OCCK

I first filed my FOIA case against the Michigan State Police and the second one later against the Oakland County Prosecutor. The Oakland County Prosecutor immediately filed a Motion to Consolidate the two cases. This Motion was denied by the Oakland County Circuit Court, the Michigan Court of Appeals and the Michigan Supreme Court. I had no original reaction as to the reason for filing this Motion, but I have now concluded that it was filed to deny me access to the search warrant affidavit and all other information and for no other reason.

In the typical lawsuit much more time is related to discovering matters and pretrial preparation than to the actual trial of the case. If the cases have been consolidated, Oakland County taxpayers would have spent funds on these pretrial matters in the Michigan State Police case and the Michigan taxpayers would have similar payments in the case against the Oakland County Prosecutor. Judge O’Brien and Judge Potts delayed any activity on my cases until the consolidation matter was settled by the Michigan Supreme Court.

After I obtained access to the search warrant affidavit on April 1, 2013 and the other information discussed in the search warrant chapters, it is my conclusion that the Oakland County Prosecutor, and perhaps other Oakland County agencies, filed this Motion to Consolidate to take control both cases and to deny me any access to the OCCK case. Fortunately, the Michigan State Police honored their FOIA obligation and gave me 3,411 pages on December 15, 2010. Admittedly this is conjecture on my part but I cannot think of any other reasonable conclusion.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather
OCCK

When the Oakland County Prosecutor would not discuss the status of the investigation with me, I wrote Oakland County Sheriff, Michael Bouchard a short note in August 2012 asking for a meeting with his lead investigator. Sheriff Bouchard and I exchanged emails and I met with Deputy Sheriff, Gary Miller on August 29, 2012. Sheriff Bouchard volunteered to attend but I told him that I did not think it was necessary. No prosecutor attended the meeting.

At the meeting, Miller advised me that his office took no further action after the trace evidence at the former Busch residence did not contain anything which might relate to the four children. The Michigan State Police documents delivered to me on December 15, 2010 contain a report that a phone call had been made to the Montmorency County Sheriff dated March 19, 1977 in which a citizen reported that, Christopher Busch, a known pedophile, was at his vacant family cottage in Montmorency County with three small boys. Tim was missing from March 16 to March 22. This supports some comments I have heard over the years that the children may have been taken to a summer cottage because all four deaths took place during cold weather. My family has been further advised that the Busch cottage in Montmorency has been destroyed after April of 2008 and has been replaced by a new cottage. Is this just coincidence?

When I later discussed this matter with one of the investigators, he advised me that he requested the search warrant to be issued for both locations, but he was successful in obtaining only having the search warrant for the former residence.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather
OCCK

In order to obtain the April 29, 2011 suppression orders from the 48th district court, the accompanying Ex Parte Motion to Clarify Order of Suppression of the October 28, 2008 search warrant and affidavit filed by the Oakland County Prosecutor states as follows:

4. That this Court has issued sixteen orders continuing the suppression of the search warrant and affidavit in this matter. The last issued March 23, 2011, and to continue to in force to May 18, 2011.

The expiration date on the fifteenth Order of Suppression expired on March 7, 2011, 840 days after October 28, 2009 Search Warrant Affidavit was issued. The sixteenth Order was not issued until March 23, 2011. Obviously, one or more of the 15 orders of suppression were issued after the expiration date of a 56 day period. Whenever the first order was not renewed within the 56 day period it can no longer be suppressed. This occurred all subsequent orders of suppression were improperly entered. The statute contains no provisions allowing the prosecutor to obtain ex parte orders once the 56 day renewal period is breached. Is my interpretation correct? Did the Oakland County Prosecutor advise the 48th district court of this interpretation when the order was entered?

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather
OCCK

In my 57 years of practice, I have no criminal law experience except for a few drunk driving cases early in my career. The Michigan Search Warrant Statute came to my attention when the Oakland County Prosecutor presented the April 29, 2011 orders in both my Michigan State Police and Oakland County Prosecutor FOIA lawsuits. The Order stated basically that no one could have access to the Busch search warrant file in the 48th District Court for the search of the former Christopher Busch residence on October 28, 2008.

The last sentence of Section 9 of the Michigan Search Warrant Statute (Act 189 of 1966) specifically provides that the suppression orders authorized by the statute do not apply in FOIA cases:

(9) On the fifty-sixth day following the issuance of a search warrant, the search warrant affidavit contained in any court file or court record retention system is public information unless, before the fifty-sixth day after the search warrant is issued, a peace officer or prosecuting attorney obtains a suppression order from a judge or district court magistrate upon a showing under oath that suppression of the affidavit is necessary to protect an ongoing investigation or the privacy or safety of a victim or witness. The suppression order may be obtained ex parte in the same manner that the search warrant was issued. An initial suppression order issued under this subsection expires on the fifty-sixth day after the order is issued. A second or subsequent suppression order may be obtained in the same manner as the initial suppression order and shall expire on a date specified in the order. This subsection and subsection (8) do not affect a person’s right to obtain a copy of a search warrant affidavit from the prosecuting attorney or law enforcement agency under the freedom of information act, 1976 PA 442, MCL 15.231 to 15.246. MCL 780.651 (9)

SECTION 9 SPECIFICALLY STATES IT DOES NOT APPLY TO MY FOIA CASES AND BOTH THE OAKLAND COUNTY PROSECUTOR AND THE 48TH DISTRICT COURT HAVE SUCCESSFULLY REFUSED TO DISCUSS THIS ASPECT OF MY CASE WITH ME.

In addition, Section 9 of the Michigan Search Warrant Statue also contains language suppressing the access to Search Warrant and Search Warrant Affidavits. All of the Search Warrant information is suppressed for 56 days. If the prosecutor wants to extend it beyond 56 days it must file a renewal order within the previous 56 day period. If no 56 day renewal order is entered the information is available to the public on the 57th day. The Statute does not contain any language allowing any public body to file subsequent suppression orders after the first 56 day period expires. I will discuss this further in chapter 11.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather
OCCK

Attached are the following copies of the Orders of Suppressions referred to in the previous chapters.

1. Exhibit B: A “true copy” of an Order Suppressing Motion to Clarifying Orders of Suppression of Search Warrant and Affidavit dated April 29, 2011 from the 48th District Court denying everyone including me access to that Court’s file on the October 28, 2008 Search Warrant for the former residence of Christopher Busch which was delivered to Judge Coleen O’Brien in my FOIA case against the Michigan State Police.

2. Exhibit C: A “true copy” of an Order Clarifying Orders of Suppression of Search Warrant and Affidavit dated April 29, 2011 from the 48th District Court denying everyone including me access to that Court’s file on the October 28, 2008 Search Warrant for the former residence of Christopher Busch which was delivered by the Oakland County Prosecutor to Judge Wendy Potts in my FOIA lawsuit against the Oakland County Prosecutor.

3. Exhibit D: The 48th District Court copy of this Order of Suppression which was delivered to me by the 48th District Court on April 1, 2013, more than two years after the delivery of Exhibits B & C.

IT WAS NOT UNTIL AFTER APRIL 1, 2013 THAT I NOTICED THAT “TRUE COPY” EXHIBITS B & C WERE BOTH DATED APRIL 29, 2011 BUT WERE NOT IDENTICAL. FURTHERMORE, EXHIBITS B & C ARE DATED AND ARE NOT TRUE COPIES OF THE UNDATED COPY IN THE COURT 48th DISTRICT COURT FILE (EXHIBIT D).

In my two lawsuits against the Oakland County Prosecutor, I was forbidden any discovery and both these cases were closed prior to April 1, 2013. Perhaps somebody from the media can check with the 48th District Court for an explanation of these inconsistent documents.

March 8, 2016

Exhibit B: A "true copy" of an Order Suppressing Motion to Clarifying Orders of the Suppression of Search Warrant and Affidavit dated April 29, 2011 from the 48th District Court...
Exhibit B: A “true copy” of an Order Suppressing Motion to Clarifying Orders of the Suppression of Search Warrant and Affidavit dated April 29, 2011 from the 48th District Court…
Exhibit B: A "true copy" of an Order Clarifying Orders of  Suppression of Search Warrant and Affidavit dated April 29, 2011 from the 48th District Court...
Exhibit C: A “true copy” of an Order Clarifying Orders of Suppression of Search Warrant and Affidavit dated April 29, 2011 from the 48th District Court…
The 48th District Court copy of this Order of Suppression which was delivered to me by the 48th District Court on April 1, 2013...
The 48th District Court copy of this Order of Suppression which was delivered to me by the 48th District Court on April 1, 2013
facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather
OCCK

As mentioned in Chapter 3, the King family always thought it was unlikely that a Blue Gremlin was involved in the 1977 abduction of Tim. The information I received from the Michigan State Police on December 15, 2010 and subsequent information described in Chapters 4, 5 and 6 universally support the original King family conclusion.

When you can’t sleep during the night and no one will talk to you, conjecture is the only basis for your conclusions. Chasing the Blue Gremlin lead probably led to a lot of wasted time. There were a lot more Pontiac LeMans on the road than Blue Gremlins in 1977; would this extra follow up be a burden? Did one or more of the leading suspects die, perhaps by murder or suicide, and therefore could not be identified or charged? Why didn’t Oakland County take some action when retired Detective Jack Kalbfleisch contacted officials this century? If you can’t sleep tonight, can you think of any sensible reasons for silence?

Law enforcement not only owes the families of the four victims an explanation for this serious oversight, but also the media and the public. They are entitled to this additional automobile information that could help in solving the most heinous unsolved crime in the State of Michigan.

As I told you in Chapter 2, the two major concerns of the OCCK investigation, which came to my attention after December 15, 2010, were the incorrect automobile information and the attempts by the Oakland County Prosecutor to deny me access to the October 28, 2008 Search Warrant Affidavit for the former Busch residence. I will discuss the second major reason in the following chapters.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather
OCCK

Tim’s sister, Cathy Board, has prepared her summary of the automobile investigations and it follows this paragraph.

July 2, 2001- June 3, 2006—Correspondence between retired Lead Detective for Birmingham, MI, Jack Kalbfleisch, who was on the OCCK Task Force, and various police officials and reports document disturbing facts ignored by investigators and reporters. None of the people he wrote responded to him. Garry Gray of the MSP did call him back and tell him the MSP would not investigate the Le Mans vehicle lead.

In an undated letter to Richard Patterson, then chief of the Birmingham Police Department, retired Det. Kalbfleisch explained, among many different facts and details, the following about the vehicles involved in these crimes:

“Based on a call after Tim King was abducted, it was assumed that a blue Gremlin could be involved. Information gleaned from the Robinson and Mihelich crime scenes would now indicate that a dark colored 1971-72 Pontiac LeMans with a v8 engine and some body damage was involved. The information was specific, but my memory as to the year is unclear.

The Troy PD was able to locate a man who observed the above described LeMans pull to the side of the I-75 at the location and the approximate time that Jill was dropped. The witness stated that the vehicle had a broken left tail light and possible body damage. He was certain about the make of the vehicle because he claimed he had owned the same type of vehicle in the past. When the vehicle at the Mihelich drop made the turn on Bruce lane, it made impressions in the snow banks on either side of the roadway. On the east side of the roadway, the left front bumper left a cone shaped impression in the snow bank. The vehicle then backed into the snow bank on the west side of the roadway leaving a complete impression of the rear of the vehicle.

The MSP crime lab didn’t take the measurements in the snow bank, but did photograph the impressions. FBI S.A., Mort Nickel, and I took copies of the photo of the rear impression to the big three auto makers in an attempt to identify the make of the automobile. GM was the only company that stated that the car could be one of their makes or models. They listed several midsized vehicles of the 71-72 year makes, but couldn’t be specific.

S.A. Mort Nickel was able to locate a photo interpreter at the University of Michigan and we brought him a copy of the impression in the snow bank. He was able to give the measurements within 1/32 of an inch. He also stated that the vehicle had a trailer hitch which had been pulled approximately one inch to the left (possibly from an accident). I took that information back to the GM building to determine if a more specific model could be identified. GM reported that the measurements belonged to a 1971-72 LeMans with a v8 engine.

Conclusion: Although much time has passed, I believe that releasing the information on the car could be the best lead in the case. The news release could state that recent information shows an interest in a vehicle of that description with the damage indicated. A former neighbor, a co-worker or a service station attendant may still recall someone who owned such a vehicle at that time. The other information listed in this report would only come into play after that information was obtained.

Due to the fact that neither the MSP nor our department could find the report that I submitted to the task force, I will contact the Detroit office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in an attempt to determine whether they have a report from S.A. Mort Nickel on the vehicle measurements and the name of the photo interpreter. I will request that any information that they locate, be forwarded to your office.”

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather
OCCK

Prologue

My eleven-year-old son, Timothy, was abducted in Oakland County on March 16, 1977, and his body was found in Wayne County in a roadside ditch on March 22, 1977. In response to my Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) lawsuit against the Michigan State Police, I learned after December 15, 2010 that Tim had been sexually abused. Furthermore, Tim had been suffocated by someone who held both his nose and mouth shut. Tim died in his hands. I cannot imagine a more heinous death.

After the death of Kristine Michelich, the third victim, my children recall a discussion I had with Tim. He was told not to accept a ride from a stranger. If anyone tried to force him to enter a car, he was instructed to drop anything he was carrying, run and scream. During the six days he was alive, I am certain he knew what would happen.

In July 2007, Tim’s sister, Cathy Broad, advised the Livonia Police Department in Wayne County of an unidentified suspect. Detective Cory Williams of the Livonia Police Department, and Detective Sergeant Garry Gray of the Michigan State Police, identified this suspect as Christopher Busch on November 30, 2007. Williams and Gray later identified the possible participation of two of Busch’s companions, Gregory Greene and Vince Gunnels. Thereafter the King family received encouraging reports on the Busch involvement from law enforcement. To my surprise, my friend, Donald Studt, now Birmingham Chief of Police, called me on March 1, 2010 at the request of Jessica Cooper, the Oakland County Prosecutor, to advise me that Christopher Busch and his companions were no longer suspects. When no one would tell me the basis for this conclusion, I commenced FOIA lawsuits against both the Michigan State Police and the Oakland County Prosecutor. Jessica Cooper and her staff have refused to talk to me about the March 1, 2010 conclusions. Thus far her silence has been supported by the Oakland County Circuit Court and the Michigan Court of Appeals.

The King family and the families of Mark Stebbins, Jill Robinson and Kristine Mihelich, the other three OCCK victims, deserve an explanation from the responsible public officials regarding the investigation of these murders. In particular, your local prosecutor should not have dictatorial powers to close investigation of valid suspects without explanation. The Michigan Constitution states that crime victims have a right to confer with the prosecutor (Article I, Section 24). Why should anyone submit a valid suspect to law enforcement if the local prosecutor can refuse to take action for undisclosed reasons? If the reasons are professional, even Jessica Cooper has gone public to explain her reasoning. However, if the reasons are political, personal, power in control or other nonprofessional reasons, all of which may be present in the OCCK case, silence does not protect the victims or the public. I welcome your thoughts and responses but request that you complete the entire story before making interim replies.

In 2008, both Wayne and Oakland County identified Christopher Busch as the best suspect the system had produced in over 30 years. The Christopher Busch lead was the result of the phone call my daughter made to the Livonia Police Department in 2009 with information on an unidentified suspect. Cory Williams of the Livonia Police Department and Gregory Greene of the Michigan State Police identified this suspect as Christopher Busch.

My Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Michigan State Police resulted in the delivery of 3,411 pages on the Christopher Busch investigation. However, the legal system has told me that the Oakland County Prosecutor has no responsibility to provide information supporting her March 1, 2010 phone call.

Last summer I decided to use social media to tell my story. This was awkward because of my limited knowledge of this new communication system. I would like to thank those youngsters (age 60 and under) for the education provided to me regarding this publication.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather