Skip to content
Steven Avery & Brendan Dassey— Case Archive
Steven Averytrial-daytrial-dayThomas J. FallonKenneth R. KratzJerome F. ButingDean A. StrangRodney PevytoeMark WiegertMichael RiddleMichael Daniel HalbachAnthony Joseph ZimmermandirectcrossredirectrecrossDay 18 - March 7, 2007Pevytoe testified about burn pit material and limits on what he could infer from it. Riddle addressed RAV4 fingerprints; Zimmerman and Michael Halbach addressed voicemail records and access. Wiegert testified about the investigation and a blood vial retrieved from a court file, after which the State said it intended to rest subject to exhibit matters.
← Day 17Steven AveryDay 19 →

Day 18 - March 7, 2007

Burn Pit Findings, Fingerprint and Voicemail Testimony, and Wiegert's Cross-Examination

Judge Patrick L. Willis
17Proceedings
7Pages
5Witnesses
2,623Lines
Day 18 of 27
Appearing:
Thomas J. Fallon Kenneth R. Kratz Jerome F. Buting Dean A. Strang Rodney Pevytoe Mark Wiegert Michael Riddle Michael Daniel Halbach Anthony Joseph Zimmerman

Pevytoe testified about burn pit material and limits on what he could infer from it. Riddle addressed RAV4 fingerprints; Zimmerman and Michael Halbach addressed voicemail records and access. Wiegert testified about the investigation and a blood vial retrieved from a court file, after which the State said it intended to rest subject to exhibit matters.

Full day summary

Special Agent Rodney Pevytoe described suspected bone and tooth fragments recovered from burn pit material, along with bone fragments entangled in wire he associated with burned tires. On cross-examination, he said the main mass of pit material had been removed before he arrived, material on elevated ground first thought to be bone proved to be burned insulation, and he could not determine how the bone and wire came together or when either burned. Crime-lab examiner Michael Riddle said apparent hand marks on the RAV4 wheel cover lacked usable ridge detail. Prints from approximately eight vehicle locations did not match Steven Avery's standard, and Riddle had no fingerprint standard from Teresa Halbach. The court declined to admit or display an anonymous letter through Riddle, allowing only limited identification of it with his report. Cingular engineer Anthony Zimmerman said the records showed no activity from Halbach's mobile phone after about 2:41 p.m. on October 31, but did not rule out voicemail access from another phone. He explained that the voicemail report did not show when messages were heard or saved. His view that a message would have had to be removed depended on someone having heard a mailbox-full recording on November 3. Michael Daniel Halbach said he accessed his sister's voicemail that day, believed he heard at least part of 18 new messages, and did not believe he erased any. Investigator Mark Wiegert described retrieving a blood vial from a court file under a court order and turning it over to the FBI. On cross-examination, he addressed the November property search and said he had not thought to look for blood in a court file. The State said it intended to rest, subject to remaining exhibit matters.

1. Rodney Pevytoe — Direct/Cross/Redirect/Recross

Special Agent Rodney Pevytoe described suspected bone in burn-pit debris and burned tire wire. Questioned about those findings, he said the pit had been partly cleared before he arrived and he could not determine how the bone entered the wire or when either burned.

→
Procedural
Session Opening and Counsel Appearances
12 lines
Direct
Rodney Pevytoe — Direct Rodney Pevytoe Thomas J. Fallon
296 lines

Pevytoe described burn pit recoveries, comparisons with barrel contents, and examinations of other possible burn sites.

Cross
Rodney Pevytoe — Cross Rodney Pevytoe Dean A. Strang
566 lines

Pevytoe described limits on the burn-site recovery, the origin and timing of burned material, and his smelter documentation.

Redirect
Rodney Pevytoe — Redirect Rodney Pevytoe Thomas J. Fallon
41 lines

Pevytoe clarified the burn-pit excavation sequence and discussed possible tire-fire explanations while acknowledging uncertainty about black oil found in jugs.

Recross
Rodney Pevytoe — Recross Rodney Pevytoe Dean A. Strang
23 lines

Pevytoe clarified how tires can intensify a fire and the source and limits of his knowledge.

Highlights

Rodney Pevytoe — Directtestimony highlightPevytoe described re-examining previously removed burn pit material and finding suspected bone fragments, a possible tooth fragment, and material he believed was charred muscle tissue; he handed recovered items to Deputy Riemer.Rodney Pevytoe — Cross“But in the reality of it, I don't think we found any bone fragmentation in the elevated area when it really came down to it.”— Rodney PevytoePevytoe distinguished an initial visual impression from his conclusion after closer examination.Rodney Pevytoe — CrossadmissionPevytoe said earlier workers had removed the main mass of material from the burn pit before he reached the scene, so he could not photograph its original condition.Rodney Pevytoe — CrossadmissionPevytoe accepted several possible explanations for how suspected bone became embedded in tire wire and said he could not select one or date the burning of either material.

2. Michael Riddle — Direct/Cross (Part 1)

Crime-lab examiner Michael Riddle testified about fingerprint examinations of the RAV4 and other items on Day 18, then answered questions about items he had not been given to examine.

→
Direct
Michael Riddle — Direct Michael Riddle Thomas J. Fallon
275 lines

Riddle described RAV4 fingerprint processing, a qualified headboard identification, and the lack of identifiable prints from the vehicle and blood-vial evidence.

Cross
Michael Riddle — Cross Michael Riddle Jerome F. Buting
68 lines

Riddle said he did not receive the rifle, cartridges or shell cases, or Toyota key for fingerprint examination, then identified a copy of his report on a letter.

Highlights

Michael Riddle — Directtestimony highlightRiddle reported no identifications from eight suitable print areas on the RAV4 or from the listed granola wrapper, water bottles, and compact disc case.Michael Riddle — Direct“There was some very faint ridge detail, but nothing suitable for comparison was developed.”— Michael RiddleDefines the limit of Riddle’s blood-vial examination.

3. Hearing on Objections to Anonymous Letter

The court declined to admit or display an anonymous letter through the fingerprint expert, but allowed the defense to identify it in connection with the expert's December 5th report.

→
Procedural
Hearing on Objections to Anonymous Letter
54 lines

The court barred display or admission of an anonymous letter through the fingerprint expert but allowed limited questioning identifying the letter and its examination timing.

Highlights

Hearing on Objections to Anonymous LetterrulingThe court distinguished prior questioning about the letter as a lead from admitting its contents for their truth, and declined to admit or display it through the fingerprint expert.

4. Michael Riddle — Cross/Redirect/Recross (Part 2)

Michael Riddle testified that usable RAV4 fingerprints did not match Steven Avery's standard. Further questioning addressed missing comparison standards and whether DNA swabbing affected the prospects for fingerprint examination.

→
Cross
Michael Riddle — Cross-Examination Resumed Michael Riddle Jerome F. Buting
146 lines

Riddle described usable RAV4 prints that did not match Avery, unmade comparisons with two officers' standards, and the expected presence of Avery's print on a headboard.

Redirect
Michael Riddle — Redirect Michael Riddle Thomas J. Fallon
15 lines

Riddle explained the need for a known fingerprint standard and the effect of DNA swabbing on print recovery.

Recross
Michael Riddle — Recross Michael Riddle Jerome F. Buting
61 lines

Riddle said unswabbed rifle areas might have been suitable for fingerprint examination; the court admitted Exhibits 497 and 498.

Highlights

Michael Riddle — Cross-Examination ResumedadmissionRiddle describes approximately eight locations with usable RAV4 prints and confirms that the prints did not match Steven Avery's standard. He says he had not compared them with standards from Lieutenant James Lenk or Sergeant Andrew Colborn.

5. Anthony Joseph Zimmerman — Direct/Cross

Cingular engineer Anthony Joseph Zimmerman explained Halbach’s phone and voicemail records, including the limits of what the voicemail report showed about messages being heard, saved, or erased.

→
Direct
Anthony Joseph Zimmerman — Direct Anthony Joseph Zimmerman Kenneth R. Kratz
103 lines

Zimmerman explained the limits of Halbach's cellphone and voicemail records, including message timing and possible remote access.

Cross
Anthony Joseph Zimmerman — Cross Anthony Joseph Zimmerman Jerome F. Buting
112 lines

Zimmerman clarified voicemail status labels and the report’s limits on timing and possible message removal.

Highlights

Anthony Joseph Zimmerman — Directtestimony highlightAfter an initial answer that he could not determine whether there was account activity, Zimmerman clarified that there was no activity from Halbach's mobile phone after about 2:41 p.m. on October 31.Anthony Joseph Zimmerman — Direct“Not from the mobile itself, no, there was no activity.”— Anthony Joseph ZimmermanNarrows the activity finding to Halbach's mobile phone rather than all possible mailbox access.Anthony Joseph Zimmerman — Directtestimony highlightZimmerman explained that the report's “received” timestamp records when a voicemail entered the mailbox, not when someone retrieved it; he said the report contains no retrieval date or time.Anthony Joseph Zimmerman — Crosstestimony highlightZimmerman said the listed messages appeared insufficient to fill the mailbox. If someone heard a mailbox-full recording on November 3, he said at least one message would have had to be removed before a later message shown on the report was received, but the report could not identify when a removal occurred.Anthony Joseph Zimmerman — Cross“Well, if somebody heard that recording, that the mailbox was full, on November 3rd, then I would say, yes, at least one or more messages had to have been removed”— Anthony Joseph ZimmermanStates the conditional basis for his opinion about a possible removed message.

6. Michael Daniel Halbach — Direct/Cross (Recall)

Michael Daniel Halbach described reviewing Teresa's voicemail and answered questions about whether he erased any messages.

→
Direct
Michael Daniel Halbach — Direct Michael Daniel Halbach Kenneth R. Kratz
42 lines

Michael Halbach described accessing Teresa's voicemail, hearing an automated count of 18 new messages, and saving about half of them.

Cross
Michael Daniel Halbach — Cross Michael Daniel Halbach Jerome F. Buting
30 lines

Halbach said he did not believe he erased voicemail messages; the parties then recorded agreements about telephone testimony and witness order.

Highlights

Michael Daniel Halbach — Directtestimony highlightHalbach said he accessed Teresa's voicemail on November 3 after his mother reported that its inbox was full. He guessed the password using her birthday.Michael Daniel Halbach — Cross“I don't believe I erased any messages.”— Michael Daniel HalbachHalbach's qualified answer addresses whether he deleted voicemail messages while reviewing them.

7. Mark Wiegert — Direct/Cross

Mark Wiegert testified about the missing-person investigation and a blood vial later sent to the FBI. Cross-examination addressed searches, recovered evidence, and why he had not looked for blood in a court file.

→
Direct
Mark Wiegert — Direct Mark Wiegert Kenneth R. Kratz
118 lines

Wiegert described the blood-vial inquiry and FBI transfer; the court limited secondhand testimony and barred an access question.

Cross
Mark Wiegert — Cross Mark Wiegert Dean A. Strang
661 lines

Wiegert addressed investigative leads, two Avery-property searches, and the blood vial; the State then announced it was resting subject to exhibit matters.

Highlights

Mark Wiegert — Directevidence eventWiegert described retrieving the vial under a court order, transporting it to the Calumet County Sheriff's Department, and sealing it in new packaging.Mark Wiegert — Crossprocedural actionThe State said it intended to rest subject to offering already-marked exhibits and court rulings on them; the defense did not object to that procedure.
← Day 17Steven AveryDay 19 →