6.Michael Daniel Halbach — Direct/Cross (Recall)
72 linesMR. KRATZ: We would recall Mike Halbach to the stand, your Honor.
MICHAEL DANIEL HALBACH, called as a witness herein, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
COURT CLERK: Please be seated. Please state your name and spell your last name for the record. Michael Daniel Halbach, H-a-l-b-a-c-h.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY ATTORNEY KRATZ:
MR. KRATZ: And, Mike, please, remind the jurors how it is that you know Teresa Halbach?
MICHAEL DANIEL HALBACH: Teresa is my sister.
MR. KRATZ: And how are you employed, Mr. Halbach?
MICHAEL DANIEL HALBACH: I work for the Green Bay Packers, in the Video Department as a video assistant.
MR. KRATZ: As a video assistant with the Green Bay Packers, are you -- or have you been provided with a cellphone from the Green Bay Packers?
MICHAEL DANIEL HALBACH: Yes, I have.
MR. KRATZ: Mike, upon learning of your sister's disappearance, or that she was missing, did you take any steps to try to ascertain where she was, including trying to access her voice mail messages?
MICHAEL DANIEL HALBACH: Yes, I did.
MR. KRATZ: When did you do that, Mike?
MICHAEL DANIEL HALBACH: My mom had called me that Thursday, November 3rd, that afternoon, about Teresa, and wondering if I knew where she was. And I didn't. So I had a feeling that I might know her voice mail password, because my mom had said that she had tried calling and Teresa's in box was full.
So I guess what I was interested in was, why it was full, or when the first new message was from, was received in her in box. And so, you know, that's why I did call her voice mail.
MR. KRATZ: And you said that you had called that on the 3rd of November?
MICHAEL DANIEL HALBACH: That's correct.
MR. KRATZ: Do you recall making that call, Mike?
MR. KRATZ: And were you able to accurately guess her password?
MICHAEL DANIEL HALBACH: Yes, it wasn't very difficult.
MR. KRATZ: Okay. How did you do that?
MICHAEL DANIEL HALBACH: I had a feeling what it was, because of -- from previous testimony, I said I did some website design for her and her password for that included her birthday, the month and day. And that was successful in getting into her voice mail.
MR. KRATZ: She used her birth date as her password?
MR. KRATZ: Mike, when you called your sister's voice mail on the 3rd of November, do you recall what message you first got? Now, I don't want to talk about the messages that -- that were retrieved, but the automated message; do you remember what that said?
MICHAEL DANIEL HALBACH: It just told me how many new voice mail messages there were.
MR. KRATZ: Do you have a recollection of how many there were?
MICHAEL DANIEL HALBACH: I know that there were 18.
MR. KRATZ: So some automated voice said 18 new messages, or something like that?
MICHAEL DANIEL HALBACH: Correct.
MR. KRATZ: Did you listen to at least some of those messages that day?
MICHAEL DANIEL HALBACH: I did.
MR. KRATZ: Did you listen to all of them?
MICHAEL DANIEL HALBACH: I believe that I did.
MR. KRATZ: Okay. Did you save some of them, or save all of them, or skip them, or tell the jury what you did?
MICHAEL DANIEL HALBACH: Like I said, what was important to me was, I knew that the first new voice mail message was from Monday afternoon some time. So after hearing that I was, you know, extremely worried just because she checks her voice mail, you know, a number of times every day. You know, she carries her cellphone with her all the time. So that -- I mean, I was worried about that. So then I listened to the first few messages, or I ended up listening to all the messages, but as I listened to the first half or so, I would save them when I was done with them. And then we started -- or I started to get into messages that were, you know, later in the week, Tuesday night, Wednesday. And at that point the messages just, you know, didn't tell me anything about where Teresa was, just -- it was a lot of stuff about work and friends calling about, you know, what they were going to do that weekend. So I did begin to skip them. But, yeah, I do believe I listened to at least parts of all 18 messages. But I did not save -- I must have saved half of them.
MR. KRATZ: And the verification that it was you, in fact, on the 3rd of November, that afternoon, that accessed her voice mail; were you able to verify that through the Green Bay Packers and through their telephone records that could verify or remind you that that was the time and date that you accessed that voice mail?
MICHAEL DANIEL HALBACH: I was able to, yes.
MR. KRATZ: All right.
MR. KRATZ: For this issue, that's all I have of this witness, Judge. Thank you.
THE COURT: Any cross?
MR. BUTING: Very brief, Judge.
THE COURT: Go ahead.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ATTORNEY BUTING:
MR. BUTING: Mr. Halbach, did you -- as you listened to these messages, you said you saved some and didn't save the rest. You just kind of let them play and skip through, hear a little bit and skip through it; is that your recollection?
MICHAEL DANIEL HALBACH: Right.
MR. BUTING: Did you erase any of the messages?
MICHAEL DANIEL HALBACH: I don't believe I erased any messages.
MR. BUTING: All right. Thank you.
THE COURT: Very well, you are excused. All right. Members of the jury, we'll take our afternoon break at this time. I will remind you, again, not to discuss the case. And we'll see you when the break is over.
(Jury not present.)
THE COURT: Counsel, we'll see you in 15 minutes then.
MR. BUTING: Thank you, Judge.
(Recess taken.)
(Jury not present.)
THE COURT: At this time we're back on the record, outside the presence of the jury. Counsel, is the State ready to call another witness?
MR. KRATZ: I am, Judge. I wanted to place one thing on the record. In criminal cases, Judge, it is permissible for testimony to be taken by telephone. It does require, however, the acquiescence of the defense. And the defendant, I understood from Mr. Strang, prior to calling Mr. Zimmerman, that, in fact, that procedure, for the limited purpose of Mr. Zimmerman, was agreed to. I simply wanted to make a record of that before the close of this case.
THE COURT: All right. Mr. Strang.
MR. STRANG: Yes, Mr. Kratz is exactly right. We discussed this before Mr. Zimmerman testified. Given the nature of this witness, the purpose of his testimony, the manner in which his testimony was taken by telephone, we think adequately satisfies both state and federal constitutional rights to confrontation. We agreed to the procedure, acquiesced in that, and have no objection to it as it happened, as to that witness, of course.
THE COURT: All right. And I should indicate, the Court had been told in chambers earlier that the parties had the agreement. I probably should have put something on the record before we had the witness testify, but the -- counsel let me know before the witness did testify that they would be putting something on the record.
MR. STRANG: Right. It was discussed before the witness testified.
MR. KRATZ: And the last matter that I had for the record, Judge, yesterday, so that Mr. LeBeau could find his way back to Virginia, or do his travels, rather than calling Investigator Wiegert, who would have packaged, and part of his testimony would have included the packaging of the vial of blood, which of course would have more appropriately, or at least chronologically, had been taken yesterday, the defense had agreed to taking Dr. LeBeau out of order to accommodate that schedule. I don't think that we need to tell the jury that Investigator Wiegert, who is our next witness, is taken out of order. I'm simply explaining that for the jury that that was an agreement between ourselves and Mr. Strang and Mr. Buting.
THE COURT: Explaining it for the Court?
MR. KRATZ: I'm sorry?
THE COURT: You said you were explaining it for the jury, you don't intend to tell the jury.
MR. KRATZ: I don't, Judge, I wanted to place that on the record because this is a witness who would normally have been called yesterday, but with the acquiescence, once again, and approval of Mr. Strang, we had agreed to call Mr. Wiegert today and we intend to do that next.
THE COURT: Mr. Strang.
MR. STRANG: For the convenience of Mr. LeBeau and for the State, Mr. Buting and I had agreed yesterday that Mr. Wiegert could be taken out of order, just as is happening. There is no objection at all to it and there is no need for the jury to be party to that agreement.
THE COURT: Very well. In terms of scheduling, I know, again, from chambers, and the Court has been meeting with the attorneys regularly before we get started just to have some idea about what the testimony for the day will be. Does the defense intend to cross-examine Mr. Wiegert just on the transmittal issue, or more broadly than that, I know there was some discussion that he might be called as part of the defense case?
MR. STRANG: No. I think, at least the anticipation is, that we will just cover on cross-examination here all that we have. I expect to be able to finish that comfortably by 4:30, or quite possibly before 4:30. And, you know, it could happen that we recall him in the defense case, but I'm not anticipating that at the moment.
THE COURT: Very well. We'll bring the jury out at this time.
(Jury present.)
THE COURT: You may be seated. Mr. Kratz, at this time you may call your next witness.