This post is of a letter I sent to former St. Louis County Commissioner Dennis Fink on July 24, 2003. Please notice that this date is over 2 months after I sent the letter in my last post to the St. Louis County Sheriff's Department.
This letter to Commissioner Fink continues the story of my unsuccessful efforts to get the Sheriff's Department to do a serious investigation of my testimony.
As before, I've redacted names to protect the innocent.
What I'd most like to point out in the following letter are three obvious absurdities that Ross Litman and Sally Burns told me with straight faces: 1. Ross Litman claimed that the Sheriff's Deparment could tell with 100% certainty what brand of vehicle had left certain tire tracks. 2. Sally Burns claimed to be able to tell the color of shoes from their tracks, and 3. She claimed that Tom Hinze having offered a sample of his DNA was in itself proof that he was innocent.
In fact, I was informed by email as late as 2013 by Mr. Ron Taggart, investigator for the Public Defender's office, that Tom Hinze had STILL never been DNA tested as of 2013 ... and then of course Joseph Couture was convicted solely on the basis of a "confession", with NO DNA evidence ever having been presented to a jury. Nor has my testimony nor the testimony of any sworn witness ever been presented to a jury. The witness claimed by the Sheriff is still unnamed, and in addition, his/her identify has been sealed by the judge.
Also, I'd like to point out that NERCC (Northeast Region Corrections Center) is first mentioned in this post. That institution, including Douglas Hoffbauer, former work foreman there, had repeated involvement with Tom Hinze, who was sentenced there for his repeated DWI's. I'd previously made complaints about corruption at NERCC to the Minnesota Attorney General's Office, and I suspect that this may have had something to do with County officials' reluctance to do any serious investigation of anything I might say about a murder case for which they had offered a $100,000 reward for information.
This is what passes for "justice" in St. Louis County.
As I said in previous posts, Tom Hinze is dead now, so they can no longer accuse me of posting this in hopes of any reward. I want to see justice, that's all, and to inform people of this matter.
Here's the letter to Dennis Fink -- to which, by the way, I am still waiting for a reply, over 11 years later.
6168 Birch
Point Road
Saginaw,
MN 55779
July 24, 2003
729-9398
(cell
310-3336)
St. Louis
County Commissioner
Dennis E. Fink
205
Courthouse,
Duluth,
Minnesota 55802
Dear
Commissioner Fink:
This letter is in regards to, and a
continuation of my former letter "To
Whom it may concern", dated May 19th, 2003.
On the morning of May 20, I was at
XXXXXXX’s (name redacted) discussing with him the fact that I'd heard that Tom
Hinze had already been released from jail. XXXXXXX (name redacted), who lives on
the Canosia Road, had called me to tell me he'd seen him hitchhiking westward
on Highway 2.
XXXXXXX (name redacted) told me that
Tom had been released in the middle of the night, and after making several
calls to XXXXXXX’s (name redacted), had found a ride to XXXXXXX's (name
redacted) and then to XXXXXXX's (name redacted). Neither wanted him around, so
evidently he'd made his way to Highway 2, where he was seen hitchhiking around
10:00 that morning.
As XXXXXXX (name redacted) and I
were talking, two Sheriff's Department investigators, Sally Burns and a man who
I hadn't met before, came to XXXXXXX's (name redacted) door to ask him if he
knew where Tom Hinze was. XXXXXXX (name redacted) said the only thing he knew
was that Tom had been seen hitchhiking up Highway 2, probably going back to
Grand Forks where he'd come from.
Ms. Burns saw me in XXXXXX's (name
redacted) kitchen, and told me they had stopped at my house first, but I wasn't
home. Ms. Burns immediately started talking about the letter I'd sent, and
denied ever having said that "Tom Hinze is not a suspect in this
case." (This is what XXXXXXX (name redacted) told me that Philip Wagner
from the MBCA had told him. Mr. Wagner hadn't said it directly to me, but on
the other hand, I've never known XXXXXXX (name redacted) to lie. In fact, I
have asked him again what Mr. Wagner had said, and he repeated, "He said
he talked to Sally Burns, and she told him that Tom Hinze is not a suspect in
this case.")
Ms. Burns told me she has "over
eight hundred suspects" in this case, including someone who has confessed,
but couldn't possibly have done it.
Ms. Burns also told me that she HAD
identified herself to me on the phone when she called during the fall of 2000
asking about Tom's whereabouts. I certainly don't remember that, or I doubt
very much if I would have thought she was Tom's sister calling me. I didn't
argue, however.
Ms. Burns also told me that the size
11 or 12 New Balance shoes they had a print of, were not black, like the size
11 or 12 New Balance shoes I'd seen on Tom Hinze shortly before the murder, but
white. I didn't argue, but asked her if, after looking at the tire from the
1987 Nissan I used to own, she would check with New Balance again (to see if
they have a different tread pattern for each color shoe they make).
The male investigator broke into the
conversation, and explained to me that law enforcement people have to have
something solid, and just a pair of shoes is not enough. Then he said,
"Let's go look at that tire."
We went to my house, and they put
the tire in their car.
The male investigator came into my
house to rinse his hands off, then asked me some questions about Mr. Hinze.
"Does he have a history of
violence?"
I said I'd seen him start fist
fights when he was drinking, and that one time Tom himself had gotten beaten up
pretty badly. I mentioned another time he twisted my coat collar and lifted me
off the ground, because I refused to give him the keys to my 1987 Nissan. Tom
had lent me some money when I first bought the car, and though I'd paid him
back, he still somehow thought the car was his.
The investigator asked me, "Was
he drunk?"
I said, "Yes."
"What was his attitude towards
women?"
I answered, "Very bad. He
compared them to animals. He told me that one time he had stuck a girl's head
into a toilet and flushed it."
"Do you have any idea why he
drove back roads in the middle of the night?"
I answered, "I asked him that
one time, and he told me it was because he liked to drive when no one would
bother him, because he didn't have a drivers' license." I also repeated
the same thing I told Mr. Litman two years ago, that Mr. Hinze was from Red
Lake Falls where his father was Sheriff of the county, and since he was young,
had travelled Highway 2, and the back roads between Highway 2 and Highway 53.
He knew those back roads like the back of his hand, and often drove them after
midnight, drinking vodka. He'd often come back to the neighborhood here early
in the morning, after the sun was up, with an almost empty bottle. Sometimes
he'd come back with a half pint of Blue 100, or Hot 100.
The investigator then asked me about
the amount of tread that was on the tire, back in 2000. "About the depth
of the proverbial head of Abraham Lincoln?"
I said, "Yeah, about that much."
(The tire in question is now worn
much more than that, as I sold the car to some neighbor kids, who drove it
until it was broke down and ready to be junked. Nevertheless, the tread pattern
on the tire is still discernible)
I told the investigators that I
wanted to file some sort of official complaint that Mr. Hinze had threatened
both my life and XXXXXXX’s life. Ms. Burns told me that the letter I sent had
already accomplished that.
The next morning, the same male
investigator returned the tire, and told me, "We couldn't get it to
match."
I couldn't argue, but I had to shrug
my shoulders in puzzlement. I thought it must have been the same KIND of tire
they were looking for, or they certainly could have told me over the phone that
it was not, and saved themselves two trips out to the Birch Point Road. I
suppose perhaps they were looking for a certain imperfection in the tread that
showed up in their print, but I also suppose that kids putting several thousand
miles of hard use on that tire could have easily obliterated that imperfection.
Nevertheless, it seemed to me that
(1) the same kind of tire from the 1987 Nissan with mismatched tires Mr. Litman
had previously questioned me over, (2) plus the fact that Mr. Hinze had been
driving a black mini-van a week before the murder, (3) plus the fact that Mr.
Hinze was wearing size 11 or 12 New Balance shoes shortly before the murder,
(4) plus the fact that Mr. Hinze has no alibi whatsoever, (5) plus the fact
that he was known to travel the roads in question in the middle of the night,
(6) plus the fact he'd burned clothes in the woodstove in his trailer shortly
after the murder, (7) plus the fact that he spoke of women as
"animals" and very often mentioned "Indian girls" in
particular, all put together, should now, at least, make Mr. Hinze a definite
suspect in the case.
During the next few days I became
aware that when Mr. Hinze was arrested on May 17, he was merely charged with
his old 2000 warrant for DWI, but was not charged with an additional DWI. The
deputies who arrested him with guns drawn, said they "hadn't seen him
driving the vehicle."
XXXXXXX (name redacted), who was a
passenger in the vehicle when it was pulled over, and XXXXXXX (name redacted) ,
whose yard the vehicle was stopped in, both told me that Mr. Hinze had jumped
from the vehicle, and was a short distance from it, with the keys in his hand,
pouring out a bottle of vodka. He was very drunk, and I myself saw him perhaps
an hour before, and I know that he was very drunk, and still drinking vodka.
I know a person who was charged with
a DWI, and later convicted, because he was picked up walking over 1/2 mile away
from his vehicle which had broken down. I was told that Sheriff's deputies were
handing out DWI's at the street dance in Brookston in 2001, for people merely
drinking in the same TOWN as their vehicle, with keys in their pockets, even
though they hadn't gotten into their vehicle to drive anywhere. A neighbor of
mine told me that the person who lives across the road from her was given a one
year's sentence for a DWI, as he was picked up one night sitting in his vehicle
in her driveway, across the road from his own house.
When XXXXXXX (name redacted) asked
one of the County Attorneys why Mr. Hinze seems to have a "Get Out of Jail
Free card", Ms. Burns explained that he wasn't charged with another DWI
because he's had so many DWI's and test refusals, he simply costs the
department too much money trying to correct him.
That really flabbergasted me,
because I've read that the very reason the Minnesota Legislature passed
stricter laws making repeat DWI offenses felonies, was to get incorrigible
drunks off the roads and keep them locked up where they can't hurt anyone. And
also flabbergasting to me was the fact that XXXXXXX (name redacted) told me
that the deputies who had hauled Tom Hinze off to jail that night had
sarcastically mentioned "certain people" who don't seem to think
driving while drunk is a serious offense, when "a little kid might get
killed." The deputies had even threatened XXXXXXX (name redacted) with
"obstruction of justice".
It seems inconceivable to me that
the Sheriff's Department could not have charged Mr. Hinze with an additional
(perhaps felony) DWI if they had wanted to, and in fact, as they would have
with anyone else. This has made all who have heard about it, rather angry.
Some have speculated that perhaps
Mr. Hinze "has something" on someone or some department, and they are
trying to keep him quiet. This doesn't make a lot of sense to me, because I
can't see why Tom Hinze would be listened to at all, considering his reputation
of being a lifelong drifter (always dressed in black, and nearly always
drinking vodka), plus the long list of DWI's and test refusals he has had, at
least the last two of which were for being an "inimical danger to public
safety".
It also upset people to find out
that Mr. Hinze was informed by the Sheriff's Department, "It was a girl
who called you in." Mr. Hinze very easily narrowed "a girl" down
to XXXXXXX (name redacted), and has, in fact, threatened her life. Several
people told me that the answer they'd received when they asked who had turned
them in for DWI was, "That's none of your business."
I
remember back in 1998 when someone falsely accused me of growing marijuana,
resulting in a terrifying four-hour police raid on my property during which
they found no marijuana, the police refused to give me any clue who had falsely
accused me. A county worker explained that to me, "Think about it, Lloyd,
if you turned someone in for a crime, would you want the police to let that
person know who you were? He might want to go after you, and hurt you."
Tom Hinze did return to XXXXXXX's
(name redacted) place in early June, where XXXXXXX (name redacted) saw him
early one morning sleeping in a vehicle in his yard. XXXXXXX (name redacted)
immediately called Sally Burns' office to tell her Tom was in town, and
immediately told Tom that Sally Burns wanted to talk to him.
Tom went into the Sheriff's
investigators' office on June 4th or 5th, and submitted a DNA sample.
On June 9, I called Sally Burns'
office to tell her about a knife I thought may have once belonged to Tom Hinze.
She told me she didn't think that it was the kind of knife that fit the crime,
and that she'd call me back after checking with their records. (She did call me
back in about 15 minutes. It wasn't the kind of knife used in the murder, and
she told me that without having to look at the knife.)
Then, she told me, "Tom
voluntarily gave us a DNA sample, Lloyd. I think that since he voluntarily came
in and gave the sample, that's a pretty good indication he's innocent."
I do not know if that is such a good
indication of his innocence that the DNA sample was submitted to a lab for
testing, in the same way a voluntarily given Breathalyzer would be read by the
policeman who asked for it, or not. I would very much like to know, but I do
not feel I am getting straight information on my questions, verifiable by me,
and so I have not asked Ms. Burns.
A couple of weeks ago, XXXXXXX (name
redacted) called me to say he'd seen Tom Hinze on the Boardwalk downtown, and
had talked with him.
Tom told XXXXXXX (name redacted)
that the Sheriff's Department had given him a copy of the letter I had sent
them. Tom also said that they had mentioned that I "didn't make them look
very good either", and that they told him he could go after me legally.
Tom told XXXXXXX (name redacted) that he expected to be sentenced to NERCC, and
that while he is sentenced there, he plans to talk with Douglas Hoffbauer
concerning how to go after at me legally. He has told XXXXXXX (name redacted)
the same thing. I heard yesterday from XXXXXXX (name redacted) that Mr. Hinze
was sentenced to 5 months at NERCC, to begin about the 26th of July.
Last time Tom Hinze was sentenced to
6 months at NERCC for an "inimical danger to public safety" DWI, he
was on Mr. Hoffbauer's chicken crew, meaning that at certain occasions, Tom was
sent out at night, to do necessary work when baby chicks were about to arrive,
etc.
Tom bragged to me that on one
occasion, he and an accomplice he didn't name, had successfully heisted some 30
chickens just before butchering day. He said the accomplice had taken them out
through the back side of NERCC, which, as you know, borders the Birch Point
Road I live on. Tom told me that Mr. Hoffbauer had questioned Tom about what
had happened to the birds, and Tom denied any knowledge, with a grin. Tom also
told me that while other residents were paid their $2 a day for five days a
week, Tom was paid for seven days a week.
When Tom was given an early release
from NERCC during the summer of 2000, he told me that Douglas Hoffbauer told
him, "Bets were five to one around here, the judge wouldn't let you out
early. How did you do it, Tom?" Tom's answer was, "The Joker beats
the Ace, Doug."
I am totally at a loss WHY the
Sheriff's investigators have been so foot-dragging in looking at any type of
evidence I've offered them that might possibly be connected to this murder.
Mr. Litman had asked me where the
1987 Nissan was, for example, and I told him that it was at XXXXXXX's (name
redacted), and soon to be scrapped. After Mr. Litman asked me in a sarcastic
tone if I had "SOLD the car??", he still never sent anyone to go and
look at it -- though XXXXXXX's (name redacted) son told me he'd noticed that
there was a stain on the roof-liner that looked as if it might have been blood.
The car has long since been scrapped.
For another example, though I told
Mr. Litman that Tom Hinze had burned clothes in the woodstove in his trailer in
September 2000, Mr. Litman has never asked me if I know where the woodstove or
the trailer are now.
Though Mr. Litman asked me a
specific question concerning the mismatched tires on the 1987 Nissan, it took
nearly two years, plus a certified letter mailed both to the St. Louis County
Sheriff's Department and to Mr. Dupois, Trina Langenbrunner's cousin on the
Cloquet Police Department, before anyone would come and look at the tire.
As I said above, I have no way of
knowing if the DNA sample was submitted to any lab, or not, and I would very
much like to know to which lab, and to see the entire results with my own eyes.
I would also like to tell you of my nervousness of having Mr. Hinze sentenced
to NERCC, a low security facility just a half a mile through the woods from my
place, as I've told the Sheriff's investigators several times he has threatened
my life, and promised to "straighten things out" with me for having
talked to the investigators about him.
I don't know if you can help in this
situation, Mr. Fink, but I appreciate your having read this letter.
Sincerely,
Lloyd Wagner
