First Posted September 5, 2009
According to Eric Stukel’s original version of events, Tammy and he left the Stephenson party at around 10:45 pm to return to his parents’ house. He even had time to stop off at the Cork ‘N Bottle in Yankton to purchase a twelve pack of Miller Genuine Draft and still made it back to his parents’ place by 11:00 pm.6 This timeline contradicts several witness claims that Stukel and Tammy were still at the Stephenson party at 11:15 pm.5
When Stukel was pressed on this discrepancy by law enforcement, he changed his timeline, saying they must have left later, at 11:15 pm, according to his testimony on the stand.1,2,6
One partygoer who testified claimed that Eric Stukel’s car was still at the party when he and his buddies had left sometime after 11:30 pm, which does seem to be validated by the fluid evidence detected in the cab of Stukel’s car.2,3,4,5
This witness also testified that he remembered seeing Stukel at the vacuum station of the car wash the next afternoon.5
This witness and his buddies even got a good laugh about all this the next day after the partygoer saw Stukel at the car wash. At that point, they could only assume Stukel was just cleaning his car seats of urine.5
I speculate none of them would have been laughing if they knew Tammy was dead.
Again, Stukel also claims to have been at the car wash at that time.6 Forensic analysis would reveal bodily fluids on the seat, steering wheel, and dashboard of Stukel’s car and fibers in his trunk, linking his vehicle to Tammy’s death.1,2,3,4
But whom do we believe: the partygoer, who told several people about the urine story before knowing anything about Tammy going missing, or Eric Stukel, who claims that he took Tammy home that night and then went to the car wash to clean his car out “real good”, knowing that his car would be impounded?5
According to Stukel’s statement to law enforcement, after the party, he and Tammy arrived at his parents’ home through a seperate entrance to the basement that he and his younger sister used. Once to his bedroom, Stukel smoked some more pot, (he had already smoked pot at the Stephenson farm) lit some candles, put on music, and he and Tammy supposedly made love.6
After this, according to Stukel, Tammy got dressed to go back to her aunt’s house sometime between 12:30 and 1:00 am.6
In her first statement to the police, Stukel’s younger sister, Sarah, who was staying in the room next to his, did not recall hearing any of this. We will turn to her series of conflicting statements soon enough.7
For now, we should examine the reasons for Stukel’s presence at the car wash on September 18th, 1992, and the body fluids and fibers investigators would find on and in his vehicle.
Just after 11:30 pm, on Thursday, September 17th, 1992, a partygoer urinates through the opened passenger window of Stukel’s car. The car seats and dash get covered in urine.4,5
A few minutes later, Eric Stukel and Tammy Haas hop in Eric’s car to leave the party and…
If Stukel’s story about taking Tammy back to his place were true, Tammy would have had to have gotten into a car with its seats covered in urine, ridden all the way back to Yankton in that car, gotten to Eric’s house, been in the mood to have sex, and then gotten dressed in those same urine-soaked clothes (the same ones she was seen wearing at the Stephenson party and the same ones hanging off her foot when her body was found.)1,2,3,4
Though urine was found on the back of Tammy’s underwear (almost like she sat in a car seat soaked in urine) and fluids were detected on Stukel’s dashboard, steering wheel, and front seats (almost like somebody might have urinated through Stukel’s window all over his upholstery) why did Stukel never mention anything about urine in his car?4,6
In fact, why, when confronted a year later by Det. Ron Hilleges of the Nebraska Highway Patrol about the urine in the car, did Eric Stukel deny ever cleaning his car on homecoming day? This was a direct contradiction to his testimony on the stand in 1996 — in other words, a lie.1, 2,3,4,5,6
Why did Stukel deny there was urine in his car? Why did he say his car was locked at that party? Why would he feel the need to protect that information? What was the big secret?
Did the vandalism to his car set him off?
Did he need to take his anger out on someone?
How do we know any of these events really happened? How do we know all these people aren’t just lying to implicate Eric Stukel as Tammy’s killer?
Here is Stukel’s version of the events, as he testified in his own defense in 1996, as quoted from the Yankton Press and Dakotan:
“On Thursday, he picked Haas up at 5:30 p.m. They had dinner at Pizza Hut and went to his home to watch television until the Yankton High School coronation began at 7:30 p.m. Following coronation, the two went to a party (near the airport north of Yankton) where they were told of another party at Dan Stephenson’s farmhouse in rural Cedar County, Nebraska.
“They stayed at the party until approximately 11:15 p.m., Stukel testified.
“Stukel said he and Haas were drinking and he smoked marijuana with a friend. After leaving the party, they returned to Stukel’s home, entered his room and Stukel ‘lit candles and put the lights low like I usually did.’
“‘I put the music on and we talked and laughed for a while. We made love for a while. I’m not sure how long we did.’ He said the evening was a repeat of Wednesday night.
“Haas had told Stukel she had to be home by 1:00 a.m. while staying at her aunt’s home. She had been living with Vicki Larsen for about a week before Haas’ disappearance. She got dressed and I offered her a ride, but she said, ‘No, you have school and it’s such a nice night.’ Stukel said Haas left his home to walk home. ‘That was the last time I saw her,’ he said.”6
Stukel’s sister would also claim to see Tammy that night, supposedly backing up Eric’s story. This made her a key witness for Stukel’s defense, again quoted from the Press and Dakotan:
“‘Around 1:00 a.m. I went to the bathroom and was startled,’ she said. ‘Tammy was coming out of the bathroom wearing a black bathrobe. Eric’s black bathrobe. I said hello and went to the bathroom.’ Sarah told her sleeping boyfriend she had been startled by Haas. ‘I went back to my room and I heard somebody go up the steps and the back door closed. No one came back down.'”7
In cross-examination, Prosecutor David Arterburn pointed out some inconsistencies in Sarah Stukel’s story:
“‘When you were interviewed by law enforcement on Sept. 27th, 1992, a week after the events we have been talking about, according to those reports, you never said you saw Tammy in a robe,’ Arterburn said. ‘Your testimony on Feb. 23, 1994 was the first time you mentioned a robe…a week after this happened you said nothing about seeing Tammy in the bathroom?’ he asked with no reply. ‘In February 1994, you added the element of the black robe and now you added the element of voices on the stairs,’ Arterburn said. ‘You seem to remember more about this the longer you go.'”7
I have to believe, not only based upon Sarah Stukel’s questionable testimony, but also based upon an encounter I had with Sarah Stukel two decades ago, that her whole story was a fabrication.
“I hope you don’t hate me because of my brother,” she shouted at me over the noise of a News Years Party at Sha-Booms in Yankton.
“What?” I shouted back.
“I said, ‘I hope you don’t hate me for what my brother did.'”
“I don’t even know who you are.”
“I’m Sarah — Eric Stukel’s my brother.”
I witnessed Sarah Stukel’s testimony in 1996. Four years later, I had not recognized her.
Needless to say, her proclamation left me speechless.
Works Cited
1. Rothanzl, Lorna. “New Clues Revealed: Sufficient Evidence Binds Stukel Over To District Court.” Yankton Press and Dakotan. Oct. 31, 1995
2. Rothanzl, Lorna. “Testimony Begins in Stukel Trial.” Yankton Press and Dakotan, Sept. 27, 1996
3. Rothanzl, Lorna. “More Evidence Offered In Stukel Trial.” Yankton Press and Dakotan, Sept. 28, 1996
4. Rothanzl, Lorna. “Experts Testify in Stukel Trial.” Yankton Press and Dakotan, Oct. 1, 1996
5. Rothanzl, Lorna. “Friends Testify at Stukel Trial.” Yankton Press and Dakotan. Oct. 2nd, 1996.
6. Rothanzl, Lorna. “Stukel Takes Stand: Prosecution Rests, Stukel Denies Knowledge Of Death.” Yankton Press and Dakotan, Oct. 3, 1996
7. Rothanzl, Lorna. ‘Stukel’s Sister Back Up Alibi at Trial.”Yankton Press and Dakotan. Oct. 4th, 1996.
Unbated Productions 