Either the keys were left in the RAV4's ignition (which drained down the battery), the battery was removed from the RAV4, or a thief stole the battery while the RAV4 set abandoned at the turnaround on Highway 147/Main Street, Mishicot (by the old dam in the East Twin River).
In order to move the RAV4 to Avery Auto Salvage (also known as Avery Salvage Yard), the planter needed a replacement battery, and he needed it quickly.
The type of battery for a 1999 Toyota RAV4 is called a Group 35 battery. The battery in the RAV4 when it was discovered at Avery Auto Salvage is a Group 58 battery, which is used in mid 1990s Lincoln Crown Victorias, the type of vehicle in the fleets for the city and county of Manitowoc, Wisconsin.
A Group 58 battery is longer and wider than the battery tray of the RAV4; therefore, it would have to placed on top of the battery tray rather than inside it, and you would not be able to attach both ends of the hold-down clamp (see images above).
The Group 58 battery is shorter than the Group 35; therefore, you possibly could connect both of the battery cables to the terminals (based on Trial Exhibit 302, you, at least, could connect the negative cable to the terminal).
Q. Next exhibit, please?
A. State's Exhibit 302, this is showing that the battery cable was disconnected from the battery.
Q. And on which vehicle is this photograph?
A. This is on the RAV4.
Trial Exhibit 302, a photo of the RAV4 battery entered into evidence, looks intentionally cropped to not reveal the other end of the hold-down clamp or to not reveal the positive terminal and cable.
The battery hold-down clamp appears to be secured but we only see the one end in the photo.
The negative terminal is disconnected; we don't see the positive terminal in the photo.
So if both cables were not connected, how was the RAV4 started?
By jumping the starter solenoid.
How to Jump a Starter Solenoid
The starter solenoid in your vehicle is the switch that provides power from the battery to the starter motor, which turns over the engine and starts your vehicle. When the solenoid goes out, you can't start your car and are typically left stranded.
Solenoids aren't difficult to install, but if your car won't start, you need a way to start the truck one time to get it to the store. This is a dangerous procedure and will cause a shock--but if you have to do it, it can be done.
Pop the hood and locate the starter solenoid. It's typically on the fender well of the vehicle, near the battery.
Get out the screwdriver and touch the metal end to the post that leads to the starter, opposite to the one that leads to the battery. You're going to turn the screwdriver into a manual switch, bypassing the solenoid in the process.
Drop the other end of the screwdriver down, touching the metal on the shaft of the solenoid to both terminals on the solenoid. At the same time, have your assistant turn the ignition to start the vehicle. This will cause a lot of sparks and could pass electrical current through your body if you're not using a rubber-handled screwdriver, so be careful and don't touch the connections for long.
Quickly remove the screwdriver from the solenoid. If it's left on too long, it can arc weld itself to both terminals, which is a bad thing. At this point, the vehicle should be running. If not, repeat the process.
Warning: By jumping your starter solenoid, you are turning the screwdriver or other metal implement into a manual switch. If you're not careful, you can turn your body into the conduit as well. Plus, if you don't get the screwdriver off of the contacts soon enough, you can burn out the starter motor. This is a dangerous procedure, so don't do it unless you absolutely have to start the vehicle.
"You can try connecting the starter solenoid with the positive terminal of the car battery to fire up the engine. This method will help you when you really need to start your car in an emergency." [Source]
"You could try jumping the solenoid. You do this going under the hood and finding the starter solenoid, and connecting a jumper from the positive battery terminal to the hot lead on the solenoid. Turn the vehicle to the on position with the key and then jump the starter. Be careful of moving parts. You may want to use an alligator clip on the starter, and just touch the other end to the battery. This will not work if it has anti-theft cause the fuel injectors won’t turn on." [Source]
"Back in the 50's and through the 90's it was pretty easy to hot-wire a vehicle: simply connect the negative battery terminal to the ignition coil and defeat the steering lock somehow (usually with a big hammer), then short the starter solenoid to crank the engine. You can do it with a hammer, screw driver, and some bailing wire in a pinch. Since 2000, nearly all vehicles have chips or transponders in their ignition keys which have to be present for the vehicle to start. The car cannot be started without them and the thief is forced to steal a key, use a tow truck or carjack the owner to obtain the vehicle." [Source]
Video Above: How to Diagnose and Repair Starter Motor for Toyota Rav4
Video and Screen Show Above: How to remove starter motor for Rav4 Toyota 1996-2005
Nowhere in the CASO file does it give details about the positioning of the battery and cables.
It is after March 1, 2006, when Tom Fassbender and Mark Wiegert coerce Brendan Dassey into saying Steven Avery went under the hood, that the battery and cables come into play.
CASO Page 603
TYPE OF ACTIVITY: Interview of Brendan R. Dassey
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 03/01/06
REPORTING OFFICER: Inv. Mark Wiegert
TYPE OF ACTIVITY: Processing of Evidence
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 03/29/06
REPORTING OFFICER: Deputy Jeremy Hawkins
TYPE OF ACTIVITY: Processing of Evidence
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 04/03/06
REPORTING OFFICER: Deputy Jeremy Hawkins
TYPE OF ACTIVITY: Interview of Service Manager of Best Toyota
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 07/03/06
REPORTING OFFICER: Inv. Mark Wiegert
This was five months after Wiegert asked a Toyota parts manager "what type of battery would have been in the 1999 Toyota RAV4."
Hawkins wrote that he "opened the hood" and then Lt. Kelly Sippel "placed the battery leads onto the battery" and started the engine using the key that was in evidence.
CASO Page 1001
TYPE OF ACTIVITY: Identifying Key to RAV4
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 11/20/06
REPORTING OFFICER: Deputy Jeremy Hawkins
Stahlke tried to check the odometer on November 7, 2005, but "there appeared to have been a dead battery." Stahlke testified that he opened the hood. He said he couldn't recall if both cables were unconnected, "but I know for sure one was."
Trial Transcript Page 2692
5 Q. And what did you do to obtain the odometer
6 reading?
7 A. Well, looking at the instrument panel, we
8 couldn't determine what the odometer reading was,
9 since there appeared to have been a dead battery.
10 Q. And what -- Did you check any further as to
11 whether there was a dead battery?
12 A. Yes. We thought we needed to charge the battery
13 so we opened up the hood of the vehicle and
14 discovered that the battery cables had been
15 disconnected.
16 Q. Would you look at the next exhibit that you have,
17 identify it, please.
18 A. Exhibit 302.
19 Q. And what does that exhibit show?
20 A. This is the disconnected battery cable.
21 Q. Is that how you observed it when you opened up
22 the hood?
23 A. Yes, it is.
24 Q. It was you who opened up the hood, correct?
25 A. That's correct.
1 Q. How did you do that?
2 A. Released the interior latch on the vehicle and
3 then opened up the hood, releasing the latch on
4 the hood, or the front of the vehicle. And
5 propped it open with its -- its a -- with a prop,
6 I guess, on the hood itself and saw this battery.
7 Q. And what did you determine by looking at the
8 battery?
9 A. Well, that -- that was the reason for the problem
10 with no power to the instrument panel, is that
11 the battery was disconnected.
12 Q. And when you opened up the hood of the RAV4, were
13 you wearing gloves?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. What type of gloves were you wearing?
16 A. Latex
Trial Transcript Page 2755
1 Q. Now, eventually, you discovered that either one
2 or both battery cables were disconnected?
3 A. Correct.
4 Q. Under the hood?
5 A. That's true.
6 Q. You were the one who opened the hood?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Which required releasing a lever inside, near the
9 driver's left leg?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And then popping the hood latch when that
12 appeared through the grill, at the front of the
13 car?
14 A. Correct.
15 Q. Lifted the hood, propped it up with the metal
16 rod, and looked at the battery posts?
17 A. Correct.
18 Q. One or both of those was disconnected?
19 A. If I recall, they both were disconnected, but I
20 know for sure one was.
21 Q. And the one that we saw in the photo yesterday, I
22 saw some reddish or reddish brown discoloration
23 on or near the battery post?
24 A. Correct.
25 Q. Was that something you tested?
1 A. No.
2 Q. That, you decided, was not suspected blood?
3 A. Well, I believe there was actually a
4 phenolphthalein test done on that, but there was
5 no -- it was not positive.
6 Q. Okay. So whatever that was, wasn't blood.
7 A. Correct.
8 Q. Now, you were still wearing the same latex gloves
9 when you opened the hood?
10 A. The same latex gloves that I put on prior to
11 opening the hood?
12 Q. Yes.
Trial Transcript Page 2776
Q. You do know enough to say that, once those
21 battery cables were disconnected, the key to the
22 Toyota wouldn't have done you any good in
23 starting the car?
24 A. That's true.
25 Q. Unless you reconnected the battery cables?
1 A. Correct.
Sherry Culhane testified that when she tried the RAV4 key from evidence it turned but the engine didn't turn over because the battery was not connected.
Trial Transcript Page 181
Q. After you did the swabbing of the key, did you do
4 anything else with the key?
5 A. Yes, I did.
6 Q. Please explain to the jurors what you do with the
7 key.
8 A. I took the key to see if it fit the vehicle. So
9 I put the key into the ignition. I still had, of
10 course, gloves on, during this entire process. I
11 put the key into the ignition and turned the
12 ignition. It did turn the ignition, but it did
13 not crank the car. And I later learned that that
14 was because, I believe, the battery had been
15 disconnected. But it did actually turn
16 completely over. I also locked, I believe it was
17 the front driver's side door, and used the key to
18 unlock the door.
Ken Kratz, during closing arguments, theorized that Steven Avery disconnected the battery so that a keyless entry remote alarm could not be sounded if and when the salvage yard was searched.
Trial Transcript Page 5406
13 Mr. Buting mentioned yesterday that
14 perhaps the hood latch, perhaps the DNA that is
15 found here was caused by that of Mr. Stahlke,
16 because Mr. Stahlke reached up under and opened
17 up and found that the battery cable was
18 disconnected. Well, so what. Mr. Stahlke talked
19 about he was rummaging around, he was actually
20 touching all kinds of DNA and touching all kinds
21 of blood, or any of those kind of things?
22 Absolutely not.
23 These are professionals. These are
24 people that process evidence for a living.
25 Mr. Stahlke had gloves on when he opened -- latex
1 gloves when he opened this particular vehicle.
2 So it is not Mr. Stahlke's, it was Mr. Avery's
3 DNA that is on the hood latch.
4 Now, the defense also asked why would
5 Mr. Avery disconnect the battery. You heard them
6 asking for speculation, guessing why Mr. Avery
7 would disconnect a battery. I have got an answer
8 and I'm going to tell you right now, right now,
9 that this is speculation. This is guessing. All
10 right. This isn't evidence. It's not even close
11 to it. It's kind of what the defense has been
12 doing through at least their closing arguments.
13 But I am going to speculate and I'm
14 going to guess that a man who hid the SUV and
15 knew that people were going to come looking for
16 that SUV, thought a little bit ahead, not just to
17 crush the car, and taking -- or in unhooking the
18 battery. But when citizen searchers looked at
19 40 acres of cars, and they looked and they go,
20 oh, my goodness gracious, how am I going to find
21 that. Mr. Avery may have thought about those
22 little devices that most of us have on our newer
23 cars. Where we're able to press a button and our
24 lights go on, or an alarm goes on, or something
25 flashes, where you can find your car in a parking
1 lot, if you are like me sometimes and I forget
2 where I have parked my car.
3 Is that why Mr. Avery unhooked the
4 battery, so that the citizen searchers that he
5 knew were coming couldn't just press a button and
6 of the 40,000 (sic) cars, could walk right to
7 that. That's possible. All right. That's an
8 inference, a logical inference, that could be
9 drawn. But that's speculating, and that's not
10 what I'm going to do. That's not what I'm asking
11 you to do. I'm not asking you at all in this
12 case to speculate. I'm simply answering
13 Mr. Buting's question.
Video and Screen Show Above: How to remove starter motor for Rav4 Toyota 1996-2005
Nowhere in the CASO file does it give details about the positioning of the battery and cables.
It is after March 1, 2006, when Tom Fassbender and Mark Wiegert coerce Brendan Dassey into saying Steven Avery went under the hood, that the battery and cables come into play.
CASO Page 603
TYPE OF ACTIVITY: Interview of Brendan R. Dassey
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 03/01/06
REPORTING OFFICER: Inv. Mark Wiegert
FASSBENDER: OK. Did he, did he, did he go and look at the engine, did he raise the hood at all or anything like that? To do something to this car?
BRENDAN: Yeah.
FASSBENDER: What was that? (pause)
WIEGERT: What did he do, Brendan?
WIEGERT: It's OK, what did he do?
FASSBENDER: What did he do under the hood, if that's what he did? (pause)
BRENDAN: I don't know what he did, but I know he went under.
FASSBENDER: He did raise the hood? (Brendan nods "yes") You remember that?
BRENDAN: Yeah.
CASO Page 882
TYPE OF ACTIVITY: Processing of Evidence
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 03/29/06
REPORTING OFFICER: Deputy Jeremy Hawkins
At approximately 1940 hours, I photographed the exterior door handle on the driver's side of the RAV4. After the door handle was photographed, I took a DNA swab of the driver's side door handle of the exterior of the Toyota.
At approximately 1941 hours, I took a photograph of the hood latch of the Toyota RAV4.
At approximately 1945 hours, I took a photograph of the left battery cable of the Toyota RAV4.
At approximately 1947 hours, I took a photograph of the right side battery cable of the Toyota RAV4.
After I photographed the right and left battery cable and hood latch, and Sgt. TYSON took DNA swabs of these locations, the storage unit containing the Toyota RAV4 was secured.
Deputy Jeremy HawkinsCASO Page 936
Calumet Co. Sheriff's Dept.
JH/bdg
TYPE OF ACTIVITY: Processing of Evidence
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 04/03/06
REPORTING OFFICER: Deputy Jeremy Hawkins
Deputy HAWKINS and I went to the storage shed where TERESA HALBACH's vehicle was being stored. Deputy HAWKINS did unlock the storage shed. Inv. WIEGERT and Special Agent FASSBENDER had informed us they wished for us to do DNA swabs on the interior and exterior of the door handles of TERESA HALBACH's vehicle. They also requested DNA swabs done on the hood latch as well as the battery cables for the vehicle. TERESA's vehicle would be identified as Property Tag#8027.
At 1930 hours, I did a DNA swab on the interior passenger door handle.
At 1933 hours, I did a DNA swab on the exterior passenger door handle.
At 1937 hours, I did a DNA swab on the hood latch to the hood of the vehicle.
At 1941 hours, a DNA swab was done on the left battery cable.
At 1943 hours, a DNA swab was done on the right battery cable.
Deputy HAWKINS also did DNA swabs on the interior and exterior handles of the driver's door. After the DNA swabs had been collected, the door to the storage locker was secured. Deputy HAWKINS and I transported the swabs that were collected to the sheriff s department and the swabs were secured in the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT evidence room.
Sgt. Bill TysonCASO Page 873
Calumet Co. Sheriff's Dept.
BT/bdg
TYPE OF ACTIVITY: Interview of Service Manager of Best Toyota
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 07/03/06
REPORTING OFFICER: Inv. Mark Wiegert
On 07/03/06 at approximately 9:00 a.m., I (Inv. WIEGERT of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT) made phone contact with a CURT JUDSON who would be the Parts Manager at LE MIEUX TOYOTA in the City of Green Bay.
My purpose for speaking with CURT was to determine what type of battery would have been in the 1999 Toyota RAV4.
CURT states the battery would be called a Group 35 battery. The name on it would be True Start. He states the battery is made for TOYOTA by INTERSTATE BATTERIES, however, would not say INTERSTATE on it.
I did request that CURT send me the schematics of the battery and its connections. It should be noted I did receive a fax from CURT of those schematics.
Investigation continues.
Inv. Mark WiegertAccording to the CASO file, on November 20, 2006, more than a year after Teresa went missing, Wiegert asked Jeremy Hawkins "to connect the battery of the RAV4" to "see if the Toyota key that was found in the bedroom of Steven Avery would start the RAV4."
Calumet Co. Sheriff's Dept.
MW/bdg
This was five months after Wiegert asked a Toyota parts manager "what type of battery would have been in the 1999 Toyota RAV4."
Hawkins wrote that he "opened the hood" and then Lt. Kelly Sippel "placed the battery leads onto the battery" and started the engine using the key that was in evidence.
CASO Page 1001
TYPE OF ACTIVITY: Identifying Key to RAV4
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 11/20/06
REPORTING OFFICER: Deputy Jeremy Hawkins
On 11/20/06, I (Deputy JEREMY HAWKINS of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT) was asked by Inv. MARK WIEGERT to connect the battery of the RAV4 and see if the Toyota key that was found in the bedroom of STEVEN AVERY would start the RAV4.
I retrieved Property Tag #7620, the Toyota key, and also property Tag #9130, two keys to the lock, out of secure storage.
I went out to the blue storage unit with Lt. KELLY SIPPEL. I unlocked the locks to the blue storage unit. I opened the blue storage unit at approximately 9:38 a.m. Lt. SIPPEL and myself put gloves on.
At approximately 9:39 a.m., I opened the hood release and Lt. SIPPEL opened the hood of the motor vehicle. Lt. SIPPEL then placed the battery leads onto the battery.
At approximately 9:43 a.m., I put the key into the ignition and turned the key.
At approximately 9:45 a.m., I started the RAV4 using the key that was in evidence.
At approximately 9:47 a.m., the battery was disconnected and the hood to the RAV4 was closed.
I then secured the blue storage unit by placing the locks back on and locking the locks.
The Toyota key and the keys to the blue storage unit were placed back into secure storage by myself.
Deputy Jeremy HawkinsAt Avery's trial, fingerprint expert Nick Stahlke was asked about the RAV4's battery cables and whether or not they were connected.
Calumet Co. Sheriff's Department
JH/bdg
Stahlke tried to check the odometer on November 7, 2005, but "there appeared to have been a dead battery." Stahlke testified that he opened the hood. He said he couldn't recall if both cables were unconnected, "but I know for sure one was."
Trial Transcript Page 2692
5 Q. And what did you do to obtain the odometer
6 reading?
7 A. Well, looking at the instrument panel, we
8 couldn't determine what the odometer reading was,
9 since there appeared to have been a dead battery.
10 Q. And what -- Did you check any further as to
11 whether there was a dead battery?
12 A. Yes. We thought we needed to charge the battery
13 so we opened up the hood of the vehicle and
14 discovered that the battery cables had been
15 disconnected.
16 Q. Would you look at the next exhibit that you have,
17 identify it, please.
18 A. Exhibit 302.
19 Q. And what does that exhibit show?
20 A. This is the disconnected battery cable.
21 Q. Is that how you observed it when you opened up
22 the hood?
23 A. Yes, it is.
24 Q. It was you who opened up the hood, correct?
25 A. That's correct.
1 Q. How did you do that?
2 A. Released the interior latch on the vehicle and
3 then opened up the hood, releasing the latch on
4 the hood, or the front of the vehicle. And
5 propped it open with its -- its a -- with a prop,
6 I guess, on the hood itself and saw this battery.
7 Q. And what did you determine by looking at the
8 battery?
9 A. Well, that -- that was the reason for the problem
10 with no power to the instrument panel, is that
11 the battery was disconnected.
12 Q. And when you opened up the hood of the RAV4, were
13 you wearing gloves?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. What type of gloves were you wearing?
16 A. Latex
Trial Transcript Page 2755
1 Q. Now, eventually, you discovered that either one
2 or both battery cables were disconnected?
3 A. Correct.
4 Q. Under the hood?
5 A. That's true.
6 Q. You were the one who opened the hood?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Which required releasing a lever inside, near the
9 driver's left leg?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And then popping the hood latch when that
12 appeared through the grill, at the front of the
13 car?
14 A. Correct.
15 Q. Lifted the hood, propped it up with the metal
16 rod, and looked at the battery posts?
17 A. Correct.
18 Q. One or both of those was disconnected?
19 A. If I recall, they both were disconnected, but I
20 know for sure one was.
21 Q. And the one that we saw in the photo yesterday, I
22 saw some reddish or reddish brown discoloration
23 on or near the battery post?
24 A. Correct.
25 Q. Was that something you tested?
1 A. No.
2 Q. That, you decided, was not suspected blood?
3 A. Well, I believe there was actually a
4 phenolphthalein test done on that, but there was
5 no -- it was not positive.
6 Q. Okay. So whatever that was, wasn't blood.
7 A. Correct.
8 Q. Now, you were still wearing the same latex gloves
9 when you opened the hood?
10 A. The same latex gloves that I put on prior to
11 opening the hood?
12 Q. Yes.
Trial Transcript Page 2776
Q. You do know enough to say that, once those
21 battery cables were disconnected, the key to the
22 Toyota wouldn't have done you any good in
23 starting the car?
24 A. That's true.
25 Q. Unless you reconnected the battery cables?
1 A. Correct.
Sherry Culhane testified that when she tried the RAV4 key from evidence it turned but the engine didn't turn over because the battery was not connected.
Trial Transcript Page 181
Q. After you did the swabbing of the key, did you do
4 anything else with the key?
5 A. Yes, I did.
6 Q. Please explain to the jurors what you do with the
7 key.
8 A. I took the key to see if it fit the vehicle. So
9 I put the key into the ignition. I still had, of
10 course, gloves on, during this entire process. I
11 put the key into the ignition and turned the
12 ignition. It did turn the ignition, but it did
13 not crank the car. And I later learned that that
14 was because, I believe, the battery had been
15 disconnected. But it did actually turn
16 completely over. I also locked, I believe it was
17 the front driver's side door, and used the key to
18 unlock the door.
Ken Kratz, during closing arguments, theorized that Steven Avery disconnected the battery so that a keyless entry remote alarm could not be sounded if and when the salvage yard was searched.
Trial Transcript Page 5406
13 Mr. Buting mentioned yesterday that
14 perhaps the hood latch, perhaps the DNA that is
15 found here was caused by that of Mr. Stahlke,
16 because Mr. Stahlke reached up under and opened
17 up and found that the battery cable was
18 disconnected. Well, so what. Mr. Stahlke talked
19 about he was rummaging around, he was actually
20 touching all kinds of DNA and touching all kinds
21 of blood, or any of those kind of things?
22 Absolutely not.
23 These are professionals. These are
24 people that process evidence for a living.
25 Mr. Stahlke had gloves on when he opened -- latex
1 gloves when he opened this particular vehicle.
2 So it is not Mr. Stahlke's, it was Mr. Avery's
3 DNA that is on the hood latch.
4 Now, the defense also asked why would
5 Mr. Avery disconnect the battery. You heard them
6 asking for speculation, guessing why Mr. Avery
7 would disconnect a battery. I have got an answer
8 and I'm going to tell you right now, right now,
9 that this is speculation. This is guessing. All
10 right. This isn't evidence. It's not even close
11 to it. It's kind of what the defense has been
12 doing through at least their closing arguments.
13 But I am going to speculate and I'm
14 going to guess that a man who hid the SUV and
15 knew that people were going to come looking for
16 that SUV, thought a little bit ahead, not just to
17 crush the car, and taking -- or in unhooking the
18 battery. But when citizen searchers looked at
19 40 acres of cars, and they looked and they go,
20 oh, my goodness gracious, how am I going to find
21 that. Mr. Avery may have thought about those
22 little devices that most of us have on our newer
23 cars. Where we're able to press a button and our
24 lights go on, or an alarm goes on, or something
25 flashes, where you can find your car in a parking
1 lot, if you are like me sometimes and I forget
2 where I have parked my car.
3 Is that why Mr. Avery unhooked the
4 battery, so that the citizen searchers that he
5 knew were coming couldn't just press a button and
6 of the 40,000 (sic) cars, could walk right to
7 that. That's possible. All right. That's an
8 inference, a logical inference, that could be
9 drawn. But that's speculating, and that's not
10 what I'm going to do. That's not what I'm asking
11 you to do. I'm not asking you at all in this
12 case to speculate. I'm simply answering
13 Mr. Buting's question.
Andrew Colborn is a mechanic who was a customer of Avery Salvage Yard.
Biography: Born in March 1959; active duty U.S. Air Force, 1976-1988; auto transmission mechanic in Las Vegas, 1988-1990; diesel mechanic in Wisconsin at Waupaca Foundry Inc., 1990-1992; joined Manitowoc County Sheriff's Office as jailer, 1992; lieutenant of the detective bureau until his retirement in early 2018.
With Officer Colborn testifying as being a customer of Avery Salvage Yard (he'd go there to find parts for his 1950 Chevy pickup), it seemed reasonable to conclude Colborn planted the plates and the vehicle at Avery Salvage Yard.
Andy Colborn's Trial Testimony:
11 Q. Prior to the 3rd of November, 2005, had you been
12 to that property?
13 A. Prior to 2005?
14 Q. Prior to November 3rd of 2005, had you been to
15 that property?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And under what circumstances, can you tell the
18 jury about that?
19 A. Again, as a customer.
20 Q. Let's talk about that, first. What do you mean
21 as a customer.
22 A. I have several older vehicles, one, as a matter
23 of fact, is a 1950 Chevrolet pickup truck. And
24 I -- in the process of tinkering around with it,
25 I have gone to several auto salvage and I have
1 always been referred to the Avery Auto Salvage as
2 the place to go if you are looking for an older
3 model vehicle parts -- or parts for an older
4 model vehicle.
5 Q. Was there one person in particular that you would
6 normally have contact with at the Avery Auto
7 Salvage?
8 A. No, actually, usually there were two; either I
9 had contact with Charles Avery or Earl Avery.
10 Q. All right. They are brothers and, in fact, the
11 owners of the business; is that right?
12 A. Yes, sir.
13 Q. Let me ask you this, Sergeant Colborn, if you
14 know, prior to the 3rd of November, 2005, when
15 was the last time you were at the Avery Auto
16 Salvage business?
17 A. I think the last time I was at the Avery Auto
18 Salvage business would have been 1999.
19 Q. All right. So at least six years previously?
20 A. Yes, sir.
21 Q. But you knew where it was?
22 A. Yes, sir.
23 Q. Then, on November 3rd, after Mr. Wiegert asked
24 for your help; did you proceed to this scene?
25 A. Yes, sir.
1 Q. And that's 2005; is that right?
2 A. Yes, sir.
3 Q. Can you tell the jury, please, what happened when
4 you got there on November 3rd?
5 A. Again, I knew that Earl Avery, who was probably
6 the person that I have had the most contact with
7 or know the best, doesn't live on the Avery Auto
8 Salvage property, so my initial -- what I was
9 initially trying to do was to make contact with
10 Charles Avery, who does reside on there.
11 I knew Charles to -- I didn't know if he
12 owned the business, but I certainly knew that he
13 managed the business. So I was going to make
14 contact with him and ask him if he had seen
15 someone on the property taking pictures of a
16 vehicle that was for sale.
17 Q. In looking for Charles Avery, do you remember
18 what building you went to?
19 A. Well, initially, I was kind of surprised when I
20 drove in, because the shop area, a lot of --
21 there were new buildings and things had changed
22 since the last time I was there. But I was
23 attempting to make contact at his residence,
24 which I believe is right behind that large,
25 square shaped building.
1 Q. We're handing you a laser pointer to assist you
2 in your --
3 A. I believe that --
4 Q. -- testimony.
5 A. I thought that was his residence right there.
6 Q. And you were pointing actually to the residence
7 which would be just the south of the --
8 A. That one right there.
9 Q. You have to wait until I finish my question, sir.
10 You are pointing to a trailer or a residence just
11 south of the Avery business itself. And I think
12 counsel is willing to stipulate that is Charles
13 Avery's residence.
14 ATTORNEY STRANG: Certainly my
15 understanding.
16 THE COURT: All right. The record will
17 reflect the stipulation.
18 Q. (By Attorney Kratz)~ Did you drive or walk into
19 this property?
20 A. I drove.
21 Q. Can you tell the jury where you came in from,
22 please.
23 A. There is -- To my knowledge there is only one
24 entrance onto the property and that's off Avery
25 Road, which the whole of Avery Road isn't
1 pictured on that picture. But I ended up coming
2 down that dirt road there and parking almost
3 where there is a vehicle parked right now.
[–]OB1Benobie
Cadaver dogs are trained to smell the decomposition of rotting flesh, not blood spatter inside an enclosed vehicle such as a Rav4. Besides, the dogs would never have been able to track Teresa’s sent to the Rav4 while blood was inside.
Whoever planted the Rav4 on Avery’s property possibly still had Teresa's sent on them as he tracked through the back part of Avery’s.
Following the dogs tracks, it seems as though Teresa’s vehicle left the property. It’s as if they follow the vehicle right back onto the property from another way into Avery’s, which means the Rav4 did leave the property.
This means that whoever planted the Rav4, this same person, soon after, planted the bones, moving bones to several areas around the property.
This means whoever planted the bones, the dogs followed in his footsteps.
Who was the first person to view the Rav4 after it was located?
Who was there searching the grounds before the dogs started searching?
Who started searching the grounds after the search warrant was obtained?
Either the bones were planted after the Rav4 was planted, or the bones were planted after the search warrant was obtained -- getting Steven and his family off the property as they conducted the seizure of the property and started their investigation.
You can’t expect Steven to have walked around all these locations. He had no reason to be in some of these locations, but officers did, as they walked all around the area.
Who was the first person to have gone to the Radandt property, looking in or around the burn barrel?
Whoever was the first on this scene at the Radandt property is the corrupt culprit who planted the bones and possibly the Rav4.
Who was the Officer first on the scene at each location where bones were found on, where the cadaver dogs alerted?
This Officer’s path is the path and direction those dogs followed.
This Officer is the one who planted the evidence.
And, later, the dogs picked up Teresa’s sent, or the sent of a dead rotting body or burned remains.
This is your answer to whoever planted evidence.
[–]7-pairs-of-panties
There are rabbit holes all over the place. That's what keeps us here. There is constantly something new to look at. The evidence and news reports were all about perceptions of the townspeople. This was never meant to be seen in front of a world wide stage.
Lately, it seems as though we're gonna hear that the battery was traced to a county fleet (maybe not a specific officer, but the fleet is BAD enough). All I gotta say about all this is...if the battery in the car is a fleet battery, then they HAD to have KNOWN she was DEAD. For any cop or county employee to move her car to the lot, he would never do so unless he already knew she was dead.
Soooo, they had to have found her BODY, not her BONES, to have known she was dead.
Lately, I'm thinking it was COPS, NOT THE KILLER, who burned the body in the Manitowoc County quarry. The only other thing I see is the killer and the cops working together to frame Avery? Sounds unlikely, but if the killer was caught, then he'd probably do whatever he had to do, cooperating with the cops.
This battery could really blow up this entire case.
[–]CaseFilesReviewer
The RAV4 was clearly staged as evident by Exhibit 291 therein showing branches carefully placed to not conceal the RAV4 logo or its dealer information.
Exhibit 130 revealed the Rambler hood and plywood were carefully placed to not conceal the RAV4's body lines or the two tone colors.
It became more than apparent the person knew how to stage a vehicle. The use of only debris laying around, easily carried by one person, indicated the person was working alone. It also indicated the person didn't have access to the salvage yard's equipment thereby was not a person employed by the salvage yard.
Comparing Exhibit 31 with Exhibit 71 revealed how easy the vehicle was to find. The vehicle was placed on a small berm, across from a bend in the road, making it essentially eye level and very easy to see by simply walking down the salvage yard's main road.
Exhibit 92 revealed the person knew how to navigate the salvage yard to get to the desired staging location thereby revealing the person was/is a customer of ASY.
There were no less than six locations the person could have more easily parked the vehicle but all would have made the vehicle harder to find.
Exhibit 31, 71 and 161 revealed the customer's profile: the old International pickup, with an old Chevy pickup's bed, and the old Dodge Power Wagon pickup, are both rare vehicles thereby eye candy to a customer with an old pickup.
Clearly, a customer searching for old pickup parts would have known that area very well and the trucks as easy finds.
In light of the information, I recalled a witness testifying being a customer with an old pickup. Unable to recall which witness, I doubled back on the transcripts and searched for “pickup”. The search revealed Officer Colborn testifying being a customer of ASY, who'd go there to find parts for his 1950 Chevy pickup.
At that point, it seemed reasonable to conclude an Officer planted the plates the evening of the 3rd then the vehicle the evening of the 4th.
In consideration of Exhibit 302, it seemed reasonable to conclude the plates were planted to connect Mr. Steven Avery to Ms. Teresa Halbach's vehicle in the event a battery wasn't obtained.
From Post Crescent:
Andy Colborn's role in Avery wrongful conviction: When Colborn worked in the county jail in 1995, he received a call from a detective who worked in Brown County who believed he had an inmate in the Green Bay jail, now known to be Gregory Allen, who committed a rape in Manitowoc County that someone else was in prison for. Colborn and his supervisors decided not to vigorously pursue the matter at the time.
Key moments from sworn testimony of Oct. 13, 2005: Colborn said he could not remember details of the phone call that could have spurred Avery's exoneration in 1995, rather than in September 2003. Other county employees suspected Colborn of conferring with then-Sheriff Tom Kocourek about the matter, which was never followed up by anyone at the sheriff's office.
"I'm not ruling out the possibility that I may have discussed it with someone else, but I can't specifically tell you names of people I may have mentioned this to."
Colborn testified his boss Lt. James Lenk was not present when Colborn met with Sheriff Ken Petersen the day after Avery's 2003 exoneration to discuss the phone call from eight years earlier that fell through the cracks.
"Sheriff Petersen was downstairs where our patrol division is, and I got the impression he was waiting for me to come into work. There were other people coming in and out of the room, but I don't recall who."
Colborn was asked if he opened the conversation with Petersen surrounding the Avery matter.
"No, he initiated the conversation by saying he had spoken with Lieutenant Lenk and he felt that it would be in the best interests of Lieutenant Lenk and myself and the sheriff's department, I would suppose, that if I was to give him a statement on the gist of our conversation or what we had discussed. And I asked for clarification on that, you know. And he goes, 'Well, what you discussed about a telephone call that you received while you were working in the jail. And I said 'OK.' And before I went out on patrol, I provided this statement."
In consideration of Exhibit 302, it seemed reasonable to conclude the plates were planted to connect Mr. Steven Avery to Ms. Teresa Halbach's vehicle in the event a battery wasn't obtained.
From Post Crescent:
Andy Colborn's role in Avery wrongful conviction: When Colborn worked in the county jail in 1995, he received a call from a detective who worked in Brown County who believed he had an inmate in the Green Bay jail, now known to be Gregory Allen, who committed a rape in Manitowoc County that someone else was in prison for. Colborn and his supervisors decided not to vigorously pursue the matter at the time.
Key moments from sworn testimony of Oct. 13, 2005: Colborn said he could not remember details of the phone call that could have spurred Avery's exoneration in 1995, rather than in September 2003. Other county employees suspected Colborn of conferring with then-Sheriff Tom Kocourek about the matter, which was never followed up by anyone at the sheriff's office.
"I'm not ruling out the possibility that I may have discussed it with someone else, but I can't specifically tell you names of people I may have mentioned this to."
Colborn testified his boss Lt. James Lenk was not present when Colborn met with Sheriff Ken Petersen the day after Avery's 2003 exoneration to discuss the phone call from eight years earlier that fell through the cracks.
"Sheriff Petersen was downstairs where our patrol division is, and I got the impression he was waiting for me to come into work. There were other people coming in and out of the room, but I don't recall who."
Colborn was asked if he opened the conversation with Petersen surrounding the Avery matter.
"No, he initiated the conversation by saying he had spoken with Lieutenant Lenk and he felt that it would be in the best interests of Lieutenant Lenk and myself and the sheriff's department, I would suppose, that if I was to give him a statement on the gist of our conversation or what we had discussed. And I asked for clarification on that, you know. And he goes, 'Well, what you discussed about a telephone call that you received while you were working in the jail. And I said 'OK.' And before I went out on patrol, I provided this statement."
