“I had to think quickly and told them that he was a friend that had gotten drunk and they believed me. Halfway up a dark alley, at two in the morning, with police coming one way and fire trucks coming the other… They told me to take him back; he was not wanting to go back; and one officer grabbed him on one arm, the other officer grabbed him on the other arm, and they walked him up to the apartment… They didn’t go into my bedroom. If they had, they would’ve seen the body of [victim Tony Hughes] still lying in there. They saw the two pictures that I’d taken earlier, lying on the dining room table. One of them said to the other: “See, he’s telling the truth.” And they left.”
– Jeffrey Dahmer talking about his encounter with Milwaukee police officers following Konerak Sinthasomphone’s brief escape from Apartment 213
14 year old Konerak Sinthasomphone died on the morning of May 27th, 1991 – as soon as Officers Joseph Gabrish, John Balcerzak and Richard Porubcan inadvertently thwarted the Laotian boys escape from his captor and returned him to Jeffrey Dahmer’s apartment.
After Dahmer had convinced the Milwaukee Police officers that the naked Konerak was his 19 year old drunk lover, the incident was dismissed as a domestic dispute between two gay men.
Outside on North 25th Street, three young black women had fought to protect Konerak when his dazed and confused state made them suspicious of the bespectacled white man who had come to his supposed aid. The compassionate concern of Glenda Cleveland (mother and aunt of two of the suspicious women) propelled her to follow up on Konerak’s wellbeing via a 911 call. She was told that the situation had “been taken care of.”
The cause of Konerak’s disorientation had been a combination of sleeping pills and a small hole power-drilled into his skull and basted with muriatic acid.
In an unprecedentedly twisted coincidence, Konerak was also the brother of the teenage boy Dahmer had been convicted of molesting in 1989. A police background check of Dahmer by the three officers would have revealed such circumstance of his current probation – while a routine examination of his residence would have yielded the body of 31 year-old victim, Tony Hughes, lying dead on Dahmer’s bedroom floor1.
When it transpired that Konerak Sinthasomphone had become Jeffrey Dahmer’s thirteenth victim, public outcry was incendiary2. Officers Balcerzak and Gabrish were fired (though later reinstated3) and both were summoned to the witness stand during Dahmer’s trial.
Below follows the entire transcript of Officer Balcerzak’s testimony as recorded by Court TV on February 11th, 1992. By his own admission, Balcerzak was prone to stammering and this was apparent during his time on the stand. The text has therefore been cleaned to remove such repetitions – and some minor alterations and additions have been made for the sake of clarity and grammar – but other than that, everything that follows is in the words of John Balcerzak and attorney Michael McCann unless otherwise stated.
Squad 36
JUDGE LAWRENCE GRAM: Do you solemnly swear that all the testimony you’re about to give in this matter will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth – so help you God?
JOHN BALCERZAK: I do.
MICHAEL MCCANN: And then would you state your name and spell your last name, please.
JB: Officer John Balcerzak. B-A-L-C-E-R-Z-A-K
MM: How were you employed in the morning hours of May 27th, 1991?
B: As a police officer of City Milwaukee.
M: How long had you been a police officer?
B: Approximately six and a half years.
M: Were you assigned to a particular district station?
B: I was assigned to Third District, City Milwaukee.
M: And what shift on that date?
B: The late shift.
M: And what is the late shift hours?
B: It’ll be midnight to 8 A.M.
M: And had you gone to work that night at midnight? That would be the beginning of the morning of May 27th, 1991.
B: Yes.
M: And what was your squad patrol area?
B: I was assigned to Squad 36.
M: And what’s that area? Roughly.
B: Area’s North 16th Street to North 35th Street. West Lisbon Avenue to North Avenue.
M: It’s not infrequent that you’re sent to areas to respond to complaints outside your particular squad area, is that correct?
B: It’s a regular occurrence.
M: And sometime, during that morning, you were dispatched to a call outside your area, is that true?
B: Uh, dispatched probably to a number of calls outside our squad area, yeah.
M: And did there come a time that you received a dispatch to the area of North 25th and West State Street in the city of Milwaukee?
B: Yes.
M: Is that strictly within your squad area or is that an adjoining area?
B: It’s in the Third District but it’s in a different squad area.
M: And you received that from the dispatcher [like]: “Squad Number 36, go to such-and-such an area”?
B: That’s correct.
M: Do you recall what the contents – the basic contents – of the dispatch was?
B: As I recall, the dispatch was to check for a naked man, badly beaten. 25th and State Street. Anonymous caller.
M: Did you go to that area then?
B: Yes, we did.
M: And when you say ‘we’, who were you with?
B: I was working with my squad partner, Officer Joseph Gabrish.
M: Were you both in uniform at the time?
B: Yes.
M: And you’re in a regular Milwaukee Police Department uniform squad car – is that so?
B: That’s correct.
Mouth of the Alley
M: As you approach the vicinity of North 25th Street and West State Street, what did you see?
B: As we approached the intersection, we observed a group of people standing at the mouth of an alley which runs parallel with State Street and directly south of State Street on North 25th Street.
M: All right. You’re speaking now of the mouth of an alley. That mouth is on 25th Street?
B: That’s correct.
M: And this alley parallels West State Street, is that correct?
B: That’s correct.
M: West State Street is an east-west street in the city of Milwaukee, is that true?
B: That’s correct.
M: And so this alley also then was an east-west alley. South of State Street, running parallel to State Street?
B: That’s correct.
M: And you saw a group of people at what would be the western end of that alley? That is at North 25th Street.
B: Yes.
M: All right. What did you do when you saw that group of people standing at the mouth of that alley?
B: We proceeded to that area of the mouth of the alley.
M: And what did you do with your squad car?
B: Upon arriving at the mouth of the alley, we observed two individuals in the alley itself. At which point we turned into that alley.
M: These two individuals, then, were east of 25th Street. Down the alley, a bit towards 24th. Is that so?
B: They were into the alley – partially into the alley – between North 25th Street and the north-south alley of that block.
M: All right. So that particular alley – that east-west alley – is cut by another alley that runs north and south?
B: That’s correct.
M: And the alley that runs north and south, parallels North 25th Street and North 24th Street? Would that be true?
B: That’s correct.
M: So when you first saw the two individuals, they were standing in the east-west alley just a little bit east of North 25th Street?
B: Uh, that’s correct. Approximately halfway between North 25th and the north-south alley.
M: All right. Did you pull your squad into the east-west alley?
B: Yes.
M: And were your lights on in the squad car?
B: In reference to…?
M: Were the lights on? Your headlights on in the squad car?
B: Yes. The headlights were operating.
M: What hour was it – to your best recollection – that you pulled into that alley with your headlights on?
B: It would have been approximately 2 – 2:06 in the morning.
M: A.M?
B: That’s correct.
M: And what did you do after pulling into that alley? Your headlights illuminated these two men down the alley, is that correct?
B: To an extent, yes.
M: All right. What did you see? Even as you pulled in with your headlights on. Can you tell the jury what you saw about these two men?
B: I observed two individuals. One individual was naked and the second individual appeared to be assisting him to his to his feet and beginning to walk as we were pulling into the alley.
M: It appeared to you that he was helping the naked man off the ground?
B: It appeared that he was helping him to his feet – had just concluded helping him to his feet – and began to walk.
M: What did you do then?
B: At that point we stopped our squad – or I should say, I stopped the squad. Both myself and my partner exited the squad. Both individuals had stopped walking and turned back to see what had pulled into the alley.
M: Was your red light on? Any red lights on in the car?
B: I don’t recall if they were operating or not. I don’t believe they were but I’m not fully –
M: It’s a city of Milwaukee marked police squad, is that true?
B: That’s correct.
M: And there’s a bank of red and blue lights on the top of it?
B: That’s correct.
M: So anyone looking back – if they could see through the headlights – would recognise that that’s a squad car pulling in?
B: Yes, they should.
M: And you and your partner, Joe Gabrish, got out of the squad car… What did you do then?
B: At that point we proceeded toward the two individuals. It was apparent to us that this was the assignment that we had gotten sent to.
M: You were satisfied that this naked man you saw in your headlights was the same naked man that had triggered the dispatch? You were satisfied you had arrived at whatever it was that caused the dispatch?
B: That’s correct.
Roommates
M: All right. What did you do then – when you walked up the alley approaching these two men?
B: As we approached both the individuals, we separated both individuals – as is a standard procedure – to determine what is happening. What is occurring in the alley.
M: You separate them both and then separately question them, is that correct?
B: That’s correct.
M: Right. Did you undertake to question one of the two men?
B: Yes.
M: And which of the two men – the clothed or the unclothed man – did you undertake to question?
B: Through our investigation I questioned the clothed male.
M: And who was that man? What did you ask him?
B: I believe I started out by asking him what’s occurring.
M: What did he say?
B: At that point he related that he was helping his roommate.
M: And what further was said or asked by you or him?
B: During the course of our investigation in the street, we obtained some information regarding [the] identities of the two and –
M: Did you ask him what his name was?
B: Yes.
M: The man to whom you were talking? What name did he give you?
B: He gave me Jeffrey Dahmer.
M: And did you ask his date of birth?
B: Yes.
M: Is that standard questioning procedure when you’re investigating an incident? Just a name and address?
B: Yes, it is.
M: And did he produce any type of identification at your request? Or did he voluntarily produce identification?
B: During the course of my investigation he produced a picture work-identification card.
M: Do you remember when that was? Was that in the alley or was it at some later point?
B: No, that was while we were still investigating in the alley.
M: And would you recall what that identification card was? Did it indicate his employment at a local West Side Chocolate Factory?
B: Yes, it was an employee picture ID card.
M: And from looking at that card – the name – was there a date of birth, if you recollect, on that card?
B: There may have been a date of birth on the card.
M: After looking at that card, examining the picture, looking at his face, getting his name and date of birth, were you satisfied that the man was using his name and speaking with you?
B: Yes.
M: And that name was what?
B: Jeffrey Dahmer.
M: Do you see that man in court right now?
B: Yes, I do.
M: Let the record reflect that there’s stipulation that’s the defendant. What, if anything, did he say about the incident when you queried him on what’s happening here?
B: He related to myself that he was assisting his roommate from the past few weeks back to their apartment. Stated that his roommate had been drinking and had passed out on the couch of the apartment and that that’s where he had left him when he had gone to a local tavern to obtain some beer or cigarettes.
M: So Dahmer told you that this was his roommate – this naked man – [and] that he had left his roommate earlier, the roommate had passed out in their apartment and he – Dahmer – had left the apartment with the man passed out and had gone to a tavern?
B: That’s correct.
M: What else did he tell you then?
B: Stated that, upon returning from the tavern, he observed his roommate on the street naked and was just trying to assist him back to the apartment.
M: And what, if anything, did you then do or say or observe at that point? After he had told you this.
B: In regards to…?
M: Any observations you made of him. Anything you said or did at that point. He had now basically relayed to you what had brought him there and the circumstances of the incident – is that correct?
B: That’s correct.
M: What, if anything, did you do at that point or say or observe?
B: I was making observations of my entire time since my arrival at the assignment and –
M: What observations had you made of Mr. Dahmer?
B: He appeared to be calm. Neatly dressed, clean-shaven, neatly combed hair. Clean clothing. No injuries of any sort. No disarray of his clothing at all.
M: You were checking that to see if, in fact, there’d been an altercation of some type? Is that what you were basically making those close observations for?
B: Yes. [It] would be the same way [whenever] I had gotten sent to [a call about] a man beaten. You run through numerous items – through your mind – that you make observations [on] and check during your course of your investigation.
M: Right. Because the dispatch had said “man beaten,” you wanted to know if he had been in a fight with this man – the naked man. Is that basically what you were interested in?
B: Correct. To see if, in fact, an altercation did occur.
M: How did he answer to you? Was he hesitant or responsive? And [in] what fashion did he respond to your questions?
B: He responded. No hesitation in any type of response to any of my questions. He responded in a calm, clear voice. I myself am a stutterer of sorts and I make observations of that – if there is discrepancies and so forth – of individuals. There was nothing to suggest that he was not as he was presenting himself to be.
M: What information, if any, did he give you about the naked man? Other than saying he was a roommate.
B: He said that the naked male was his roommate of the past three weeks and he provided a name and a age.
M: What name did he provide?
B: I believe the name he provided was John Hmong.
M: H-M-O-N-G – it sounds like?
B: I believe.
M: Right. And what, if any, age did he give you for that young man’s birth?
B: He provided the age of 19 to 20.
M: Had you made any observations as to the dissent of the young man? The naked man in the alley.
B: Yes.
M: And what observations had you made?
B: He appeared to be a Asian male of approximately that age.
M: Did the name John Hmong appear to you – or occur to you – to be a name that might be of Oriental nature?
B: Yes. Didn’t strike me as being unusual of any sort at all.
A Strong Smell of Alcohol
M: What happened then? Or what was said then? Or what did you do then?
B: We continued to investigate in the alley. I ran through the explanation a number of times with Mr. Dahmer.
M: Why do you do that? Why do policemen make you repeat sometimes – or jump around with questions and come back. Why do you do that?
B: To see if there’s a discrepancy. Any variants in what was told to us during the course of our investigation that would help us. Possibly to alert us to somebody not telling us the truth.
M: And if a person changes their responses, that may alert you that something’s going on here and you’re going to press further on it. Would that be accurate?
B: Yes. If he changes responses or any change in his mannerisms or so forth.
M: For how long did you talk with him at that time? Before you had any communication with your partner, Mr. Gabrish.
B: Maybe approximately five, ten minutes. I’m not quite – I wasn’t watching my wristwatch to see.
M: Did there come a time then that you conferred with Gabrish to see what he was learning from the Oriental man?
B: Yes.
M: What, if anything, was communicated between you and Gabrish?
B: We exchange information, as is normal. See if there’s any discrepancies between the two individuals which we separated.
M: In this case, you want to know if Gabrish is going to say that the Oriental has told him that this man was striking him or beating him or doing something like that. Is that basically why you’re asking Gabrish: “What does he say about it?”
B: Well, explanation as to the circumstances of our assignment and as far as if there’s any variance in anything else with an identification of individuals or anything like that.
M: Right. And what did Gabrish tell you?
B: At the time he advised me that the Asian male was refusing to make any statements at all to him.
M: Had you made – up to this point – any particular observations yourself of the Asian male?
B: Yes.
M: And would you tell the jury what observations you made of the Asian male?
B: Again, he appeared to be an Asian male of the age group given by Mr. Dahmer. He appeared to be intoxicated. He had no clothing on. He had a minor abrasion to his knee. Other than that, he appeared to be alert. Conscious of our presence and the presence of my partner.
M: Did you hear him speaking at all? In his voice at all? That is, the Oriental male.
B: No, I did not.
M: What happened then? What was said or was done between – and or by – you and Mr. Gabrish?
B: Well, at that time, after conferring with my partner (as is normal for any officers) we’d then attempt –
M: I’m sorry, would you repeat that?
B: I’m sorry. After speaking with my partner (as would be normal for any police officer) I then made an attempt to speak with the Asian male – in hopes that maybe he would feel comfortable speaking to me or [to] see if I could obtain anything from him.
M: It’s your experience that sometimes an individual won’t speak to one officer but will to another? A different technique or approach or something like that?
B: Yes.
M: And so you then went over and saw if you could get information from the Asian male yourself?
B: That’s correct.
M: Were you able to get any information from him?
B: No. Other than his being alert to my presence, he refused to make any attempt to communicate to me.
M: And you made a conclusion as to whether or not – or did you make any observations that caused you to reach a conclusion – as to whether or not he was intoxicated in some fashion?
B: Yes.
M: And what was that conclusion?
B: Well, to me he appeared to be intoxicated. A strong smell of alcohol on his breath. His unsteadiness on his feet – as upon our arrival when he was standing. His glassy-eyed look.
M: In that opportunity, when you were observing him, was he in front of the headlights of the car at that point?
B: Upon…?
M: As you were speaking to him. As you’re now questioning the Oriental male.
B: He would have been seated on the bumper of the squad car at that time.
M: Did you see anything about his person – beyond the scrape on the knee that you’ve earlier testified to. Did you see any other injuries on his person?
B: No. I was able to view him, upon our arrival, from his back and his front and I did not see any other injuries – other than an abrasion to his knee.
M: What then happened – or was said or was done? Were you successful at all in getting any information from the Asian male?
B: No, I did not get anything from him.
M: Did he simply remain silent or did he speak in some tongue you didn’t understand or what, if any communication, was there?
B: There was nothing from him verbally, physically, facial expressions, nothing – other than just his being aware that I was there and talking to him, asking questions. He just didn’t respond.
M: What did you then do or say after you had made these observations and this attempt to communicate with the Asian male?
B: At that time, as I recall, I spoke with Mr. Dahmer again and may have spoke with my partner another time.
Assistance
M: Now, at some point, had Fire Personnel arrived on the scene? Or [had] you became aware of Fire Personnel?
B: I don’t recall, uh… Are you speaking of my knowledge at that time or what I know now?
M: Well, going back to then. To that particular early morning hour at about 2 A.M in this alley. Did there come a time when you became aware that fire people had arrived at the scene?
B: Myself, personally, I was not aware that they had been there, no.
M: Were you aware that, at some point, a blanket of some type had been put around the Oriental male?
B: Yes.
M: When you spoke with him – after you had initially talked to Dahmer, came back, spoke to Gabrish then undertook to question the Asian male yourself – when you were questioning, was there now a blanket on him?
B: Yes.
M: After you had completed this effort trying to talk with the Asian male, you went back and talked to Gabrish and then back to Dahmer again. Is that what transpired?
B: I believe so, yes.
M: What was the conversation at that point with Mr. Dahmer?
B: May have been, I believe, checking the – again, just trying to substantiate everything.
M: More questions?
B: Right.
M: And what happened then? Had he told you where he lived (Dahmer)? And when you would ask the name and that, did you ask the address and so on?
B: Yes.
M: Where was the address? With respect to where you were right in that alley.
B: That would have been at the South end of the city block that we were on.
M: Is the end of the alley the north-south alley?
B: Basically, yes.
M: So would that put you within a few apartment buildings of his address?
B: That’s correct.
M: You were in the 900 block of North 25th Street – this alley. Is that correct?
B: That’s correct.
M: And he advised you he lived in the 900 block of North 25th Street?
B: Yes.
M: So you knew you were within a couple of doors of his residence. Is that so?
B: Yes.
M: Right. You question them again – and then what was said or done?
B: At that time I made an appeal to the people that were there – asking if anybody knew the Asian male.
M: You have indicated that – as you came up to the scene – you saw a group of people there at the mouth of the alley. Now you start to talk to those people. You’re going to try to get some information about the Asian male?
B: Right. For a matter of my record.
M: Right. What inquiry did you make of the people that were there?
B: I asked in a loud voice if anybody knew this person – in reference to the Asian male. At which point I received no response from the individuals.
M: What did you then do or say?
B: At that time I believe we talked – I talked to my partner – and we decided to go back to the apartment to further our investigation and to have the Asian male off the street, since he was naked.
M: So you and Gabrish decided “okay, we’ll go over to the apartment” where Dahmer had told you he and this Oriental male were roommates. Is that correct?
B: That’s correct.
M: All right. What happened then – after you and Gabrish made that decision. Had other officers arrived on the scene in the interval that you’ve been describing?
B: Another squad had arrived on the scene during the course of our investigation on the street, yes.
M: Did you observe who those officers were that had arrived on the scene?
B: One officer I observed.
M: And what is his name?
B: That would be Officer Richard Porubcan4
M: Presumably he arrived with a partner, but you did not see that partner?
B: I don’t recall seeing.
M: All right. After you and Gabrish decided that the group would go back to the apartment building, what happened?
B: At that time Mr. Dahmer went to assist the Asian male to his feet, to escort him.
M: Did you announce to them “we’re going back to the apartment”? Did you advise Dahmer of that?
B: I wasn’t as much ‘announcing’ as much as it was saying “well, let’s get him off the street. We’ll get him back to the apartment.”
M: Right. So somebody went back to the Asian male. Was he still on the bumper of the squad car?
B: He was just sitting upright by himself on the bumper the whole time.
M: Right. And he was advised [that you’re] going back to the apartment building. Was he assisted in any way at that point?
B: He was initially assisted by Mr. Dahmer, I believe. Not to the point of being carried of any sort or anything like that. He was assisted in just guidance. Just being steadied as he walked.
M: Did any other officers assist, that you recollect?
B: It would have been my partner and Officer Porubcan
M: What did you do at this point? Did Dahmer say how he would get into his apartment? Did he indicate some fashion in which he would enter his apartment building?
B: No, I don’t recall him indicating that.
M: Right. In which direction did the group head? There’s now Dahmer, the Oriental male, Porubcan, yourself and your partner, Mr. Gabrish. Is that correct?
B: Yes. They were on foot and I had followed them in the squad car.
M: You went and got in the squad car?
B: That’s correct.
M: Right. And which way did the group head?
B: They walked east into the east-west alley (where we had been) until they reached the north-south alley and, at that point, they turned south into that alley.
M: All right. So that east-west alley that parallels State Street. We’ve already indicated that’s split in mid-block by a north-south alley. Is that correct?
B: That’s correct.
M: So the group walks east to the north-south alley and then turns south and walks south down the north-south alley. Is that correct?
B: That’s correct.
M: How far do they walk south? You’re following in the squad car?
B: Yes.
M: How far did they walk south down that alley?
B: They walked to the rear of the last building. On the south into the alley.
M: And is that the building you know as the Oxford Apartments?
B: Yes, I believe that’s what it is.
M: Right. Is there a back door into that apartment building?
B: Yes.
M: Right. Are there some steps that lead to that back door?
B: Yes.
M: When the group reached that area, did they proceed up those steps towards the back door?
B: Yes, they did.
M: And at that point you determined that you’d – what? Get out of the squad car and follow?
B: Yes. At that point I parked the squad, locked it up and followed on foot.
A Neat, Well-Kept Apartment
M: Did Mr. Dahmer have the key into that back door? Into the apartment building?
B: I wasn’t in a position to see.
M: At any rate, when you started up the steps the door was open and you followed in. Is that correct?
B: Correct. I followed the other group in.
M: Right. As you did, was there some walk down a hallway – or part-way down a hallway – to get to Mr. Dahmer’s apartment?
B: Yes. It was a little bit into the building itself.
M: Were you in that hallway by the time he undertook to unlock the door into his apartment?
B: I would have been in the hallway, yes.
M: And did he unlock the door?
B: Again, I was not in a position to observe how he was entering his apartment.
M: At any rate, because Porubcan, Gabrish, the Oriental male and Dahmer were between you and Dahmer’s door. Is that correct?
B: I believe that’s so.
M: So they obstructed your view of what happened. At any rate, he opened the apartment door – Mr. Dahmer did – and the group went in. Is that correct?
B: That’s correct.
M: Was there any hesitancy by him about going into the apartment?
B: No, there was no hesitance by him either on the street or before – when we stated we’re going back to the apartment. And there was no hesitation at any time about allowing us into the apartment, of any sorts.
M: He didn’t ask for a warrant or anything like that?
B: No.
M: Right. He opened the door and all of you went in. Were you probably the last to go in?
B: I would believe so, yes.
M: When you got in, can you tell the jury… Basically – when you open up – is it a living room opening up into the first room [that] you enter from the hallway?
B: The apartment itself has a short hallway and there’d be a living room in an open-area to the kitchen.
M: Right. Did you notice any doorway to the right leading into a bedroom or bathroom?
B: It may have been a short – again – a short hallway where there was a door or two. Which I assumed was the bathroom or bedroom.
M: Did you go into that area at all?
B: No.
M: Do you have any recollection whether that was closed? When you walked into the area that would provide access to the bedroom and bathroom. Do you recall if [in] the access to that hallway, there was a closed door there or not? If you recollect.
B: To the hallway or to the rooms itself?
M: No, to the hallway that would lead into the bathroom and the bedroom.
B: I believe that there was no door to the hallway itself – my recollection – but just to the individual rooms themselves.
M: Did you look into a bedroom or a bathroom at all?
B: No. Those doors, as I recall, were closed and [we] had no reason to venture into there5.
M: But when you came into the living room, what observations did you make?
B: Of the apartment itself?
M: Yes.
B: The apartment was a neat, well-kept apartment.
M: Did you make any particular observations with respect to – was there a couch in the living room?
B: Yes, there was.
M: Did you make any particular observations of that couch?
B: The couch – in regards to where it was positioned or what was on it?
M: Where it was positioned, what was on it, whatever you observed of it.
B: The couch, I believe, was against the east wall of the apartment. Had a blanket or a sheet, as I recall, on the couch and some clothing – as if someone had been sleeping on the couch and with the blanket.
M: What impact did that have on you? That observation.
B: That, to me, further substantiated what I had been told during my investigation on the street and – as we further investigated – that substantiated that from Mr. Dahmer. That someone – his roommate – had been sleeping on the couch. Passed out.
M: And the clothes were there on the couch also?
B: Yes.
M: You described it as a neat apartment. Did you see any evidence of a struggle in that apartment?
B: No, there was no signs of any disturbance or struggle of any sort. Everything was in its place. It was a clean, well-kept apartment.
M: What, if anything, was said or done at that time? There are now the three Officers: you, Gabrish, Porubcan; the defendant, Mr. Dahmer and the Oriental male. Is that correct?
B: That’s correct.
M: And what did the Oriental male do when you came into the apartment? What was he doing – or had he done – by the time you came into the apartment?
B: As I was walking to the apartment he proceeded to the couch and he sat in an upright position on the edge of the couch.
M: Since that time – since the May 27th, 1991 morning – you have come to know that Asian male by a name other than John Hmong. Is that correct?
B: That’s correct.
M: And what name have you come to know him?
B: As Konerak Sinthasomphone.
M: You’ve seen pictures of him and so on – and that was the Oriental male that you were observing [on those] early morning hours [who] you’ve come to know as Konerak Sinthasomphone. Is that correct?
B: That’s correct.
M: As you’re making these observations, you see the sheet on the bed or on the couch – the sheet or blanket. The clothes. What other observations did you make at that time – or what was said or done at that time – In the apartment?
B: At that time I was talking to Mr. Dahmer and my partner was next to me in an area not too distant from me. Officer Porubcan was off to the side towards a table for the kitchen area.
M: And do you recall what you said to Dahmer at this particular time? What the discussion was about? Were you looking for anything at that point?
B: At that point we had proceeded back to further investigate and for this just to substantiate everything.
“Everybody Has To Be Into Something”
M: Do you recall or not whether any of the other officers started through the clothing that was seen on the couch?
B: I don’t recall, myself, that incident or that part of our investigation.
M: In other words, you don’t know particularly what Gabrish or Porubcan was doing at that point. Other than you were – more or less – talking to Dahmer [and] they were nearby because of the small apartment. But you weren’t particularly observing what they were doing, I take it, at that point?
B: I wasn’t watching them directly, no.
M: What then happened or was said or done?
B: By?
M: By anybody.
B: Officer Porubcan picked up one or two Polaroid pictures off of a table and he held them up so we could view them and brought them to our attention.
M: Were you close enough that you could make a review yourself of those Polaroid pictures?
B: Yes.
M: And what appeared in those Polaroid pictures?
B: That was a picture of Sinthasomphone posing in either black underwear or bikini briefs – in that apartment itself.
*McCann hands Balcerzak two Polaroid pictures*
M: I ask you to examine what has been marked The State’s Exhibit Number 68 and 69. Can you tell the jury: Are those photographs?
B: Yes.
M: And are they photographs of the man you’ve come to know as Konerak Sinthasomphone?
B: Yes.
M: And would you describe to the jury what is presented in those photos?
B: It’s a picture of – it appears to be the same Polaroid which I viewed on those early morning hours.
M: And what does the picture show?
B: It shows Mr. Sinthasomphone posing in black bikini briefs or underwear, in a relaxed pose in the apartment itself
M: In one of the poses, is he on the couch?
B: Yes. One of the poses he’s stretched out on the couch.
M: Are his eyes open?
B: Yes, they are.
M: Does he appear to be conscious in that pose?
B: Yes.
M: Does it appear to be a deliberate posing?
B: Yes. Appears to be a relaxed pose for whoever was taking the pictures.
M: And what does the second picture contain?
B: Again, contains the same setting of the apartment. Along with Mr. Sinthasomphone with his bikini briefs, posing.
M: Is he standing or reclining in the second photo?
B: He is standing.
M: And are his eyes open?
B: Yes, they are.
M: Does he appear to be conscious?
B: Yes.
M: You were shown those photos by Porubcan – or copies of those photos by Porubcan – at that time in the apartment?
B: It would be – I believe there were Polaroid pictures, yes.
M: Right. What was said or done at that time?
B: Uh, upon…?
M: Yes, after you observed those. Porubcan showed them to you. Did he show them to Gabrish too? If you recollect.
B: Officer Gabrish, myself – along with Mr. Dahmer and Mr. Sinthasomphone – were all in a position to view those, yes.
M: And what happened then – or was said or done – at that point, after you looked at those photos?
B: Uh… Said or done by us or by anybody?
M: Yes, by anybody.
B: I believe Mr. Dahmer made a statement that – to me, he appeared to be a little embarrassed about it – and made a statement (or said something to the effect) that: “Everybody has to be into something.”
M: “Everybody has to be into something”? And you drew some conclusions from that?
B: From the pictures and the statement or from the –
M: Yes.
B: To me it appeared that… Uh, yes.
M: All right. And what were those conclusions?
B: That there was a relationship of sorts between the two individuals.
M: Is there anything in the pictures that suggested to you that it either was consensual or non-consensual? From looking at the pictures.
B: From the pictures, that appeared to be a consensual type of pose. A relaxed posing. No distress of any sorts in the pictures.
M: And you could tell from looking at the picture [that] the pictures had been taken in the very apartment in which you were standing?
B: Yes.
M: Did that influence what then transpired? Your decision? Having seen those two pictures?
B: To me it just further substantiated my investigation [and] that of my partners… [It] appeared to substantiate what Mr. Dahmer had related to us throughout the investigation.
M: After those pictures were shown by Porubcan and Mr. Dahmer said “everybody’s got to be into something” – what did you then do or say?
B: At that time I believe I spoke to Mr. Dahmer stating that if we or the police returned for similar behaviour, then some action would be taken.
M: And this is referring to if Sinthasomphone is seen out on the street naked again, further action will be taken?
B: Yes.
M: Did he respond to that at all? Dahmer?
B: I believe he said something to the effect that – he assured us that he’d take care of him and that it wouldn’t occur again.
Like A Normal Person
M: What, if anything then, was said or done?
B: At that point, we basically concluded our assignment and we left the apartment.
M: The three of you left the apartment? The three officers?
B: Right. As we left, we made Mr. Sinthasomphone aware that we were leaving – as well as Mr. Dahmer – and we proceeded to leave.
M: And did you leave?
B: Yes.
M: Right. During the time that you were there, had Mr. Sinthasomphone done or said anything besides sitting on the couch?
B: No. He remain seated in an upright position by his self and he just was watching what was happening in the apartment. Just watching us and Mr. Dahmer.
M: During that time did he say anything? Mr. Sinthasomphone?
B: No, he did not.
M: During that time was there a light on within the apartment?
B: There would have been some lights on, yes.
M: Did you make any additional observations as to any injuries of Mr. Sinthasomphone?
B: The only injuries that I had observed on him or anyone – Mr. Dahmer or him – [were that] Mr. Dahmer had nothing [on] him. The only injuries I have observed to Mr. Sinthasomphone was the abrasion to his knee.
M: When you were in the apartment in that fashion, had he kept the blanket around him? Sinthasomphone.
B: I believe when he sat down he relaxed – regarding his holding the blanket around his self. There was no need to – he was not in the public’s eye, per se.
M: How had the blanket been? Was it about his shoulders or his head or about his waist? In what fashion do you recollect this blanket had been about him?
B: Well, initially, when I first observed a blanket, I believe it would have been around his shoulders – kind of draped over his shoulders and his back. Basically coming just below, to his thigh. And as he walked back to the apartment it might have gone to a lower [place] – more like wrapped around his waist.
M: This you would have seen from following in the squad car?
B: Yes.
M: And you had made observations of Mr. Dahmer in the alley. You said basically that he appeared neat, calm, hair in order, clothing in order. When you got into the building and had observations of him within the lighted apartment, was there anything more you added to those observations?
B: No, he remained calm and forthright to me. I’ve heard through the entire investigation.
M: Now, when the three of you left, did Mr. Sinthasomphone get up or do anything of that nature as you three officers started to leave?
B: No, throughout our investigation he made no physical or verbal communication with us.
M: Had you ever seen Mr. Sinthasomphone before, to your knowledge?
B: To my recollection, I’ve never seen him before.
M: Had you ever seen Mr. Dahmer before, to your knowledge?
B: To my recollection, I’ve never seen him before.
M: To your recollection, have you ever been in that particular apartment before?
B: The apartment itself?
M: Not the building, just the apartment itself.
B: Not to my recollection. I’ve never been in there.
M: Right. Were the Polaroid pictures left there? Do you know what Mr. Porubcan did with them?
B: I don’t recall if he set ‘em back. After briefly looking at ‘em he just held them up – and what he did with him after that, I don’t recall.
M: Was Porubcan also a uniformed officer?
B: Yes, he was.
M: Right. So Majeski, the fourth officer, did not enter the apartment at any time I take it?
B: No, not that I recall.
M: You’ve indicated that he [Dahmer] was calm during this time. Let me ask some additional questions. Was Mr. Dahmer responsive to the questions you put to him?
B: Yes.
M: As you went back and forth and re-questioned him on different points, was he inconsistent at any time in his responses to you?
B: No, he wasn’t.
M: Did he appear to understand what you were asking of him?
B: Yes.
M: Did he appear incoherent at any time?
B: No.
M: Was he non-responsive to your questions at any time?
B: No.
M: Did you see any evidence of a delusion? That he was in a delusional state at that time?
B: No, he appeared to be a normal person.
M: Did he appear to you to be hallucinating at that time, in any fashion?
B: No.
M: Did he appear to be in a stupor of any type?
B: No.
M: Did you form any opinion as to whether he had been drinking – particularly that evening, if you recollect.
B: The only thing I could say [is] that he did not appear to be intoxicated to me. As far as his possibly drinking, I wouldn’t be able to say.
M: Did he appear to you to be, in any way, out of touch with reality?
B: No.
M: While you were in the apartment, did you smell anything unusual? If you recollect.
B: No.
M: How long were you in the apartment? From the time that you were actually in the apartment itself.
B: The exact time, I couldn’t give you.
M: Not the exact time, the approximate time.
B: Be five to eight minutes or so.
M: How much time transpired from the time you initially started to talk to Mr. Dahmer in the alley until the time you walked out of the apartment? How much time frame are we talking about?
B: About 20 minutes or so. The exact time – again, I wasn’t watching my wrist watch, so…
M: And thereafter – after you left the apartment – you returned to another assignment?
B: After leaving we went into service and attempted to go and do clean up.
M: Thank you.
*Balcerzak is then briefly cross-examined by Dahmer’s defence attorney, Gerald Boyle*
❌❌❌ CROSS EXAMINATION ❌❌❌
GERALD BOYLE: I have relatively few questions for Officer Balcerzak… My client informed me that one of the officers took a flashlight and looked from the top of Mr. Sinthasomphone’s head to the bottom of his feet. Would that have been you or another officer who was present?
B: No, it was not me.
GB: Okay. You never saw any signs of blood – other than this small abrasion on the knee, correct?
B: To Mr. Sinthasomphone?
GB: Yes.
B: Yes, that’s all.
GB: Now, when you went back into the apartment… Did you have to go back into the apartment? Was there any violation of law that you saw? As far as what Mr. Dahmer was doing.
B: In regards to Mr. Dahmer, you say?
GB: Yeah.
B: No, there was nothing.
GB: You couldn’t have arrested him if you wanted to, correct?
B: No, no. That’s correct.
GB: So when you went back into the apartment, you’re going back there to make sure that everything was okay?
B: That’s correct.
GB: And – when you got into the apartment – did you see any violations of law, in your presence, that you could have effectuated an arrest for?
B: No.
GB: Did there come a time – as Mr. Dahmer recalls – [when] one of the officers [was] checking the clothes of this young man were all folded neatly? Did you see how they were folded?
B: I recall that they were laid on the couch, but as to whether, or how, they were folded – they were not strewn around the apartment.
GB: I mean, you didn’t see just clothes that had been ripped off or just pulled off –
B: No, not at all. They were put in place.
GB: And if it was reported that one of the officers was looking for ID by touching the trousers – was that you or another officer?
B: I don’t recall if that was me doing that or not, but –
GB: Do you recall Mr. Dahmer saying “there’s no ID. You won’t find any ID in those pants. He doesn’t carry his ID”?
B: No, I don’t recall that.
GB: You don’t recall hearing that?
B: No.
GB: Okay. You couldn’t have left the area of that living room – based upon what you’ve seen – and gone around that apartment, even if you wanted to. Correct?
B: That’s correct, yeah.
GB: That’s all I have. Thank you.
JUDGE GRAM: Redirect?
MICHAEL MCCANN: Nope.
JUDGE GRAM: You may step down, sir. Thank you.
🌸🌸🌸
Konerak Sinthasomphone
1976 – 1991
Rest in Peace
🌸🌸🌸
Sources:
- WI v. Jeffrey Dahmer: Officer John Balcerzak on Court TV
- I Have Lived in the Monster by Robert Ressler and Tom Shachtman (1997)
- The Milwaukee Journal, The Milwaukee Sentinel, Tulsa World
Special thanks to Steve G.
Transcribing is time-consuming and can be a financial expense. If you find this transcript useful and quote it, please consider referencing me. I’d really appreciate it! 🙂
- Four other young men were to die in apartment 213 after Konerak and Tony – with Dahmer killing 17 men in total ↩︎
- Public relations weren’t helped by the emergence of dispatch recordings featuring the officers laughing about the “intoxicated Asian male” being “returned to his sober boyfriend” and joking about needing to get “deloused” back at the station ↩︎
- Initially suspended with pay on July 26th – a few days after Dahmer’s final arrest – the officers were officially dismissed on September 6th, 1991. Following three years full of public protest and depositions; pro-cop support and appeals, Gabrish and Balcerzak were reinstated in June 1994 by Judge Robert J. Parins – who found the firings too severe a penalty. The Sinthasomphone family later sought a settlement from the city ↩︎
- Following Dahmer’s arrest and the Konerak incident being brought to light, Porubcan was put on work probation for a year – having been found to have been less culpable (and less experienced on the force) than Balcerzak and Gabrish ↩︎
- Had the officers felt a reason to look in Dahmer’s bedroom, they would have discovered the body of victim, Tony Hughes. Who Dahmer had killed just three days earlier ↩︎
girl I’m so glad you’re doing this stuff again!! Your jd research is 👌👌👌👌
Ash, I totally missed approving your comment! Thank you so much for always supporting me x
I was anxiously awaiting the next installment on this blog! It was worth the wait. It’s my favourite online, by far.
I point that jumps off the page are the Polaroids of Konerak. If you were a cop in that situation, those seemingly consenting photos explain a lot regarding the cops’ frame of mind.
Really enjoyed this one!
Really cool post 🙂 I like how you provide both sides of the argument, while deeply respecting Konerak Sinthasomphone and the black ladies. Do you have more transcripts? 🙂
Thank you so much! Am glad the tone of my respect comes across that way.
I do have quite a lot more transcripts, content and pending // in-progress posts, but it can take a while to put things together sometimes. I’ll try and have another article done by this week though – and another full transcript by the end of the month 🙂