Rav4

[Sunkist]

So we have confirmation that they had a key made. It's not clear when the key was made, but they had it as of 11/11/05.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/CASO-Investigative-Report.pdf#page=230



I'm still a bit confused though, because on a later date, 11/16/05, Dedering makes an inquiry with Toyota about the key and the key code, where it's located, etc. There is no indication about why he was asking these questions, and it seems that at this time they would have already had a key copy, and actually had the RAV4 key as well.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/CASO-Investigative-Report.pdf#page=288

Still reading.... LOL

Just jumping in here. I read that today, also, and my impression was they were checking on the odds another RAV4 key would fit Teresa's vehicle. I guess in case SA tried to claim the found key was for a different RAV4.

 

[missy1974]

Just jumping in here. I read that today, also, and my impression was they were checking on the odds another RAV4 key would fit Teresa's vehicle. I guess in case SA tried to claim the found key was for a different RAV4.

Could be! I'm finding that so many of these reports seem to be so random, and no explanation and of course, there is no logical sequence to this document, it's all over the place!

I wonder when they had the key made still, because we know the drivers side door was open mid-morning on the Sunday.

 

[ZOOL]

Could be! I'm finding that so many of these reports seem to be so random, and no explanation and of course, there is no logical sequence to this document, it's all over the place!

I wonder when they had the key made still, because we know the drivers side door was open mid-morning on the Sunday.

I'm speculating here that the moment they discovered the doors locked someone contacted the nearest Toyota dealership and was told the various steps for a quick copy. For example, Toyota provides a small key identification plate with the proper stamped in code along with its set of keys to an owner when a car is purchased. Since it is doubtful that TH had that, the next step would be as described in the CASO pdf-file. By the time, the rav4 was in transit to WIC, it is probable that a simple telephone call to a Madison Toyota dealership had a copy of the required key being made and on its way to the crime lab.

In a murder investigation, with exigent circumstances, when investigators need something quickly, it's hard to hold them back. :laughing:

 

[missy1974]

I'm speculating here that the moment they discovered the doors locked someone contacted the nearest Toyota dealership and was told the various steps for a quick copy. For example, Toyota provides a small key identification plate with the proper stamped in code along with its set of keys to an owner when a car is purchased. Since it is doubtful that TH had that, the next step would be as described in the CASO pdf-file. By the time, the rav4 was in transit to WIC, it is probable that a simple telephone call to a Madison Toyota dealership had a copy of the required key being made and on its way to the crime lab.

In a murder investigation, with exigent circumstances, when investigators need something quickly, it's hard to hold them back. :laughing:

I don't disagree with you Zool. But I would expect to see some sort of report about it, wouldn't you? Someone had to call about getting the key, someone had to pick up the key, or receive the key, someone had to physically unlock the door. Maybe it was Colborn and the report just isn't done yet :giggle:

Dedering made the inquiry with Toyota on the 16th, days after it was opened, why not inquire with the Toyota dealership that made the key for them then?

 

[ZOOL]

page 427
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/CASO-Investigative-Report.pdf

• [...]In the driver's front seat YS an envelope containing bolts for the drive shaft of the motor vehicle, bearing Property Tag #8239.

Several times by page427 MTOS has mentioned the four drive shaft bolts. But I have never seen any indication anywhere as to why the rav4's drive shaft was disconnected, damaged, or even missing. In order for the rav4 to have been placed on the southeast ridge someone either drove it there, or a wrecker (or flatbed hauler) moved it there. But no one has mentioned anything about this.

Why not? If TH had suddenly hit something on the afternoon of 10/31/05 and the rav4 was inoperable due to frontend damage, it is conceivable that she would have made phone contact with someone familiar with her need for road assistance.

On the other hand, it is also conceivable that MTSO disconnected the drive shaft to defeat a would-be-thief from removing the rav4 from secure storage -- although I find THAT belief absurd.

 

[missy1974]

Several times by page427 MTOS has mentioned the four drive shaft bolts. But I have never seen any indication anywhere as to why the rav4's drive shaft was disconnected, damaged, or even missing. In order for the rav4 to have been placed on the southeast ridge someone either drove it there, or a wrecker (or flatbed hauler) moved it there. But no one has mentioned anything about this.

Why not? If TH had suddenly hit something on the afternoon of 10/31/05 and the rav4 was inoperable due to frontend damage, it is conceivable that she would have made phone contact with someone familiar with her need for road assistance.

On the other hand, it is also conceivable that MTSO disconnected the drive shaft to defeat a would-be-thief from removing the rav4 from secure storage -- although I find THAT belief absurd.

I will look later, but didn't they disconnect the drive shaft to tow the vehicle down the hill to the truck to transport it to the crime lab? It could be that those bolts were put in there after the fact and some dumba$$ put them in the RAV4 (I'd like to know when, considering the vehicle was locked when it got the crime lab).... and then entered them into evidence, when maybe they shouldn't have been? Or maybe they should have been.

 

[missy1974]

[video=youtube;j92xU4r_w10]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j92xU4r_w10[/video]

Thought I would share this in this thread since it's a great overview of the RAV4.... it seems very similar to TH's, only difference I see is that it's a manual and not automatic like TH's. So her RAV4 had a middle console instead of the stick shift between the 2 front seats I think.

 

[missy1974]

BCA ~ I was looking at lab reports to see if I could find anything about those broken glasses (which I didn't lol) But I came across another report about the blood in the RAV4 and noticed something... under the Conclusion, it said: the contact/transfer stains observed underneath both ends of the rear seat and located just below the seat levers of the RAV4 are consistent with a transfer ....

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Steven-Avery-Lab-Report.pdf

So I thought huh... maybe the seat lever is wrong in that video I posted, maybe wrong year of vehicle or something.... so I found the manual again and nope... the lever is up on the seat like in the video according the manual.

http://www.manuals365.com/swf/toyota/toyota_rav4_owners_manual_1999.html?page=34#index


Also... I'm a bit confused what it means by "both ends of the rear seat" *sigh* Now I would really like to know if those seat levers were tested... but not that I could find in the reports (imagine that!) Now I see why Zellner would buy a RAV4 LOL

I haven't looked at these is quite awhile and it only stood out to me because it was mentioned in the last few days, it's interesting to go back and read these now lol

 

[ZOOL]

BCA ~ I was looking at lab reports to see if I could find anything about those broken glasses (which I didn't lol) But I came across another report about the blood in the RAV4 and noticed something... under the Conclusion, it said: the contact/transfer stains observed underneath both ends of the rear seat and located just below the seat levers of the RAV4 are consistent with a transfer .... I'm a bit confused what it means by "both ends of the rear seat" *sigh* Now I would really like to know if those seat levers were tested... but not that I could find in the reports (imagine that!) Now I see why Zellner would buy a RAV4 LOL

I haven't looked at these is quite awhile and it only stood out to me because it was mentioned in the last few days, it's interesting to go back and read these now lol

Both "ends of the rear seat" could mean the "right and left SIDES of the seat". I have a 2010 FJ Cruiser and the up/down levers for the seat-backs are located on the upper corners of the backs. In other words, in your video when the hand pulls on the lever, the person is releasing the seat-back from the lower-section (different than the FJ). Then, in your comment when you relay " located just below the seat levers", this could mean the underneath corners of the back of the seat when viewed from the back of the Rav4 looking in.

Why not ask a Toyota Service Manager? Take the investigator's written comment to him. He ought to be able to explain the exact location of the transfer marks.

 

[missy1974]

Zool... I guess I should have been more clear. I am confused by "both ends of the rear seat" because blood was only found in one spot there.

I'm not going to Toyota... they would think I was crazy! hahaha Bad enough I had hubby take pics of vials when he went for blood work and ask about vials LOL

 

[BigCityAccountant]

Both "ends of the rear seat" could mean the "right and left SIDES of the seat". I have a 2010 FJ Cruiser and the up/down levers for the seat-backs are located on the upper corners of the backs. In other words, in your video when the hand pulls on the lever, the person is releasing the seat-back from the lower-section (different than the FJ). Then, in your comment when you relay " located just below the seat levers", this could mean the underneath corners of the back of the seat when viewed from the back of the Rav4 looking in.

Why not ask a Toyota Service Manager? Take the investigator's written comment to him. He ought to be able to explain the exact location of the transfer marks.

I have to take my car in for service soon...Although I think they would think I was crazy asking a question like that...LOL

My take on it is that when you pull the lever,(The seat falls forward) and you have to put a hand or something to slow the motion of the seat coming forward. So I read that as in between the two seat cushions, the upper and lower. Both ends would refer to the left side of the seat cushion and the right side. (I'm looking at it as separate seat cushion butting up next to the center seat cushion) I know the 4-Runners I've owned have had separate seats in the back( I'm not a car person--but--I think they call them bucket seats) --unlike the seat they burned which was 1 long seat.

 

[missy1974]

I have to take my car in for service soon...Although I think they would think I was crazy asking a question like that...LOL

My take on it is that when you pull the lever,(The seat falls forward) and you have to put a hand or something to slow the motion of the seat coming forward. So I read that as in between the two seat cushions, the upper and lower. Both ends would refer to the left side of the seat cushion and the right side. (I'm looking at it as separate seat cushion butting up next to the center seat cushion) I know the 4-Runners I've owned have had separate seats in the back( I'm not a car person--but--I think they call them bucket seats) --unlike the seat they burned which was 1 long seat.

I agree about having to "slow the motion" or whatever, I remember when we first got the pics of the blood, I actually went out to my truck to see how easy or awkward it was to use my right hand on the lever of the rear passenger seat LOL It was doable, but it was awkward. Now knowing that there is a lever/string that needs to be pulled up on the back of the seat first, I just can't imagine using my left hand to pull that on the passenger side (on the drivers side, no problem lol)

Understanding the motions involved or needed to get that seat down and in the position it was, and the light fixture under it.... I do not understand how more blood was not found, if we are assuming it was the cut that we have all seen, it was on his right hand. The drip on that door frame has always been odd to me too (if it came from his right hand), but that's JMO lol That and the lack of blood in other places I would expect to see, whether smudges, trace dna, something (but then again.... what wasn't tested?)

As a visual... this is the blood stain/drip in the rear passenger area.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

BCA ~ I was looking at lab reports to see if I could find anything about those broken glasses (which I didn't lol) But I came across another report about the blood in the RAV4 and noticed something... under the Conclusion, it said: the contact/transfer stains observed underneath both ends of the rear seat and located just below the seat levers of the RAV4 are consistent with a transfer ....

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Steven-Avery-Lab-Report.pdf

So I thought huh... maybe the seat lever is wrong in that video I posted, maybe wrong year of vehicle or something.... so I found the manual again and nope... the lever is up on the seat like in the video according the manual.

http://www.manuals365.com/swf/toyota/toyota_rav4_owners_manual_1999.html?page=34#index


Also... I'm a bit confused what it means by "both ends of the rear seat" *sigh* Now I would really like to know if those seat levers were tested... but not that I could find in the reports (imagine that!) Now I see why Zellner would buy a RAV4 LOL

I haven't looked at these is quite awhile and it only stood out to me because it was mentioned in the last few days, it's interesting to go back and read these now lol

I think what they are referring to is where I circled. But just under where you pull the lever for the seat. On both ends of the vehicle. But contact/transfer stains don't mean drips, correct? So it would not be dripping from a hand/finger. It would have to be actually touching correct?

 

[missy1974]

But there was no blood found there BCA.

6 spots with blood attributed to SA found in the RAV4. 1. The dash 2. The CD case. 3 and 4 I believe were spots on the carpet.... 5 and 6 are the rear passenger door area. I am heading to bed but will double check that tomorrow, don't feel like hunting them down lol I do remember that it took awhile before to figure out where they all were.

 

[SoBeCzar]

Has anyone saw these youtube videos where a shows how the Rav 4 evidence photos has been photo shopped? It seems if it was photo shopped then the Rav 4 found on the property was not actually Teresa's Rav 4. I'm still withholding judgement but this guy makes some compelling points. He has 4 of these videos about 3 of the photos of the car.

[video=youtube;PVOaLwf2Ka4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVOaLwf2Ka4[/video]

 

[missy1974]

BCA? anyone? have we noticed this before...

exhibit 307


exhibit 135


There appears to be a tear in the tire cover in the lab photo, but not the photo from the scene. I don't recall it being brought up before, but then again, it's been a long time and I maybe just don't remember :thinking:

 

[BigCityAccountant]

BCA? anyone? have we noticed this before...

exhibit 307

exhibit 135

There appears to be a tear in the tire cover in the lab photo, but not the photo from the scene. I don't recall it being brought up before, but then again, it's been a long time and I maybe just don't remember :thinking:

Haven't heard it mentioned before now...I will see what I can find...

 

[BigCityAccountant]

BCA? anyone? have we noticed this before...

exhibit 307

exhibit 135

There appears to be a tear in the tire cover in the lab photo, but not the photo from the scene. I don't recall it being brought up before, but then again, it's been a long time and I maybe just don't remember :thinking:

It definitely does have a tear in it in Exhibit 307~~and it doesn't appear in the Exhibit 135. However, I don't make much of it~~because I suspect they damaged it when they transported the vehicle.

 

[missy1974]

I thought it was odd that we hadn't noticed it before! I agree, it was probably damaged somehow in transport, although, I'm not sure how and I didn't see anything documented about it. BUT, we don't have all the reports, specifically from the State lab/investigators.

I was trying to find the pictures of the back seat that had the "blue bag" with unknown contents (from motion exhibit, Fassbenders report). I know I saw it somewhere, but I couldn't find it, will keep looking ;-)

ETA: I found the picture I was looking for. It was in the newsweek article. http://s.newsweek.com/sites/www.new.../embed-sm/public/2016/03/25/0408zellner07.jpg

 

[proudfootz]

It's been suggested in another thread that Steven planned on crushing the RAV4, which is meant to explain why it was left 'only' 150 yards away from the car crusher.

The post is accompanied by a photo of the crusher with one car crushed in it, and the scheme is supposed to be that Steven was going to put the RAV4 in the middle of a 'sandwich' of three cars.

This seems at first blush to be a plausible scheme, except it is complete speculation.

Steven had several days to execute this plan (November 1st through 3rd), a time during which no one even noticed Teresa was missing - not her friends, nor her family, nor her employers.

I'm not a huge fan of rhetorical questions, so this is a real question: what prevented Steven from carrying out this scheme during this time when he apparently had complete freedom of action, no one had any reason to suspect Teresa was missing let alone had come to any harm, and no one had any reason to be suspicious of anything Steven did?

My own suggestion about the location of the RAV4 on November 5th is that it was placed as far from the living quarters of residents on the property to prevent premature discovery.