Lingering questions ‑ Search Scene or Crime Scene?
Very soon after the discovery of Teresa Halbach’s Toyota RAV4, chatter on the Manitowoc County Police radio indicated that deputies concluded that Steven Avery was a perpetrator and his arrest was imminent.
The first Manitowoc County Deputy on the scene, Pete O’Conner, was ordered to set up a roadblock at the entrance to Avery Salvage as he arrived on the scene. Other entrances and egresses were not treated the same.
The next Manitowoc County deputies milled around the vehicle without setting up a perimeter or documenting the area. There was no attempt to preserve the scene as an aid for finding the missing person. The location of the vehicle and any indication of how it got there was important. Crucial items like tire track direction, if any, were ignored. The only photographic documentation of the scene was done by one of the discoverers of the vehicle. There was no police documentation until later and that was rudimentary.
The situation did not improve when Calumet County deputies arrived and took over from Manitowoc County due to conflict of interest issues. Clues to the whereabouts of Teresa Halbach that could be found in the vehicle were important, but no one looked.
On discovery of the Toyota, police search activity increased substantially from some aerial searches to a full‑fledged containment scene. Roadblocks were suddenly in place, and one‑hundred‑fifty law enforcement officers joined in the search on the Avery property.
One of the oddities of this case was demonstrated by the discoverer of the vehicle, Pam Sturm.
At trial, she testified that she closely observed the officers around the vehicle from a point approximately 125 yards away. Her statement was that no officer touched the Halbach vehicle and that was important enough that she wanted to make certain. Calumet Count Sheriff Jerry Pagel had directed Sturm to not touch the vehicle. But, she was not directed to ensure no one else entered the Toyota RAV4.Why she felt police could not is an unanswered question. And what she would have done if anyone entered the vehicle is unclear.
The access to Halbach’s Toyota only became important at a much later date when potential evidence tampering was discovered at the Manitowoc County Courthouse. At Avery’s trial law enforcement persons testified that no one had attempted to open the vehicle. Attempts were made to look inside, but nothing appeared amiss. A camera memory card was seen although initially considered a piece of paper.
Testimony at the trial was that until the discovery of human bones on 10 November, 2005 this was a missing persons search so it was rudimentary and limited to what were labeled sweeps. The testimony was to explain the fact that bones were discovered five days after the start of the search.
But, a partially burned camera and other electronics were found in the Avery burn barrel three days before the discovery of the bones. The components were recognizable under a burned wheel rim and a mass of wire. When the bones were discovered, they only a few feet from the barrel.
Although State Witnesses testified that their lack of diligence in the early search was due to treating the area as a missing persons scene, the treatment of the vehicle was like a crime scene.
John Ertl from the State Crime in Madison testified that he sent the SUV to Madison to preserve evidence. He attempted to look through a window with a flashlight but could see very little.* Then he had the RAV4 enclosed and transported 160 miles to Madison rather than a secure nearby location. His testimony was this was done to preserve evidence. If this was indeed a missing person search that was an unnecessary and potentially dangerous delay. Weather and darkness were concerns that would indicate relocating the SUV, but the transport of the vehicle to a nearby facility in Calumet County made sense as did a documented search of the vehicle.
Even in Madison, when good clear fingerprints were collected, the AFIS database was not used. Technicians waited until the field investigators sent them a very limited set of fingerprints for comparison. (If they were not Avery family fingerprints they didn’t matter.)
Clearly there were no protocols in place to scientifically examine the area to locate a missing person. State witnesses claimed that they did not attempt gather evidence such as tire tracks because there were none. But, without documentation that is an open issue. Since none thought to photograph the Toyota, apparently they did not have their thinking caps on. Perhaps the excitement over getting Avery took precedence.
Neither Manitowoc County nor Calumet County had any protocol to cover missing person recovery. It would have been more than an embarrassment if the body of Halbach had been discovered with a date of death later than 5 November, 2005.
I doubt very seriously if any other counties in Wisconsin have well researched and designed protocols for missing person searches. The Wisconsin State Justice Department did not since a crucial item was sequestered and removed far from the scene as evidence.
The persons responsible for this lack of protocol are not the deputies. They are the sheriffs and the county boards.
When the various agencies get done patting themselves and each other on the back, perhaps they can get serious about the sequence of events and behaviors that occurred in November, 2005.
See Photographs Through Tinted Automobile Windows for a better way to see inside tinted windows in the dark.
by Brian McCorkle
in category Steven Avery
