 2005,
do you remember anything unusual that
happened at about 2:30 that afternoon?
A vehicle had drove up
and started taking pictures of the van.
Well, let's back up just a minute.
- What did you see?
- I seen a vehicle pull up in our driveway.
And how do you know that it was
about 2:30 in the afternoon?
'Cause I was going hunting that night
and that's the time I wanted to get out.
All right.
Tell the jury what you saw then.
I seen Teresa Halbach get out of
the vehicle and start taking pictures.
After seeing her taking any pictures,
did you see her do anything?
She started... Before I got in the shower,
she actually started walking over
to Steven's trailer.
[Kratz] When looking at exhibit number 61,
could you point to the window that
you looked out and watched things from?
[Bobby] It would be that window there.
[Kratz] The left-most window
on the trailer,
- is that right?
- [Bobby] Yes.
About what time do you think
that you left to go hunting?
- Twenty to three. Quarter to three.
- Quarter to three?
Mr. Dassey, when you walked out
to your vehicle to go bow hunting,
did you notice if Teresa's vehicle
was still in the driveway?
- Yes, it was.
- It was?
Yep.
- Did you see Ms. Halbach?
- No.
- Did you see any signs of her at all?
- No.
Now, Bobby, on the 3rd of November,
a Thursday, I believe it is,
do you recall having a conversation
with your Uncle Steven regarding a body?
- Yes.
- Could you tell us
what your Uncle Steven told you that day?
Well, my buddy Mike
was over too and he asked us...
It sounded like he was joking, honestly.
But he asked us if we wanted...
He wanted us to help him
get rid of the body.
This sensational testimony today accounted
for a dramatic response from the Defense.
[male reporter] Defense attorney
Dean Strang said that...
[overlapping dialogue]
Well, Cammie, as Elizabeth said,
Bobby Dassey's testimony
and the mistrial issue
took up quite a bit of time this morning.
[male reporter] The Defense
made a motion for a mistrial.
We have no written summary
of an interview of Bobby Dassey
in which that statement is recited.
We do have a report of a contact
with a Michael Osmundson.
"Michael indicated he was aware Steven
was one of the last people
to see the missing girl and jokingly
asked Steven if Steven had her,
the missing girl, in a closet.
At this point, Steven asked Michael
if Michael wanted to quote
'help bury the body' closed quote.
And they laughed about this together."
This conversation clearly is placed
on Thursday, November ten.
I now have a different witness to whom
this statement has never been attributed,
identifying the statement
as having been made on November three.
The implication
is that this may have been
before Teresa Halbach
even is reported missing.
What I'm left with is this jury
having heard testimony
from the first blood relative
of Mr. Avery to testify here,
his nephew and next-door neighbor,
that amounts to a confession of a crime.
There is no way to unwind this
from the jury's mind.
It has enormous unfair prejudicial impact.
If there were a remedy
short of a mistrial,
and I don't know that there is,
it would be something like
the court instructing the jury
that it may disregard as false
all of Bobby Dassey's testimony
because of his false testimony
on this point.
[female reporter]
Are you ready? Are you ready?
I'm always ready. Go ahead.
You said when you asked
the question of Bobby
that the conversation
was on November 3rd,
but later you said in reference
to the police report on Mike Osmundson
that he said the conversation
was November 10th.
- Was there a question there?
- [laughs] Can you clarify that?
[female reporter] Where'd you
get the date November 3rd?
I can't clarify that.
The testimony from Bobby Dassey today,
that's the in-court evidence.
He, uh, identified that conversation
as happening on the 3rd.
[female reporter] No, you identified it.
You said "On November 3rd,
I believe it was a Thursday,
do you recall a conversation
with Steven Avery about a body?"
- All right.
- So you established it as November 3rd
and I'm wondering where...
Did that come from a report
we don't know about?
That came from preparation
of, uh, Bobby Dassey.
I talk to my witnesses before I call...
The police reports, were they strictly
from this Mike's statements to police
or did Bobby Dassey actually tell...
'Cause it sounded like in court
that Bobby Dassey never mentioned
this conversation
or these jokes with investigators,
that was only Mike that mentioned them.
I understand that you're all
very excited about this one piece.
Please don't forget the real reason
that Bobby testified today.
Establishing the timeline
and establishing that Teresa Halbach
walked towards Mr. Avery's house
before she was murdered.
[male reporter] Why didn't you put Mike
on the witness list and call him?
Instead of avoid... So that you
could have avoided this entire issue?
I didn't think this was an issue.
I get to call my witnesses that I think
is gonna prove the State's case.
Bobby Dassey was a central figure
in this trial
to establish again the timeline and
to establish the last person to see her.
This was not and is not,
at least from the State's perspective,
a central part of this case at all.
This will be very short.
But if you... If you have questions,
we'll take two or three minutes.
- [female reporter] What the hell happened?
- [laughter]
That's... cutting right to it.
- Uh...
- Well, we're on deadline, so...
Give me a little direction on...
Does this rise to the level
of prosecutorial misconduct?
I'm... No, I'm not gonna
comment on anybody.
- I'm not here to throw stones.
- But the comment...
The reference to the joke, it wasn't
Dassey who told police about the joke,
it was the third party
who told police about the joke.
[Strang] That's right.
So Dassey never actually told a detective,
"This is what I heard."
He didn't say what he said in court today
to a detective.
So far as the written reports we have,
you are exactly correct.
How can Ken even ask that question then?
How can Ken ask that?
[Dolores] That's horrible to look at.
That stuff isn't even the truth.
You don't feel too good
when he says stuff like that.
We always thought he liked Steven,
but it doesn't sound like it.
[Buting] We're really worried
that the jury might think,
"You know, can we really acquit
this man when we don't know...
We can't tell them who we think did it?"
That's gonna be, on a human level,
the hardest thing, I think.
And the judge has really
tied our hands on that.
[Buting] We can't point the finger
at other suspects.
All we're gonna be able to argue is
failure to follow this lead and that lead
which, in a way,
points at other suspects,
but there's a lot of leads
that if they had been followed up,
might have led to motive,
opportunity and access
and a direct connection to the crime.
But in a case like this,
where there's such tunnel vision,
you can't go too far down that road
because they didn't
go very far down the road.
And by the time we're on the case,
the trail's cold.
Or it's been altered.
My mom had called me, um,
that Thursday, November 3rd,
that afternoon about Teresa
and said that she had tried calling her
and Teresa's inbox was full.
So, um, I guess what
I was interested in was, um...
why it was full or when
the first new message was, you know,
received in her inbox. Um...
I... I had a feeling that
I might know her voicemail password
and so, you know, I...
that's why I did call her voicemail.
Did you listen to at least some
of those messages that day?
I did.
Did you listen to all of 'em?
- I believe that I did.
- OK.
And you said that you called that
on the 3rd of November?
That's correct.
Mr. Halbach, did you erase
any of the messages?
I don't believe I erased any messages.
All right. Thank you.
Mr. Kratz, you may call
your next witness.
[Kratz] Thank you, Judge.
Via telephone, Your Honor,
we're gonna be calling a gentleman
by the name of Tony Zimmerman.
Mr. Zimmerman,
how is that you're employed?
[Zimmerman on phone] I am a network
engineer with Cingular Wireless.
[Kratz] Now as a network engineer,
have you been asked to review reports
that deal with the wireless usage of a
young woman by the name of Teresa Halbach?
[Zimmerman] Yes, I have been.
[Kratz] After October 31st, 2005,
at 2:41 p.m.,
was there any activity in Ms. Halbach's
account after that time?
[Zimmerman] Not from the mobile itself.
No, there was no activity.
Turning to exhibit number 372
for a moment,
do you have an opinion
about whether or not
this would fill up the capacity
of this subscriber's voice mailbox?
[Zimmerman] This appears
that it would not have filled up
the full capacity of the mailbox.
[Buting] All right.
And so if one was getting a message
on November 3rd,
when calling this particular phone number
that said "Mailbox full,"
would that indicate to you
that some messages
had been erased that are not reflected
on this exhibit number 372?
[Zimmerman] If somebody
heard that recording
that the mailbox was full
on November 3rd,
then at least one or more messages
had to have been removed
before the new message at the top
of this document was received.
If at some point people were calling
and finding her mailbox was full,
then some of the messages
that were on that mailbox are gone.
They were erased. Now why?
Why would you erase the messages
of a woman who is missing
and later then found
to have been killed, um...
when those messages might have clues
to her whereabouts, to where she went,
where she was going, perhaps.
Her brother testified
that he did listen on Thursday afternoon,
or right when the police were called,
to some of the messages.
He did have her password,
but he denied erasing any of them.
Well, if he didn't erase them,
then who did?
About three weeks
before she disappeared,
Teresa Halbach, you were aware
had been getting a lot of telephone calls
that she was not answering
on the cell phone?
Yes, sir. She was standing
almost right next to me in a day
and she got this phone call
and she looked at it and went...
Oh, she made... "Oh, not them again"
or "Not him again" or whatever.
And just kind of forgot about it.
And she was...
She looked a little upset so
I questioned her a little bit about this
and she just told me
"just forget about it"
and that somebody keeps calling
at all different hours and blah, blah.
Just a nuisance call. Um...
And that was about two to three weeks...
And she had mentioned that
she had been getting them for a while.
And I said, "Well, why don't you give me
the number and I'll call and find out,
and, you know, intervene a little bit."
And she said, "No, don't worry about it."
And she rec... Whatever the number was
that came up on her phone,
she recognized it?
[Pearce] Yeah, she knew what it was,
but she wouldn't let me know.
Thank you.
[Buting] So if your records show that,
on a certain date, messages were opened
all the way up to that date
on Teresa Halbach's phone,
that would mean that somebody
had listened to those voice messages.
[Kratz] I'd like to be heard outside
the presence of the jury.
Mr. Kratz?
[Kratz] He's about to show her some
retrieved voicemails on the 2nd.
If Mr. Buting's position,
if his theory as the Defense
is that Teresa Halbach is alive
on the 2nd of November,
we're entitled to know that.
We're entitled to notice of that.
That's my objection,
is that it's irrelevant.
Mr. Kratz may draw the conclusion
that because messages are opened
as of November 2nd, that means that
Teresa Halbach was alive on that date.
I don't.
And I don't think the jury
needs to either.
But I do intend
to introduce records that show
that her voicemail was picked up
at 8:00 a.m. on November 2nd.
Something was going on with this phone
in a very, very critical period of time
for this trial, which is between
October 31st and November 5th,
when her car was found, or November 3rd
when she's reported missing.
[Kratz] How does that help this jury
decide who killed her?
That's what the jury's here to do, Judge.
Because unless the State's
prepared to establish
that Mr. Avery had her password,
then he's not the one who's listening
to her messages on Wednesday,
November 2nd at 8:00 a.m.
So that... And their theory is that
he's already destroyed the phone.
- [Kratz] I never said...
- [Buting] Somebody who knew her,
somebody who may have had a motive
that he doesn't have
and somebody who may have had opportunity
was doing that.
- I'm not suggest she was still alive.
- [Kratz] Sounds like a third...
third-party liability, Judge.
That's what it sounds like.
I don't, um...
I'm not gonna argue
that part to the jury
because that's what the court
says we're not gonna do.
But as far as what's relevant is,
the police have had this report
and the police have not followed up
to find out what's up here.
Does the State know
who accessed the voicemail?
I suppose we...
If there was an inkling that Mr. Buting
was going to suggest
that Ms. Halbach was alive at that time,
this is something that could've been
looked into investigatively.
It's another thing
that we could do, Judge,
if the Defense is changing its theories.
[Buting] This is not changing
the theory at all.
This fits perfectly to show
that they have not followed up
this investigative lead
because this investigative lead
points elsewhere than Mr. Avery.
And here we are in the middle of the trial
and it hasn't been investigated.
The jury has a right to know that.
All right, I'm...
I guess having trouble seeing
the apparent relevance of it
at this stage of the trial.
Let's, uh, bring the jurors back in.
[indistinct chatter]
[Buting] The State wants to argue
and in fact put out into the media
as quickly as November 4th
and maybe even November 3rd,
that Steven Avery
was the last person to see her,
when they didn't know that,
and they don't know that to this day.
You know, there's more to come.
You know, examples of one after another
after another of decisions
that were made
in the investigative process,
all of which went just towards
Steven Avery and no one else.
[Steven on phone] They're always saying
I'm the last person to have seen her.
Now, how can I be the last one?
I saw her leave.
So I'm not the last one.
Whoever did this is the last one.
[Strang] Human endeavors are muddy,
they are imperfect by definition,
and a chase for the truth
in a criminal trial can be vain.
Justice, it seems to me,
is staying true
to the set of principles we have
about what we do when confronted
with uncertainty about the truth.
On which side do we err?
Do we err on the side of depriving
a human being of liberty
or do we err on the side of a human being
sustaining his claim to liberty
when we're uncertain
as we almost always are?
[Kratz] Was Steven Avery
the only person being investigated?
- No.
- Explain that.
We go into an investigation
and you're not gonna lock and load.
You're gonna listen to all
the intelligence and information
being brought in,
look at all the evidence. Um...
You're there to find the truth.
That's what we go there for,
is to find the truth.
And the object is to allow
the evidence and the facts
that are uncovered as you go along
to lead you to the most logical suspect.
I think you mentioned before
the last person to see her alive,
- obvious place to start, is that right?
- Most certainly.
You said that you... Mr. Avery was not
the only person being investigated.
[Fassbender] Correct.
But that you felt he was
the most obvious place to start.
[Fassbender] If I have
to pick a place to start,
the person who last saw that person alive
- is a pretty logical place to start.
- [Buting] All right.
Often the most obvious suspect
in a homicide is a spouse,
you look at the spouse, right?
Yes. The people we love the most.
[Buting] Or you look at a boyfriend
or an ex-boyfriend. Don't you?
[Fassbender] Yes.
How about a roommate who doesn't
report the victim missing for three,
almost four days?
- Yes.
- Somebody you'd want to investigate?
That's a possible area to look at.
That'd be somebody
you'd want to ask for an alibi?
[Buting] In most cases,
the people who are close to a victim
are the ones who are in fact the killers.
And in this case,
in every single instance,
all those people who are close to her,
the police never investigated.
Any of them.
They never from the minute the case
was reported considered...
seriously considered
the possibility that Teresa Halbach
was killed by somebody she knew.
[Kratz] How did you know Teresa?
Um, I guess she was a long-time friend.
We had dated for five years or so.
End of high school
and early part of college.
Were you aware
of Ms. Halbach's living arrangements?
- Yes.
- And what were they, if you recall?
She lived in a house
with a friend of ours, Scott Bloedorn.
And was it your understanding
that Scott and Teresa
had any kind
of a romantic relationship?
- No. No romantic relationship.
- All right. Just roommates?
Just roommates.
Mr. Hillegas, when was the first time
that you heard your friend Teresa
had gone missing?
Scott had called me
and said that Teresa's dad
had went over and asked
if he had seen Teresa,
and Scott called me and I went over
to the house that afternoon
and we printed off her cell phone
records off the Internet.
Just to see, you know,
calls she had made or, you know,
if there were other numbers of friends
that we could find on there.
Finding her cell phone records,
how does something like that occur?
Um... well, there were a couple of us
that tried figuring it out,
but basically I figured out her password
and made up a user name that worked
and got into her...
her phone records and, I mean,
they printed right off.
[Kratz] All right.
Now, tell me about this online search.
She had never shared her password
with you?
[Hillegas] No.
[Buting] So you just went online to
Cingular Wireless or whatever, dot com,
and just guessed her password?
Well, we had just kind of figured
that it would...
apparently be something
relating to her sisters.
And I believe it was their...
I think it was their birth dates
that got into it for us.
I'm not exactly sure about
what the password was, but...
OK.
Let me ask you about the weekend
of October 29th and 30th.
The 29th being the Saturday.
Did you see her or talk with her that day?
I don't believe I talked to her
on Saturday.
Yeah, I don't think so.
OK. Did you talk with her
or see her on Sunday?
- Yes.
- And where was that?
Uh, at her house.
And how did that come about?
I had just stopped briefly...
I think I was dropping something off
for Scott
and she was sitting there
at her computer.
So the last time you actually
saw Teresa was Sunday?
- Yes.
- Do you know about what time that was?
No. I don't know.
I mean, we talking morning,
afternoon, night?
- I don't know.
- You don't remember at all?
All right, by the time that Calumet County
investigators arrived,
I take it you guys were pretty concerned
about Teresa's well-being, where she was.
Yes.
Did the police interview you
and Scott together
or did they put you in separate rooms
when they talked to you,
or how'd they do that?
Um...
I believe we were...
I believe we were in the same room.
OK. Did the police ever ask you
for any kind of alibi for October 31st?
No.
They never asked your
whereabouts whatsoever?
- I don't believe so.
- OK.
So it'd be fair to say that you weren't
in any way treated like a suspect,
- that you could tell?
- That's correct.
And even on the 5th and thereafter
when the search narrowed into the Averys,
the police actually
let you through some checkpoints
along with some other searchers,
you leading them to come
and search the area, right?
- Yes.
- The area around the Avery property
that they had made off-limits
to the general public, right?
Yes.
[Kratz] Now,
with you being the coordinator
of this citizens search effort
on that Friday,
that is the day after Teresa
was reported missing,
what efforts were being developed
to try to find Teresa?
Friday night, we kind of planned a...
a road search I guess you could call it,
where everybody got in their vehicles
and drove certain parts of roads and maps
that we had plotted out for 'em
just to make sure
we'd cover everything, but...
Maps of what?
Maps of county highways...
out in, you know,
the Manitowoc area near the Averys...
Let me ask you something, Mr. Hillegas,
why would you center
or why would you direct
some of your search efforts
around the Avery property?
Well, mostly for the fact that,
you know,
the media had covered so much of it,
you know.
All you'd heard about was, you know,
around the Avery property and...
I believe by that point
we had known that, you know,
her last kind of whereabouts
were in that neck of the woods.
So even as an untrained
law enforcement officer,
you knew to look for the last place
she was seen alive, is that right?
- Yeah.
- OK.
Do you know Pam Sturm
or her daughter Nikole Sturm?
I had met them Saturday morning.
They showed up after the good majority
of everybody else had left.
But that was the first time
I had met them.
What did you and Pam Sturm discuss?
She just basically
came right out and said,
"Has anybody went to the car yard yet?
You know, the Avery salvage yard."
And we just said no, that we hadn't
been sending anybody in there
and she offered to
and said she'd be willing to and...
Before Pam left then to travel
to the Avery salvage yard,
was she provided a map
or any other information?
Yes. Yes, I gave her a map.
What other information
was she provided, if you know?
Scott had borrowed her... his camera
just in case they were to find something.
You said that Scott had "borrowed"
Pam Sturm a camera, is that right?
- Yes.
- But you mean "lent."
- Had lent her, given her a camera?
- Yes.
- A digital camera?
- Yes.
He didn't give every one of those members
Saturday morning a camera, did he?
No.
He just gave it to Pam Sturm
who he knew was gonna go out
to the Avery salvage yard.
That's correct.
That's the only person
he gave a camera to, right?
Yes.
[Wiegert] Hey, um,
kind of a change of plans here.
[Remiker] OK.
[Wiegert] The boss has got something
he wants us to do.
[Remiker] OK.
[Wiegert] He wants us to go back over
and re-interview Avery again.
And the search party is out there
and he wants to ask them
if they would allow us to have
the search party come on the property
- and go through the junkyard.
- [Remiker] OK.
[Wiegert] So if it's OK with you,
we'll meet you over
at your sheriff's department.
- [Remiker] OK.
- [Wiegert] If you don't mind?
- Help us out today? Stop over.
- [Remiker] Yeah. That's fine.
[Kratz] Ms. Sturm, were you familiar
with the Avery salvage property?
No, I'm not... I wasn't at all.
All I knew, it was a 40-acre plot
salvage yard for vehicles.
Now, Ms. Sturm, prior to your arrival
at that location,
had you had any contact or direction
from any law enforcement officials?
No, sir, we didn't.
Why don't you show us then,
where did you and Nikole start looking?
[Sturm] We had searched all of these.
Then we went down here south
and there were, like...
you can see there's two rows here.
So I searched the first row
and my daughter was on the second row.
[Kratz] Let me stop you right there, Pam.
Can you tell the jury
what you were looking for?
We were looking for any trace of Teresa.
Be the car... or herself.
[Kratz] All right. OK.
And after looking at those rows of cars,
where did you then look?
[Sturm] I continued up here
and I saw these vehicles up here
and this is like a ridge up here.
So up on the top,
there's a little car path
and you can see there's some vehicles here
and I thought, "I have to search up there.
I have to search each and every one."
[Kratz] And did you do that?
So I went up there
and I went through, like, three cars
and I came upon this car
that had all these branches
on the top of it
and leaning against it and there was an
old hood of a car leaning up against it
and it was kind of bluish-green
and I thought,
"This is really strange.
This is really strange."
And it looked like a little SUV that,
like, I was looking for,
a RAV4 Toyota SUV.
And I went around
to the back of the vehicle
and again there were branches
leaning up against it
and I noticed that it said RAV4.
Well, my heart starting going, you know,
"Oh, my goodness. Maybe this is it."
- Because... OK. Sorry.
- Let me stop you right there, Pam.
When you saw this, Ms. Sturm,
what did you do?
I became very, very worried
for our safety.
Because 90 percent,
this was probably Teresa's car
and we're in danger.
So I called Nikole's name.
I think I maybe even screamed.
I shouldn't have, but I did.
And I went running to the area
where she was.
I said, "Nikole! Nikole! You have to come
and see this car. It must be her car."
Did you attempt to verify
the identification of this vehicle?
- Yes.
- And how was that done?
My daughter Nikole brought her
cell phone along and we...
I should back up.
Ryan gave us a direct line to
Sheriff Pagel in case we found something.
So I called Sheriff Pagel.
And I said, "I think I found the vehicle."
[Kratz] How long
from when you entered that property
did it take you to find Teresa's vehicle?
I believed we entered at ten to ten...
and by 10:20 to 10:25,
we had found the vehicle.
Ms. Sturm, do you know how many
vehicles are on this property?
I didn't at the time. I had no idea.
[Kratz] Looking at it now,
do you think you got lucky?
Yeah. Well, not lucky.
God showed us the way,
I do believe that.
All right, do you think
looking at this exhibit now
that you and your daughter Nicky could
have searched that entire salvage yard?
We would've tried. We would've came back
the next day if we had to.
[Kratz] All right.
[Buting] I never believe and to this day
don't believe Ms. Sturm's
"Holy Spirit guided me there" theory.
Not that I don't believe
that that's possible.
But I just don't believe her.
I do not believe her at all. I never...
She just seemed too weird.
- Right.
- And, um...
You know, it's...
They went right to that thing.
Somebody knew that vehicle was there
before they ever went there,
I'm convinced of it.
How do you think that truck
got on that property?
Which way do you think they came in or...?
Well, when I seen tail lights by me
and Chuck had seen headlights by him.
I don't know who drove it.
Which way was it pointed?
- What?
- The truck.
- I don't know.
- You don't know?
What... Was there a different way in there
or... two ways into there or what?
There's a bunch of ways in there.
There's the main road, there's by me,
- there's in the pit.
- OK.
What about this cop?
- [Fassbender] Want to tell us about that?
- [Wiegert] Tell us about that.
Tammy told me that.
- Tammy told you?
- Yeah.
She a friend of yours
or something or...?
Yeah, I know her.
What did she tell you?
That... she heard...
She told me that she'd heard
that a cop put it out there
- and planted evidence.
- Put what out there?
That vehicle.
- And that's Teresa's vehicle?
- Yeah.
So Tammy told you
that somebody told her...
- Yeah.
- ...that a cop put that vehicle,
- Teresa's vehicle, out on your property.
- Yeah.
[Strang] One of the things
road patrol officers frequently do
is call in to dispatch
and give the dispatcher
the license plate number
of a car they've stopped or a car that
looks out of place for some reason.
- Correct?
- Yes, sir.
And the dispatcher can get information
about to whom a license plate
is registered.
- Yes, sir.
- If the car is abandoned
or there's nobody in the car,
the registration tells you
who the owner presumably is.
Yes, sir.
I'm gonna ask you to listen,
if you would, to a short phone call.
[woman] Manitowoc County Sheriff's
Department, this is Lynn.
- [Colborn] Lynn.
- Hi, Andy.
[Colborn] Can you run
Sam-William-Henry-582?
[Lynn] OK.
It shows that she's a missing person.
- And it lists to Teresa Halbach.
- [Colborn] OK.
[Lynn] OK,
that's what you're looking for, Andy?
[Colborn] Ninety-nine Toyota?
- [Lynn] Yep.
- [Colborn] OK, thank you.
[Lynn] You're so welcome. Bye-bye.
[Strang] OK. What you're asking
the dispatch is to run a plate
that's "Sam-William-Henry-582"?
Did I hear that correctly?
Yes, sir.
Sam-William-Henry
would be S-W-H-5-8-2?
Yes.
This license plate?
Yes, sir.
And the dispatcher tells you
that the plate comes back
to a missing person or woman.
Yes, sir.
- Teresa Halbach.
- Yes, sir.
And then you tell the dispatcher,
"Oh, '99 Toyota?"
No, I thought she told me that.
[Lynn] It shows that she's a missing
person. And it lists to Teresa Halbach.
- [Colborn] OK.
- OK, that's what you're looking for, Andy?
- [Colborn] Ninety-nine Toyota?
- [Lynn] Yep.
- [Colborn] OK, thank you.
- [Lynn] You're so welcome. Bye-bye.
Were you looking at these plates
when you called them in?
No, sir.
Do you have any recollection
of making that phone call?
Yeah, I'm guessing
eleven-oh-three-oh-five.
Probably after I received a phone call
from Investigator Wiegert
letting me know
that there was a missing person.
Investigator Wiegert, did he give you
the license plate number
for Teresa Halbach when he called you?
You know, I just don't remember the
exact content of our conversation then.
- But you think...
- He had to have given it to me
because I wouldn't have
had the number any other way.
Well, you can understand
how someone listening to that
might think that you
were calling in a license plate
that you were looking at
on the back end of a 1999 Toyota.
Yes.
But there's no way you should've been
looking at Teresa Halbach's license plate
on November three on the back end
of a 1999 Toyota.
I shouldn't have been and I was not
looking at the license plate.
Because you're aware now that the
first time that Toyota was reported found
was two days later on November five.
Yes, sir.
[theme music plays]
Maybe the truth will come out.
I want everybody to know I'm innocent.
You know, that's all I'm asking for.
[Buting] The State clearly
was freaked out.
Norm Gahn looks at it,
and from that point on,
you could tell that
he was extremely worried.
[indistinct chatter]
[Buting] Afterwards, Norm said,
"This changes everything."
[Gahn] The Defense intends
to bring this vial into court
and show it to the jury
to demonstrate that the vial
was tampered with by officers.
And when officers are accused
of what they're being accused of,
they deserve to have
their reputations protected.
They're good, solid, decent family men.
I'm sure everyone in this room knows them.
We have to show the world...
that the blood that
is in Teresa Halbach's car...
did not come from this vial of blood.
[Judge Willis] Mr. Buting?
After two months, they have not
been able to present the court
with one single scientifically valid test
that would somehow prove
what they would love it to prove.
There are no tests.
Even the FBI stopped doing them
because they're not reliable.
The FBI is only doing this test now
because the State is desperate.
[Gahn] Again,
I just cannot emphasize too much,
give us the chance to meet
this planting frame-up defense.
I believe it's fair
to give them a chance to do so
and that's what I'm gonna do.
- Mr. Fallon?
- Yes, and one final point.
If the Defense wants
to put forth in their defense
that they're suggesting and implying
in their pleadings today,
then they do so at their peril.
- [theme music plays]
- [geese honking]
[Strang] It is too late
to sit on the fence.
The State has all the information
it needs today.
It's had it for months to decide
whether it's calling Mr. Dassey
to prove the three charges
it added or not.
The three attorneys at this table
have had long discussions
about whether we should proceed
with all six counts
or whether we should proceed
with the four counts
that don't require
Brendan Dassey's testimony.
If put to that question today,
then it is our inclination
to proceed on the four counts that
do not require Brendan Dassey's testimony.
But if we have to start this case
swimming upstream, if you will,
in the face of some instruction
given to the jury
that they should be taking
some negative view of the State,
then we intend to proceed
on all six counts.
[Judge Willis] Mr. Strang, briefly.
All due respect to Counsel,
the State is supposed to start
every criminal case swimming upstream.
And the strong current against which
the State is supposed to be swimming
is a presumption of innocence.
That presumption of innocence
has been eroded, if not eliminated, here
by the specter of Brendan Dassey.
And here's why the court needs
to take some further curative action.
Up through the WFRV report last night,
for example,
Steven Avery has been presented as the...
The man who allegedly raped...
mutilated and murdered Teresa Halbach.
How many times will Steven Avery
be charged in Manitowoc County
with rapes he didn't commit?
This makes two.
You know, forget getting
the 18 years back on the first one.
Where do we go to get
the last ten months back?
Where do we go to get
our presumption of innocence back...
from a public who believes
and has heard time and again
that he's an alleged rapist?
Even before a murderer.
[Judge Willis] I do not believe
that the State has engaged
in any conduct to this point
which would warrant the giving
of some type of instruction
unfavorable to the State
should the State decide at this point
to dismiss some of the charges
that have been filed.
[Buting] We've got a hundred and... what
is it, 130 of these jury questionnaires?
One person, only one, has said
they think he might actually be innocent.
[Strang] "Yeah,
I'm willing to assume him innocent."
One.
Versus the more typical answer of,
"Is there any reason you... [laughs]
you think you should not be selected
to serve in this case?"
"Yes, I already think he is guilty."
Well, OK.
[Strang] "A trial is pointless"...
"Are you aware of the publicity?"
"Yes, I read everything there was on the
Internet and in the newspaper on this case
including Dassey's interview
confession with detectives." [chuckles]
Um... "This case seems
pretty much cut and dry.
I believe the defendant
is guilty as charged."
- "Have you discussed this at length..."
- There's the American spirit!
[TV plays indistinctly]
[news theme music plays]
[male reporter] Right now,
more than 15 months
after Teresa Halbach was murdered...
[female reporter] The jury is picked
and the trial of Steven Avery
is ready to begin on Monday.
Thanks for joining us.
One of the most high-profile murder trials
in Wisconsin history is set to begin.
Teresa Halbach's family
is seeking justice.
It took all week to seat a jury.
[female reporter] These jurors
range in age from 20 to 80.
They include a carpenter,
an international recording artist,
a homemaker, a mechanic,
some working, some retired.
All Manitowoc County residents.
[female reporter 2] The jury will
be bussed from Manitowoc to Chilton
each day of the trial.
It's expected to last six weeks.
How are ya?
[indistinct chatter]
[Kratz] Teresa Halbach had her whole life
in front of her
and the evidence is going to show...
that on Halloween of 2005, that all ended.
That ended in the hands
of the defendant... Steven Avery.
Who is this man? Virtually all of you
knew something about Steven Avery
before serving on this particular jury.
Mr. Avery achieved some degree
of notoriety back in 2003
when he was exonerated.
And at the close of this case,
I'm gonna point
to every one of you potential jurors
and say that has absolutely nothing
to do with this case.
When deciding who's accountable...
for the death
of 25-year-old Teresa Halbach,
Mr. Avery's past and his past exoneration
have nothing to do with this case.
The State intends to prove to you
that the defendant restrained...
murdered and mutilated Teresa Halbach.
The mutilation of this little girl...
Excuse me, not this little girl,
this young woman,
absolutely occurred
because this is what's left.
Small, tiny pieces of bone fragment.
Now, despite Mr. Avery's efforts
to completely obliterate
all these bones by burning,
to incinerate these bones completely,
this bone survived.
It's Teresa Halbach's shin bone.
It's Karen Halbach's daughter's tibia.
Remembering the humanity
of Teresa Halbach, remembering who she is,
what she meant to these people,
is an important part of this process.
Ultimately, this process includes
assigning accountability
for the murder and the mutilation
of an innocent 25-year-old young lady.
And I'll ask at the conclusion
of this case
that you return verdicts of guilty.
Thank you. Thank you, Judge.
[Judge Willis] Thank you, Mr. Kratz.
[Steven on phone]
They wouldn't look at nobody else.
They're paying all their attention to me.
And they shouldn't be doing that.
That's what they did before.
In a long trial like this,
openings are very important.
Really, probably more important
even than the closings.
Because by the time
they get to that point, um...
it's gonna be a matter of arguing
for a few of them probably.
I think most of them will probably
have already decided.
So we want to get 'em early.
Just get 'em thinking that there's
another side to this they have not heard.
All they've been hearing,
for what, 15 months,
is, you know, Teresa Halbach was burned.
Bones were found
on Steven Avery's property.
Which is a horrible fact.
But what they don't know is that
there's evidence those bones were moved.
And so...
And neither does the media.
So it's gonna be interesting
to see the reaction
when that little tidbit
finally becomes public.
The blood I'm more...
a little bit more worried about
than I was when I first discovered it
and was very happy and you know.
Because I don't trust the FBI at all
and I think that they're gonna come up
with some dishonest test
that somehow claims
that the blood in the vial
is different
than what was found at the scene.
And that'll be a little bit harder
to overcome.
I'm not worried about the key at all.
I like the key.
I'm glad they're using it. [clears throat]
It shows that if they would be willing
to go to that length of planting a key,
which I think is...
the jurors are gonna get,
then... the blood follows easily. It does.
[Strang] In 2004,
Steven Avery filed a lawsuit
seeking some recompense
for the hole in his life.
The time he had spent as an innocent man
for the crimes
that Gregory Allen committed.
In October 2005, James Lenk
and another ranking officer
of the Manitowoc County Sheriff's
Department, Sergeant Andrew Colborn,
both were pulled into the lawsuit,
questioned about
their own activity and conduct
with respect to Mr. Avery's imprisonment.
It's Thursday evening about 5:00,
November three,
when Mrs. Halbach reports Teresa missing.
That very night, Calumet is calling
the Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department
for a little bit of help.
And who do we get?
We get Sergeant Andrew Colborn.
And he's told,
"Look, two places we'd like
to sort of check out and see
if Teresa Halbach showed up on Monday:
the Zipperer residence...
and Steven Avery."
Well, that's a name that rings a bell.
You better believe.
Less than three weeks,
or about three weeks after his deposition.
And it is interesting
that of those two places
that Sergeant Colborn is asked to check
out and inquire after Teresa Halbach...
he only goes to one.
Goes to Steven Avery's home.
Out of the blue, the same night,
Lieutenant James Lenk
calls Calumet
about this missing person report.
Let's be clear.
It's in another county.
It's not even Manitowoc County at all.
And nobody has called for Lieutenant Lenk.
Nobody's called looking for him.
But the Chief Detective
of Manitowoc County
takes it upon himself that night
to call Calumet
and offer to get involved
in the missing person investigation
where one of the appointments
that was to be kept was Steven Avery.
November five, Saturday,
Pam and Nikole Sturm
find the Toyota they suspect,
correctly as it turns out, is Teresa's.
And folks, from that point forward,
before the police say
they've even opened the car,
before they say they know of any blood
of any sort, in or on the car,
before anybody even knows whether this
young woman has been hurt or killed...
the focus is on Steven Avery.
Hear it yourself.
When Detective Jacobs was calling
after the police have arrived
at the Avery property,
after Teresa's car has been found there.
[recording of phone line ringing]
[woman] Good morning, Manitowoc County
Sheriff's Department. Katie speaking.
[Jacobs] Katie,
just rolled into the parking lot.
Can you tell me,
do we have a body or anything yet?
[Katie] I don't believe so.
[Jacobs] Do we have Steven Avery
in custody, though?
[Katie] I have no idea.
This is 30 minutes
after they found the car.
Indeed, they wouldn't find
the first bone fragment for three days.
"Do we have Steven Avery
in custody, though?"
Now, if you're thinking though
that the evidence will show you
that Manitowoc County bowed out
because of the conflict of interest
after it turned the investigation
over to Calumet County...
If you're thinking that, it's reasonable,
but you're wrong.
Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department
stays very much involved
in this investigation.
The police didn't kill Teresa Halbach,
obviously.
They have that in common
with Steven Avery.
But they wanted to believe he did.
And whoever did kill her
or burned that body
exploited that tunnel vision
pretty skillfully.
In the end, after the full
and fair consideration
of everything and everyone,
the full and fair consideration
that Steven Avery
did not get from the Manitowoc County
Sheriff's Department...
we're gonna ask you to send him home.
We're gonna ask you
to send him home again.
We're gonna ask you
to get it right this time.
We're gonna ask you to set it right.
So Teresa takes a picture,
you come outside.
She and you are both outside
and you give her the money.
She goes and gets in her truck and then
gives you an Auto Trader magazine,
- is that right?
- Yeah.
OK.
Is she in the truck or out of the truck
when she gives you the magazine?
- She's in the truck.
- In the truck.
OK, then what happens next?
Then she gave me the book, shut the door,
I walked toward the house,
- I put the book on the computer.
- Mm-hm.
I came back out.
And then I was gonna
walk over by Bobby...
but then his vehicle was gone.
So you walk in the house,
you put the magazine down,
you come out and Bobby's vehicle's gone?
Bobby's vehicle's gone.
Mr. Dassey, do you know
the defendant Steven Avery?
[Bobby] Yes, he's my uncle.
You have to speak up
just a little bit, please.
Yes, he's my uncle.
And is he in the courtroom here
at this time?
Yes, he is.
Would you point him out for the record?
Tell the judge where he's seated?
[Bobby] He's right over there,
to my right.
[Kratz] Mr. Dassey,
do you know where your uncle lived?
[Bobby] Yes,
he lived right next door to us.
[Kratz] Please tell the jury
what we're looking at.
[Bobby] Well,
basically this is my mom's house. Um...
The red thing is Steven's trailer.
[Kratz] Now, Bobby, on October 31st, 2005,
do you remember anything unusual that
happened at about 2:30 that afternoon?
A vehicle had drove up
and started taking pictures of the van.
Well, let's back up just a minute.
- What did you see?
- I seen a vehicle pull up in our driveway.
And how do you know that it was
about 2:30 in the afternoon?
'Cause I was going hunting that night
and that's the time I wanted to get out.
All right.
Tell the jury what you saw then.
I seen Teresa Halbach get out of
the vehicle and start taking pictures.
After seeing her taking any pictures,
did you see her do anything?
She started... Before I got in the shower,
she actually started walking over
to Steven's trailer.
[Kratz] When looking at exhibit number 61,
could you point to the window that
you looked out and watched things from?
[Bobby] It would be that window there.
[Kratz] The left-most window
on the trailer,
- is that right?
- [Bobby] Yes.
About what time do you think
that you left to go hunting?
- Twenty to three. Quarter to three.
- Quarter to three?
Mr. Dassey, when you walked out
to your vehicle to go bow hunting,
did you notice if Teresa's vehicle
was still in the driveway?
- Yes, it was.
- It was?
Yep.
- Did you see Ms. Halbach?
- No.
- Did you see any signs of her at all?
- No.
Now, Bobby, on the 3rd of November,
a Thursday, I believe it is,
do you recall having a conversation
with your Uncle Steven regarding a body?
- Yes.
- Could you tell us
what your Uncle Steven told you that day?
Well, my buddy Mike
was over too and he asked us...
It sounded like he was joking, honestly.
But he asked us if we wanted...
He wanted us to help him
get rid of the body.
This sensational testimony today accounted
for a dramatic response from the Defense.
[male reporter] Defense attorney
Dean Strang said that...
[overlapping dialogue]
Well, Cammie, as Elizabeth said,
Bobby Dassey's testimony
and the mistrial issue
took up quite a bit of time this morning.
[male reporter] The Defense
made a motion for a mistrial.
We have no written summary
of an interview of Bobby Dassey
in which that statement is recited.
We do have a report of a contact
with a Michael Osmundson.
"Michael indicated he was aware Steven
was one of the last people
to see the missing girl and jokingly
asked Steven if Steven had her,
the missing girl, in a closet.
At this point, Steven asked Michael
if Michael wanted to quote
'help bury the body' closed quote.
And they laughed about this together."
This conversation clearly is placed
on Thursday, November ten.
I now have a different witness to whom
this statement has never been attributed,
identifying the statement
as having been made on November three.
The implication
is that this may have been
before Teresa Halbach
even is reported missing.
What I'm left with is this jury
having heard testimony
from the first blood relative
of Mr. Avery to testify here,
his nephew and next-door neighbor,
that amounts to a confession of a crime.
There is no way to unwind this
from the jury's mind.
It has enormous unfair prejudicial impact.
If there were a remedy
short of a mistrial,
and I don't know that there is,
it would be something like
the court instructing the jury
that it may disregard as false
all of Bobby Dassey's testimony
because of his false testimony
on this point.
[female reporter]
Are you ready? Are you ready?
I'm always ready. Go ahead.
You said when you asked
the question of Bobby
that the conversation
was on November 3rd,
but later you said in reference
to the police report on Mike Osmundson
that he said the conversation
was November 10th.
- Was there a question there?
- [laughs] Can you clarify that?
[female reporter] Where'd you
get the date November 3rd?
I can't clarify that.
The testimony from Bobby Dassey today,
that's the in-court evidence.
He, uh, identified that conversation
as happening on the 3rd.
[female reporter] No, you identified it.
You said "On November 3rd,
I believe it was a Thursday,
do you recall a conversation
with Steven Avery about a body?"
- All right.
- So you established it as November 3rd
and I'm wondering where...
Did that come from a report
we don't know about?
That came from preparation
of, uh, Bobby Dassey.
I talk to my witnesses before I call...
The police reports, were they strictly
from this Mike's statements to police
or did Bobby Dassey actually tell...
'Cause it sounded like in court
that Bobby Dassey never mentioned
this conversation
or these jokes with investigators,
that was only Mike that mentioned them.
I understand that you're all
very excited about this one piece.
Please don't forget the real reason
that Bobby testified today.
Establishing the timeline
and establishing that Teresa Halbach
walked towards Mr. Avery's house
before she was murdered.
[male reporter] Why didn't you put Mike
on the witness list and call him?
Instead of avoid... So that you
could have avoided this entire issue?
I didn't think this was an issue.
I get to call my witnesses that I think
is gonna prove the State's case.
Bobby Dassey was a central figure
in this trial
to establish again the timeline and
to establish the last person to see her.
This was not and is not,
at least from the State's perspective,
a central part of this case at all.
This will be very short.
But if you... If you have questions,
we'll take two or three minutes.
- [female reporter] What the hell happened?
- [laughter]
That's... cutting right to it.
- Uh...
- Well, we're on deadline, so...
Give me a little direction on...
Does this rise to the level
of prosecutorial misconduct?
I'm... No, I'm not gonna
comment on anybody.
- I'm not here to throw stones.
- But the comment...
The reference to the joke, it wasn't
Dassey who told police about the joke,
it was the third party
who told police about the joke.
[Strang] That's right.
So Dassey never actually told a detective,
"This is what I heard."
He didn't say what he said in court today
to a detective.
So far as the written reports we have,
you are exactly correct.
How can Ken even ask that question then?
How can Ken ask that?
[Dolores] That's horrible to look at.
That stuff isn't even the truth.
You don't feel too good
when he says stuff like that.
We always thought he liked Steven,
but it doesn't sound like it.
[Buting] We're really worried
that the jury might think,
"You know, can we really acquit
this man when we don't know...
We can't tell them who we think did it?"
That's gonna be, on a human level,
the hardest thing, I think.
And the judge has really
tied our hands on that.
[Buting] We can't point the finger
at other suspects.
All we're gonna be able to argue is
failure to follow this lead and that lead
which, in a way,
points at other suspects,
but there's a lot of leads
that if they had been followed up,
might have led to motive,
opportunity and access
and a direct connection to the crime.
But in a case like this,
where there's such tunnel vision,
you can't go too far down that road
because they didn't
go very far down the road.
And by the time we're on the case,
the trail's cold.
Or it's been altered.
My mom had called me, um,
that Thursday, November 3rd,
that afternoon about Teresa
and said that she had tried calling her
and Teresa's inbox was full.
So, um, I guess what
I was interested in was, um...
why it was full or when
the first new message was, you know,
received in her inbox. Um...
I... I had a feeling that
I might know her voicemail password
and so, you know, I...
that's why I did call her voicemail.
Did you listen to at least some
of those messages that day?
I did.
Did you listen to all of 'em?
- I believe that I did.
- OK.
And you said that you called that
on the 3rd of November?
That's correct.
Mr. Halbach, did you erase
any of the messages?
I don't believe I erased any messages.
All right. Thank you.
Mr. Kratz, you may call
your next witness.
[Kratz] Thank you, Judge.
Via telephone, Your Honor,
we're gonna be calling a gentleman
by the name of Tony Zimmerman.
Mr. Zimmerman,
how is that you're employed?
[Zimmerman on phone] I am a network
engineer with Cingular Wireless.
[Kratz] Now as a network engineer,
have you been asked to review reports
that deal with the wireless usage of a
young woman by the name of Teresa Halbach?
[Zimmerman] Yes, I have been.
[Kratz] After October 31st, 2005,
at 2:41 p.m.,
was there any activity in Ms. Halbach's
account after that time?
[Zimmerman] Not from the mobile itself.
No, there was no activity.
Turning to exhibit number 372
for a moment,
do you have an opinion
about whether or not
this would fill up the capacity
of this subscriber's voice mailbox?
[Zimmerman] This appears
that it would not have filled up
the full capacity of the mailbox.
[Buting] All right.
And so if one was getting a message
on November 3rd,
when calling this particular phone number
that said "Mailbox full,"
would that indicate to you
that some messages
had been erased that are not reflected
on this exhibit number 372?
[Zimmerman] If somebody
heard that recording
that the mailbox was full
on November 3rd,
then at least one or more messages
had to have been removed
before the new message at the top
of this document was received.
If at some point people were calling
and finding her mailbox was full,
then some of the messages
that were on that mailbox are gone.
They were erased. Now why?
Why would you erase the messages
of a woman who is missing
and later then found
to have been killed, um...
when those messages might have clues
to her whereabouts, to where she went,
where she was going, perhaps.
Her brother testified
that he did listen on Thursday afternoon,
or right when the police were called,
to some of the messages.
He did have her password,
but he denied erasing any of them.
Well, if he didn't erase them,
then who did?
About three weeks
before she disappeared,
Teresa Halbach, you were aware
had been getting a lot of telephone calls
that she was not answering
on the cell phone?
Yes, sir. She was standing
almost right next to me in a day
and she got this phone call
and she looked at it and went...
Oh, she made... "Oh, not them again"
or "Not him again" or whatever.
And just kind of forgot about it.
And she was...
She looked a little upset so
I questioned her a little bit about this
and she just told me
"just forget about it"
and that somebody keeps calling
at all different hours and blah, blah.
Just a nuisance call. Um...
And that was about two to three weeks...
And she had mentioned that
she had been getting them for a while.
And I said, "Well, why don't you give me
the number and I'll call and find out,
and, you know, intervene a little bit."
And she said, "No, don't worry about it."
And she rec... Whatever the number was
that came up on her phone,
she recognized it?
[Pearce] Yeah, she knew what it was,
but she wouldn't let me know.
Thank you.
[Buting] So if your records show that,
on a certain date, messages were opened
all the way up to that date
on Teresa Halbach's phone,
that would mean that somebody
had listened to those voice messages.
[Kratz] I'd like to be heard outside
the presence of the jury.
Mr. Kratz?
[Kratz] He's about to show her some
retrieved voicemails on the 2nd.
If Mr. Buting's position,
if his theory as the Defense
is that Teresa Halbach is alive
on the 2nd of November,
we're entitled to know that.
We're entitled to notice of that.
That's my objection,
is that it's irrelevant.
Mr. Kratz may draw the conclusion
that because messages are opened
as of November 2nd, that means that
Teresa Halbach was alive on that date.
I don't.
And I don't think the jury
needs to either.
But I do intend
to introduce records that show
that her voicemail was picked up
at 8:00 a.m. on November 2nd.
Something was going on with this phone
in a very, very critical period of time
for this trial, which is between
October 31st and November 5th,
when her car was found, or November 3rd
when she's reported missing.
[Kratz] How does that help this jury
decide who killed her?
That's what the jury's here to do, Judge.
Because unless the State's
prepared to establish
that Mr. Avery had her password,
then he's not the one who's listening
to her messages on Wednesday,
November 2nd at 8:00 a.m.
So that... And their theory is that
he's already destroyed the phone.
- [Kratz] I never said...
- [Buting] Somebody who knew her,
somebody who may have had a motive
that he doesn't have
and somebody who may have had opportunity
was doing that.
- I'm not suggest she was still alive.
- [Kratz] Sounds like a third...
third-party liability, Judge.
That's what it sounds like.
I don't, um...
I'm not gonna argue
that part to the jury
because that's what the court
says we're not gonna do.
But as far as what's relevant is,
the police have had this report
and the police have not followed up
to find out what's up here.
Does the State know
who accessed the voicemail?
I suppose we...
If there was an inkling that Mr. Buting
was going to suggest
that Ms. Halbach was alive at that time,
this is something that could've been
looked into investigatively.
It's another thing
that we could do, Judge,
if the Defense is changing its theories.
[Buting] This is not changing
the theory at all.
This fits perfectly to show
that they have not followed up
this investigative lead
because this investigative lead
points elsewhere than Mr. Avery.
And here we are in the middle of the trial
and it hasn't been investigated.
The jury has a right to know that.
All right, I'm...
I guess having trouble seeing
the apparent relevance of it
at this stage of the trial.
Let's, uh, bring the jurors back in.
[indistinct chatter]
[Buting] The State wants to argue
and in fact put out into the media
as quickly as November 4th
and maybe even November 3rd,
that Steven Avery
was the last person to see her,
when they didn't know that,
and they don't know that to this day.
You know, there's more to come.
You know, examples of one after another
after another of decisions
that were made
in the investigative process,
all of which went just towards
Steven Avery and no one else.
[Steven on phone] They're always saying
I'm the last person to have seen her.
Now, how can I be the last one?
I saw her leave.
So I'm not the last one.
Whoever did this is the last one.
[Strang] Human endeavors are muddy,
they are imperfect by definition,
and a chase for the truth
in a criminal trial can be vain.
Justice, it seems to me,
is staying true
to the set of principles we have
about what we do when confronted
with uncertainty about the truth.
On which side do we err?
Do we err on the side of depriving
a human being of liberty
or do we err on the side of a human being
sustaining his claim to liberty
when we're uncertain
as we almost always are?
[Kratz] Was Steven Avery
the only person being investigated?
- No.
- Explain that.
We go into an investigation
and you're not gonna lock and load.
You're gonna listen to all
the intelligence and information
being brought in,
look at all the evidence. Um...
You're there to find the truth.
That's what we go there for,
is to find the truth.
And the object is to allow
the evidence and the facts
that are uncovered as you go along
to lead you to the most logical suspect.
I think you mentioned before
the last person to see her alive,
- obvious place to start, is that right?
- Most certainly.
You said that you... Mr. Avery was not
the only person being investigated.
[Fassbender] Correct.
But that you felt he was
the most obvious place to start.
[Fassbender] If I have
to pick a place to start,
the person who last saw that person alive
- is a pretty logical place to start.
- [Buting] All right.
Often the most obvious suspect
in a homicide is a spouse,
you look at the spouse, right?
Yes. The people we love the most.
[Buting] Or you look at a boyfriend
or an ex-boyfriend. Don't you?
[Fassbender] Yes.
How about a roommate who doesn't
report the victim missing for three,
almost four days?
- Yes.
- Somebody you'd want to investigate?
That's a possible area to look at.
That'd be somebody
you'd want to ask for an alibi?
[Buting] In most cases,
the people who are close to a victim
are the ones who are in fact the killers.
And in this case,
in every single instance,
all those people who are close to her,
the police never investigated.
Any of them.
They never from the minute the case
was reported considered...
seriously considered
the possibility that Teresa Halbach
was killed by somebody she knew.
[Kratz] How did you know Teresa?
Um, I guess she was a long-time friend.
We had dated for five years or so.
End of high school
and early part of college.
Were you aware
of Ms. Halbach's living arrangements?
- Yes.
- And what were they, if you recall?
She lived in a house
with a friend of ours, Scott Bloedorn.
And was it your understanding
that Scott and Teresa
had any kind
of a romantic relationship?
- No. No romantic relationship.
- All right. Just roommates?
Just roommates.
Mr. Hillegas, when was the first time
that you heard your friend Teresa
had gone missing?
Scott had called me
and said that Teresa's dad
had went over and asked
if he had seen Teresa,
and Scott called me and I went over
to the house that afternoon
and we printed off her cell phone
records off the Internet.
Just to see, you know,
calls she had made or, you know,
if there were other numbers of friends
that we could find on there.
Finding her cell phone records,
how does something like that occur?
Um... well, there were a couple of us
that tried figuring it out,
but basically I figured out her password
and made up a user name that worked
and got into her...
her phone records and, I mean,
they printed right off.
[Kratz] All right.
Now, tell me about this online search.
She had never shared her password
with you?
[Hillegas] No.
[Buting] So you just went online to
Cingular Wireless or whatever, dot com,
and just guessed her password?
Well, we had just kind of figured
that it would...
apparently be something
relating to her sisters.
And I believe it was their...
I think it was their birth dates
that got into it for us.
I'm not exactly sure about
what the password was, but...
OK.
Let me ask you about the weekend
of October 29th and 30th.
The 29th being the Saturday.
Did you see her or talk with her that day?
I don't believe I talked to her
on Saturday.
Yeah, I don't think so.
OK. Did you talk with her
or see her on Sunday?
- Yes.
- And where was that?
Uh, at her house.
And how did that come about?
I had just stopped briefly...
I think I was dropping something off
for Scott
and she was sitting there
at her computer.
So the last time you actually
saw Teresa was Sunday?
- Yes.
- Do you know about what time that was?
No. I don't know.
I mean, we talking morning,
afternoon, night?
- I don't know.
- You don't remember at all?
All right, by the time that Calumet County
investigators arrived,
I take it you guys were pretty concerned
about Teresa's well-being, where she was.
Yes.
Did the police interview you
and Scott together
or did they put you in separate rooms
when they talked to you,
or how'd they do that?
Um...
I believe we were...
I believe we were in the same room.
OK. Did the police ever ask you
for any kind of alibi for October 31st?
No.
They never asked your
whereabouts whatsoever?
- I don't believe so.
- OK.
So it'd be fair to say that you weren't
in any way treated like a suspect,
- that you could tell?
- That's correct.
And even on the 5th and thereafter
when the search narrowed into the Averys,
the police actually
let you through some checkpoints
along with some other searchers,
you leading them to come
and search the area, right?
- Yes.
- The area around the Avery property
that they had made off-limits
to the general public, right?
Yes.
[Kratz] Now,
with you being the coordinator
of this citizens search effort
on that Friday,
that is the day after Teresa
was reported missing,
what efforts were being developed
to try to find Teresa?
Friday night, we kind of planned a...
a road search I guess you could call it,
where everybody got in their vehicles
and drove certain parts of roads and maps
that we had plotted out for 'em
just to make sure
we'd cover everything, but...
Maps of what?
Maps of county highways...
out in, you know,
the Manitowoc area near the Averys...
Let me ask you something, Mr. Hillegas,
why would you center
or why would you direct
some of your search efforts
around the Avery property?
Well, mostly for the fact that,
you know,
the media had covered so much of it,
you know.
All you'd heard about was, you know,
around the Avery property and...
I believe by that point
we had known that, you know,
her last kind of whereabouts
were in that neck of the woods.
So even as an untrained
law enforcement officer,
you knew to look for the last place
she was seen alive, is that right?
- Yeah.
- OK.
Do you know Pam Sturm
or her daughter Nikole Sturm?
I had met them Saturday morning.
They showed up after the good majority
of everybody else had left.
But that was the first time
I had met them.
What did you and Pam Sturm discuss?
She just basically
came right out and said,
"Has anybody went to the car yard yet?
You know, the Avery salvage yard."
And we just said no, that we hadn't
been sending anybody in there
and she offered to
and said she'd be willing to and...
Before Pam left then to travel
to the Avery salvage yard,
was she provided a map
or any other information?
Yes. Yes, I gave her a map.
What other information
was she provided, if you know?
Scott had borrowed her... his camera
just in case they were to find something.
You said that Scott had "borrowed"
Pam Sturm a camera, is that right?
- Yes.
- But you mean "lent."
- Had lent her, given her a camera?
- Yes.
- A digital camera?
- Yes.
He didn't give every one of those members
Saturday morning a camera, did he?
No.
He just gave it to Pam Sturm
who he knew was gonna go out
to the Avery salvage yard.
That's correct.
That's the only person
he gave a camera to, right?
Yes.
[Wiegert] Hey, um,
kind of a change of plans here.
[Remiker] OK.
[Wiegert] The boss has got something
he wants us to do.
[Remiker] OK.
[Wiegert] He wants us to go back over
and re-interview Avery again.
And the search party is out there
and he wants to ask them
if they would allow us to have
the search party come on the property
- and go through the junkyard.
- [Remiker] OK.
[Wiegert] So if it's OK with you,
we'll meet you over
at your sheriff's department.
- [Remiker] OK.
- [Wiegert] If you don't mind?
- Help us out today? Stop over.
- [Remiker] Yeah. That's fine.
[Kratz] Ms. Sturm, were you familiar
with the Avery salvage property?
No, I'm not... I wasn't at all.
All I knew, it was a 40-acre plot
salvage yard for vehicles.
Now, Ms. Sturm, prior to your arrival
at that location,
had you had any contact or direction
from any law enforcement officials?
No, sir, we didn't.
Why don't you show us then,
where did you and Nikole start looking?
[Sturm] We had searched all of these.
Then we went down here south
and there were, like...
you can see there's two rows here.
So I searched the first row
and my daughter was on the second row.
[Kratz] Let me stop you right there, Pam.
Can you tell the jury
what you were looking for?
We were looking for any trace of Teresa.
Be the car... or herself.
[Kratz] All right. OK.
And after looking at those rows of cars,
where did you then look?
[Sturm] I continued up here
and I saw these vehicles up here
and this is like a ridge up here.
So up on the top,
there's a little car path
and you can see there's some vehicles here
and I thought, "I have to search up there.
I have to search each and every one."
[Kratz] And did you do that?
So I went up there
and I went through, like, three cars
and I came upon this car
that had all these branches
on the top of it
and leaning against it and there was an
old hood of a car leaning up against it
and it was kind of bluish-green
and I thought,
"This is really strange.
This is really strange."
And it looked like a little SUV that,
like, I was looking for,
a RAV4 Toyota SUV.
And I went around
to the back of the vehicle
and again there were branches
leaning up against it
and I noticed that it said RAV4.
Well, my heart starting going, you know,
"Oh, my goodness. Maybe this is it."
- Because... OK. Sorry.
- Let me stop you right there, Pam.
When you saw this, Ms. Sturm,
what did you do?
I became very, very worried
for our safety.
Because 90 percent,
this was probably Teresa's car
and we're in danger.
So I called Nikole's name.
I think I maybe even screamed.
I shouldn't have, but I did.
And I went running to the area
where she was.
I said, "Nikole! Nikole! You have to come
and see this car. It must be her car."
Did you attempt to verify
the identification of this vehicle?
- Yes.
- And how was that done?
My daughter Nikole brought her
cell phone along and we...
I should back up.
Ryan gave us a direct line to
Sheriff Pagel in case we found something.
So I called Sheriff Pagel.
And I said, "I think I found the vehicle."
[Kratz] How long
from when you entered that property
did it take you to find Teresa's vehicle?
I believed we entered at ten to ten...
and by 10:20 to 10:25,
we had found the vehicle.
Ms. Sturm, do you know how many
vehicles are on this property?
I didn't at the time. I had no idea.
[Kratz] Looking at it now,
do you think you got lucky?
Yeah. Well, not lucky.
God showed us the way,
I do believe that.
All right, do you think
looking at this exhibit now
that you and your daughter Nicky could
have searched that entire salvage yard?
We would've tried. We would've came back
the next day if we had to.
[Kratz] All right.
[Buting] I never believe and to this day
don't believe Ms. Sturm's
"Holy Spirit guided me there" theory.
Not that I don't believe
that that's possible.
But I just don't believe her.
I do not believe her at all. I never...
She just seemed too weird.
- Right.
- And, um...
You know, it's...
They went right to that thing.
Somebody knew that vehicle was there
before they ever went there,
I'm convinced of it.
How do you think that truck
got on that property?
Which way do you think they came in or...?
Well, when I seen tail lights by me
and Chuck had seen headlights by him.
I don't know who drove it.
Which way was it pointed?
- What?
- The truck.
- I don't know.
- You don't know?
What... Was there a different way in there
or... two ways into there or what?
There's a bunch of ways in there.
There's the main road, there's by me,
- there's in the pit.
- OK.
What about this cop?
- [Fassbender] Want to tell us about that?
- [Wiegert] Tell us about that.
Tammy told me that.
- Tammy told you?
- Yeah.
She a friend of yours
or something or...?
Yeah, I know her.
What did she tell you?
That... she heard...
She told me that she'd heard
that a cop put it out there
- and planted evidence.
- Put what out there?
That vehicle.
- And that's Teresa's vehicle?
- Yeah.
So Tammy told you
that somebody told her...
- Yeah.
- ...that a cop put that vehicle,
- Teresa's vehicle, out on your property.
- Yeah.
[Strang] One of the things
road patrol officers frequently do
is call in to dispatch
and give the dispatcher
the license plate number
of a car they've stopped or a car that
looks out of place for some reason.
- Correct?
- Yes, sir.
And the dispatcher can get information
about to whom a license plate
is registered.
- Yes, sir.
- If the car is abandoned
or there's nobody in the car,
the registration tells you
who the owner presumably is.
Yes, sir.
I'm gonna ask you to listen,
if you would, to a short phone call.
[woman] Manitowoc County Sheriff's
Department, this is Lynn.
- [Colborn] Lynn.
- Hi, Andy.
[Colborn] Can you run
Sam-William-Henry-582?
[Lynn] OK.
It shows that she's a missing person.
- And it lists to Teresa Halbach.
- [Colborn] OK.
[Lynn] OK,
that's what you're looking for, Andy?
[Colborn] Ninety-nine Toyota?
- [Lynn] Yep.
- [Colborn] OK, thank you.
[Lynn] You're so welcome. Bye-bye.
[Strang] OK. What you're asking
the dispatch is to run a plate
that's "Sam-William-Henry-582"?
Did I hear that correctly?
Yes, sir.
Sam-William-Henry
would be S-W-H-5-8-2?
Yes.
This license plate?
Yes, sir.
And the dispatcher tells you
that the plate comes back
to a missing person or woman.
Yes, sir.
- Teresa Halbach.
- Yes, sir.
And then you tell the dispatcher,
"Oh, '99 Toyota?"
No, I thought she told me that.
[Lynn] It shows that she's a missing
person. And it lists to Teresa Halbach.
- [Colborn] OK.
- OK, that's what you're looking for, Andy?
- [Colborn] Ninety-nine Toyota?
- [Lynn] Yep.
- [Colborn] OK, thank you.
- [Lynn] You're so welcome. Bye-bye.
Were you looking at these plates
when you called them in?
No, sir.
Do you have any recollection
of making that phone call?
Yeah, I'm guessing
eleven-oh-three-oh-five.
Probably after I received a phone call
from Investigator Wiegert
letting me know
that there was a missing person.
Investigator Wiegert, did he give you
the license plate number
for Teresa Halbach when he called you?
You know, I just don't remember the
exact content of our conversation then.
- But you think...
- He had to have given it to me
because I wouldn't have
had the number any other way.
Well, you can understand
how someone listening to that
might think that you
were calling in a license plate
that you were looking at
on the back end of a 1999 Toyota.
Yes.
But there's no way you should've been
looking at Teresa Halbach's license plate
on November three on the back end
of a 1999 Toyota.
I shouldn't have been and I was not
looking at the license plate.
Because you're aware now that the
first time that Toyota was reported found
was two days later on November five.
Yes, sir.
[theme music plays]