Terasa’s RAV was found on the Avery property on Nov 5, 2005. A warrant was obtained that same day. Avery’s trailer was entered three times on Nov 5 by multiple officers each time. On Nov 6, 2005, three officers from Manitowoc and one officer from Calumet County thoroughly searched Avery’s detached garage. The officers were Lenk, Colborn, Remiker and Kucharski. The search of this small garage began at 8:00 a.m. and was completed almost two hours later. During the pre trial Lenk testified that they searched the garage very thoroughly and believed they had seized anything of evidentiary value by the time they left. At the same hearing Remiker testified that the four officers searched the garage thoroughly for just shy of two hours and that they searched for as long as they needed.

 

Several shell casings were found on Nov 6, 2005, and the officers labelled the location of each, however not a single bullet was reported to have been found. Months later (March 2006) Dassey gave his “confession” to investigators. Recall that although Wiegert and Fassbender did their best Brendan never freely told them that Teresa had been shot in the head. In order to get what he wanted Wiegert was forced to ask a leading question to Brendan: “Who shot her in the head.” Brendan replied, “He did.” When asked why he didn’t just say that, Brendan answered, “Because I couldn’t think of it.” A day or two after this law enforcement went back to Avery’s garage to search once more. This time officers found the bullet fragment, sitting in plane site, somehow overlooked on Nov 6, 2005, despite that they were clearly looking for bullets.

 

Culhane would later report detecting Teresa’s DNA profile on the bullet, although as we know the test was contaminated with Culhane’s own DNA, suggesting Teresa’s DNA might have only been deposited on the bullet by Culhane handling personal items of Teresa’s before her examination. As a reminder, Culhane was only able to detect DNA on the bullet, not blood or even latent blood. Culhane indicated she could not see any bodily fluids and as she was only able to detect nucleated cells she was not able to say what the source of the DNA on the bullet was. It could be blood, it be cervical cells. Also, at some point in 2006 a microscopic examination was conducted on the bullet by the State’s ballistic expert, Mr. Newhouse. According the 2006 Newhouse worksheet no trace evidence was identified as being present on the damaged bullet. As far as I know the bullet was not treated with luminol to confirm the presence of blood or bleach by either the State or the defense.

 

Avery’s trial took place from Feb - Mar 2007. During the trial it was revealed that the .22 caliber rifle the State claimed was the murder weapon and was hanging above Avery's bed actually belonged to Johnson, the man who owned the trailer Avery was residing in. Amazingly when Buting called Johnson to the stand he freely admitted he was the owner of the weapon which the State claimed was used to murder Teresa. Johnson was very clear that it was not uncommon for him to be found shooting the weapon all over the Avery property, even at Avery’s detached garage.

 

The State ballistics expert (Newhouse) testified at the trial that he was able to determine the shell cases found on the Nov 6, 2005, and the bullet found on March 2, 2006 all came from the gun belonging to Johnson, which was hanging above Avery’s bed in Nov 2005. Buting argued that Newhouse was correct in identifying the shell casings as having come from Johnson's gun, but that it was improper of Newhouse to offer an opinion as to whether or not the damaged bullet came from any of the recovered shell casings or the weapon in question. In support of his position Buting criticized Kratz and Newhouse for not showing photos of his comparison of the bullet fragment and an exemplar bullet side-by-side. Buting argued the bullet was obviously too damaged to make any such determination. For the record, this is a non issue IMO. I would assume the bullet is most likely from that gun, however IMO even if we accept that the bullet came from that gun it still doesn’t change the many, many issues with the finding of / testing of the bullet. Zellner has demonstrated the bullet has wood particles embedded in it (but not bone) as well as miniscule amounts of (potential) red paint on it. This proves the State theory is false, as they specifically argued that the bullet with Teresa’s DNA on it was shot through her head, which would result in bone particles being embedded in the lead of the bullet. The presence of potential red paint, absence of bone and abundance of wood detected on the bullet fragment recovered from Avery’s garage is perhaps the strongest piece of new evidence we have suggesting planting may have occurred in 2006 by agents of the State.

 

Zellner’s expert (Palenik) examined the bullet fragment at MicroTrace Labs using Stereomicroscopy Digital Video Microscopy and Scanning Electron Microscopy and Energy Dispersive X-Ray Spectroscopy. Zellner argues the tests demonstrate that the damaged bullet (Item FL) was never shot through Teresa's skull, as the State claimed. Palenik (utilizing stereomicroscopy digital video microscopy) produced a detailed map of the bullet surface and the debris adhering to it. Using the digital images of the bullet surface as a guide, specific areas were examined in detail and analyzed to determine their elemental composition. Palenik says the approach he used is capable of detecting minute amounts of bone (calcium, phosphorous, oxygen).

 

Again, the State claimed the bullet found with Teresa’s DNA on it was shot through Teresa’s skull. However the results of Palenik’s tests contradict that claim, as he was not able to detect any bone particles via any of the above mentioned methods. Palenik discovered that in lieu of bone particles there were wood fragments embedded in the lead of the bullet. Some of the fragments observed are individual particles of wood. One particle appears to be “an agglomeration of woody fragments, possibly originating from a manufactured wood product such as chip or particle board.” Zellner informed that judge (that pursuant to the stipulation and order) the bullet was only microscopically examined in situ; no samples were collected from the bullet. However Zellner let the court know she was happy (if granted the authority) to have her expert isolate and analyze each of the particle types found “to identify the species or type of wood product” detected embedded in the bullet.

 

The bullet was also examined by a JEOL 7100FT field emission scanning electron microscope with a 50 mni2 Oxford SDD EDS detector (X-ray). The bullet was continually rotating as the EDS detector was functioning in order to increase the number of x-rays detected. No areas with elevated levels of calcium and phosphorous were detected, again indicating a complete absence of bone particles. Palenik opines: "there is no evidence to indicate that the bullet passed through bone.” He suggests an alternative hypothesis: “the trajectory of the fired bullet took it into a wooden object, possibly a manufactured wood product.” Based upon his findings Zellner sent her investigator to the Avery garage to review the area for possible sources of the particulate type of wood described above. The following possible sources of wood / paint were identified:

 

a. Particle board in the garage with apparent bullet holes.

b. Red painted surfaces including a ladder in the garage and a red painted ceiling.

 

Again, Zellner says that each of the above listed materials (wood, paint) could be identified more specifically with further testing, telling the Court the potential sources for the wood / paint recently collected from the Avery garage could be directly compared to materials on the bullet to determine if the particles of wood on the bullet were deposited by being shot through the bullet hole filled particle board recovered from Avery’s garage. Zellner would also be able to tell if the paint on the ladder / ceiling matches the elemental composition of the paint on the bullet.

 

The State never filed an official response to Zellner’s claim that the bullet was planted. I have never heard anyone provide an explanation for the absence of bone and abundance of wood particles on the bullet. Of course even setting the new evidence regarding the bullet aside we still have some old unanswered questions. First, why didn’t anyone (the State or the defense) use luminol on the bullet? It would have reacted ... unless there was no bleach or blood on the bullet, just DNA. Finally, I have always wondered how many murder bullets are found bloodless on the floor of a murder scene? Is it even possible to have a victim's DNA on a bullet but no trace of blood or bone on it from having traveled through the victim’s skull? Saying it's scientifically impossible doesn’t seem like too strong of a statement IMO. Again, even if the blood was cleaned from the bullet Luminol would reveal that if it was ever there. I don’t think this bullet was shot through Teresa’s skull.

 

I believe it is possible the bullet was shot through the garage particle board where it came to rest only to be found by LE at an unknown date and planted on March 2 after which it was collected and further tampered with by Culhane. The presence of wood on the bullet is incredibly damaging to the State’s case. It is physically impossible for that bullet to have been shot through Teresa’s skull at a trajectory that would have allowed the bullet to exit with enough speed to strike a wooden object with such force that wood particles would be embedded in the lead of the bullet. Even if this somehow miraculously happened, that would suggest wood and bone should be found - but as we know only wood was found embedded in the bullet, not bone, meaning this bullet was not shot through Teresa’s head as the State claimed.

 

The Reply

 

I thought it was pretty well established that the State claimed the bullet with Teresa’s DNA on it was shot through her head. First, the State's forensic anthropologist (Eisenberg) testified that the cause of Teresa's death was two gunshot wounds to her head. Eisenberg also testified (based on what, I don’t know) that the gunshots occurred "pre-burning." Kratz references Eisenberg’s opinion in his closing, also claiming that Teresa was killed by two gunshot wounds to the head (one to the left side and one to the back of her head) while she was lying down on the garage floor.

 

KK: Dr. Eisenberg was able to show you and tell you, through photographs, that the -- this particular bone piece, we wouldn't know it was right above the left ear, but this is a piece of the parietal bone that's right above the left ear, that shows the characteristic sign of an entrance bullet wound. And this particular defect that is shown, again, that we wouldn't know, is the occipital region of the skull, that Teresa was also shot in the back of the head with a .22 caliber gun. (Kratz closing - Pg. 128)

 

KK: Teresa Halbach is killed. She's laying down. She's shot twice, once in the left side of her head, once in the back of her head, or I guess I should more accurately say she's shot at least twice. Because two bullets were found, two entrance wounds were found to her head. We do have the 11 shell casings on the 6th that were recovered. How many times Mr. Avery actually shot this poor girl, you probably aren't going to be able to determine, but it's at least twice, and it's at least twice to the head. (Kratz closing - Pg. 98)

 

We know that Zellner obtained the opinion of Haag (world renowned ballistics expert who published, among other things, an article in the Association of Firearms and Toolmark Examiners (AFTE) Journal regarding the forensic value of bone particles recovered from bullets). Zellner also obtained the opinion of Palenik (world renowned trace expert). Palenik determined (via utilizing a 2016 scanning electron microscope) that the bullet which the State claimed was shot through Ms. Teresa’s skull was not shot through bone, refuting the State’s theory that the cause of death was two gunshot wounds to the head, as well as the State’s theory that the bullet found with Teresa’s DNA on it was the very bullet shot through her head.

 

Attorney Gahn examines State witness, Jentzen (Page 63)

 

Gahn: Now, tell the -- I mean, in your opinion, the cause of death here was one or two gunshot wounds?

Jentzen: Yes.

NG: To the head?

JJ: Correct.

NG: All right. Tell, the ladies and the gentlemen of the jury all of the information you have in this case that allows you to conclude that either of the two bullets here first struck skull bone while the victim was alive?

JJ: Okay. Could you repeat that question?

NG: Sure. I would like you to simply tell the ladies and gentlemen of the jury what information you have here that allows you to conclude that either of these gunshot wounds occurred while the victim was alive, that is, bullet struck bone, while that person was alive?

JJ: I don't specifically think that there's any one piece of information that would say that the person was alive, with a beating heart, or an intact brain. There's material and I was given information that there was a spent bullet recovered at the scene that contained the blood specimens of the decedent. And that would be indicative to me that the bullet had passed through the brain at a time.

 

There a couple things to point out here. First, above Jentzen seemed confident the cause of death was two gunshot wounds to the head. However when asked to provide what information he had to support his opinion that Teresa was alive when shot in the head he backtracks, saying “I don't specifically think that there's any one piece of information that would say that the person was alive, with a beating heart...” If that is true, how was Jentzen able to determine the cause of death was two gunshots to the head? This is reminiscent of Eisenberg, who testified that Teresa was killed due to homicidal violence, but then later admitted she too could not tell whether or not the gunshots occurred peri or post-mortem.

 

Also notice that Jetzen erroneously states that blood specimen was found on the bullet, and then asserts the bullet likely passed through Teresa’s brain at one point. Gahn corrects Jentzen’s assertion that blood was found on the bullet, however he doesn’t dispute Jentzen’s claim that the bullet in question was shot through Teresa’s brain. Indeed Gahn seems intent on eliciting testimony from Jentzen demonstrating that the bullet did indeed pass through bone - Teresa’s skull.

 

NG: I, at least, recall no testimony that Teresa Halbach's blood was found on a bullet fragment, but the jury will decide in the end, that. And in a sense it doesn't matter. Is there any way to distinguish whether the bullet hole you saw, either one, came from a gunshot that was fired into the head of an intact corpse, or from a gunshot that was fired into the head of a living person?

JJ: I don't think I could make a definitive determination based on whether the individual was in a peri-mortem time frame or whether the individual was skeletonized. It would be my opinion that the wounds showed an intact, robust bone that is consistent with what I would say non-skeletonized material, meaning that these look typically like an entrance wound through a bone of a person who is not a skeleton. And the way -- the reason I described that and I would make that -- that clarity is that in a skeletonized bone, where you have got dried bone material, as the bullet passes through it, I would suspect that there would be a different kind of fracturing and that it wouldn't get the same type of gunshot wound, particularly in the parietal bone fragment that I can see.

 

As we can see Jentzen went on to say he could only determine the bullet was shot through bone that had still not been skeletonised, meaning the bones were not in the final stages of decomposition when the bullet entered and exited the skull. Jentzen suggests the bullet and bullet holes in the skull fragments both suggest the bullet struck solid bone coated in flesh and muscle, not brittle dry bone. Clearly Gahn was determined to use Jentzen’s testimony to demonstrate the bullet found with Teresa’s DNA on it had been shot into (and out of) Teresa’s skull. Zellner has proven (via her expert’s testing of the four exemplar bullets) that bone should have been detected on the bullet if he was actually shot through Teresa’s skull as the State claimed. While bone was not found, wood was found on the bullet along with small amounts of potential red paint, which seems to support Zellner’s theory that the bullet might have come from Johnson firing the .22 towards a piece of particle board on the garage where it laid in wait, covered in particles of wood and miniscule amounts of paint, but not blood or bone. Somehow Teresa’s DNA found its way onto that bullet, and it wasn’t from being shot through Teresa’s head. Jentzen erroneously stated he believed the bullet had blood on it and that it passed through Teresa's brain. Again, Gahn was happy to correct Jentzen by pointing out no blood was detected, however Gahn doesn't reject the idea that the bullet passed through Teresa's skull, indeed he suggests it himself. Gahn asks Jentzen if he can determine whether the bone was shot through the skull of a living person or the skull of a dead person. This indicates Gahn had accepted the theory that item FL was shot through Teresa's skull, the only unknown was whether the shot was fired into her skull before or after her death, but it is undisputed that the State claimed item FL had been shot into bone.