February 25, 2025 • 39 mins
On a chilling January evening in 2006, Teresa Butler, a devoted mother and beloved community member, vanished without a trace while putting her children to bed. After a regular family gathering, her husband left for work, unaware that this would lead to a heartbreaking investigation into her disappearance. In this gripping episode, we dive deep into the details of her last known moments, revealing a puzzling array of clues that highlight the complexities of family life intertwined with unexpected tragedy.
As authorities piece together the timeline following Teresa's disappearance, unsettling revelations emerge regarding her connections to individuals seemingly unconnected to her life. We explore the fallout of her case, introducing Melvin Ray Hufford, a man whose confession adds layers to the mystery yet raises further questions about Teresa’s character and circumstances leading to that fateful night.
Through this episode, we not only seek answers to the numerous questions left in the wake of Teresa's disappearance but also reflect on the broader implications of safety, trust, and the fragility of family units. Join us for an in-depth examination of love, betrayal, and the ongoing quest for closure for Teresa and her children. We urge you to share your thoughts and join the conversation about this heart-wrenching case as we continue to seek justice for Teresa Butler. Remember to subscribe and share this episode to help keep her story alive in hopes of uncovering more truths.
Sources:
https://charleyproject.org/case/teresa-lynn-butler
https://www.trace-evidence.com/teresa-butler
https://www.kfvs12.com/story/34639197/2017/03/Wednesday/heartland-unsolved-in-the-dark/
https://www.kfvs12.com/2019/11/21/arrest-made-teresa-butler-case/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/awarenessformissingmopersons/posts/552172495493670/
https://faithfuneralservice.net/obituary/442
Music Credit:
Crime Trap by Muza Production
Sinister Skies by Alana Jordan
Deep Thoughts by Crab Audio
What a Pity by Alban Gogh
Gone in a Blink is created by Heather Hicks and Danielle E.
Written and produced by Heather Hicks and hosted by Danielle E. and Heather Hicks.
Gone in a Blink theme: Crime Trap created and produced by Muzaproduction
We would love to hear from you!
Follow us on social media:
Instagram @ Goneinablinkpod
Facebook @ Gone in a Blink podcast
YouTube @ Goneinablinkpodcast@goneinablink
Email us with comments and/or ideas for an episode at goneinablinkpod@gmail.com
Thanks for joining us on the airwaves. And remember......Be Safe, Be Smart, and Try Not to Blink.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:09):
A quiet evening spent with family on a cold January
day.
Small children playing andlaughing.
Their mother close by, engagedin casual conversation with her
sister-in-law.
The children's father isworking the night shift at his
(00:30):
job not far from where thefamily resides.
As it starts to get late, thechildren's mother decides she
needs to head home, get theminto the bath and then put them
to bed for the night.
She too is ready to call it anight.
A devoted mother, she headshome to tend to her small
(00:54):
children, four-year-old Gavinand two-year-old Garrett.
What seemed like such a typicalday with family would soon turn
into a nightmare for everyonewho knew and loved this young
mother of two.
This is the case of TeresaButler.
(01:16):
And this is Gone in a Blink.
Hey, true crime fans, I'm yourhost, heather, and I'm Danielle.
Welcome to episode 34 of Gonein a.
Blink.
I hope everyone is staying warmout there.
(01:37):
Wherever you may be listeningfrom, we have been dealing with
some extreme temperatures herein the Midwest.
Schools seem like they'reclosed more than they're open at
this point, and I'm really justready for springtime.
To be honest, my children aregoing out of their minds with
boredom, and being stuck in thehouse is driving everyone pretty
(01:59):
much crazy and I'll be prettyhonest, I'm ready for them to go
back as well.
How's everything been going atyour house with this cold.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
Well, I, you know, hadn't left the house for a
couple of days and thenyesterday I finally had to go
into work but it was too coldfor my dog to be outside, so I
had to leave him inside andthankfully he didn't do any mess
on the floor or anything likethat.
But I could definitely tell,like, just like with a little
kid, that boredom when I gothome, of course super excited to
(02:29):
see me but wouldn't leave mealone and nothing was making him
, you know, happy, just like alittle kid, bored, just had been
in the house too long.
Speaker 1 (02:38):
That's actually how my nine year old son has been.
He can't understand why we gotall this snow and the
temperatures are in the uppernegatives, so it's way too cold
for him to be playing outside init and it's just driving him
absolutely crazy.
But the weather's kind ofchilling out now.
(02:59):
So I'm ready for spring, thoughReally ready for spring.
So today's case is one out ofRisco, missouri.
Today we are talking about thecase of missing mom Teresa
Butler.
So if you're ready, let's jumpright in.
Teresa Lynn Butler was describedby those who knew and loved her
(03:20):
as having a huge heart and onewho would always go the extra
mile to help anyone in need.
She was married to the love ofher life, gary Dale Butler, and
together they shared twobeautiful children, gavin, age
four, and Garrett, just twoyears old.
They lived in a small but cutelittle home in the rural part of
(03:41):
Risco, missouri, on County Road241, which is also known as
Eight Ditch Road, just off ofHighway 62.
And just a little bit aboutRisco.
It is located approximately 123miles or 198 kilometers north
of Memphis, tennessee, and islocated in the southeast part of
(04:04):
Missouri.
Its population in 2006 wasaround 356, and I believe it was
last updated in 2020 with apopulation of only 286.
So it is a very small, mostlyrural community.
On Tuesday, january 24th 2006,just before 5 pm, dale Butler
(04:28):
got ready for his overnightshift and gave his wife, teresa,
a hug goodbye.
After telling her that he lovedher, he headed to work.
Teresa then took the boys overto her brother, donald Buchanan,
and her sister-in-law, sarahBuchanan's home.
Teresa's husband, dale, wasworking the overnight shift and
wouldn't be home until the nextmorning.
(04:49):
Around 9.30 pm, teresa decidedthat she better get the boys
home so she could give them abath and get them to bed, and as
she headed back to her home,her sister-in-law, sarah,
followed her home so that shecould borrow Teresa's computer
in order to copy some things forwork.
Little did Sarah know at thetime this would be the last time
(05:11):
her or anyone else would eversee Teresa Butler.
According to Sarah Buchanan,the two women and the little
boys arrived at the Butler homearound 10 pm on the night of
January 24th.
Sarah stayed for a short whilebefore heading home.
When Sarah was leaving theButler home, teresa was getting
(05:32):
the boys ready to take theirbaths.
She told Sarah that she wasgoing to bed after she got the
boys to bed.
So Sarah mentions that.
She specifically remembers thatwhen she walked out the front
door of the Butler home, theporch light was on, and this
will later become a very crucialpart of this case.
(05:53):
So around this same time Daletold police that he tried to
call Sarah on his lunch break.
However, it would just gostraight to voicemail.
He later told reporters that itwas like the call wasn't even
going through.
He figured that maybe Teresahad just fallen asleep and so he
really wasn't worried about itat that point.
(06:14):
The next morning Dale returnedhome from work around 10 am and
he recalled walking into thehouse and not seeing anyone in
the front area of the house.
He thought that was kind ofstrange and then, along with the
fact that he tried to callTeresa the night before and she
wasn't answering, he decided towalk through the house in search
(06:34):
for his wife.
So he walked to the backbedroom and there he saw
four-year-old Gavin laying inthe couple's bed curled up in a
blanket.
Two-year-old Garrett wassitting in a chair with an empty
bottle and a soaked diaper.
There was no sign of Teresaanywhere.
Dale walked throughout thehouse calling Teresa's name, and
(06:57):
when he still couldn't locateher, panic really began to set
in.
He grabbed his phone and begancalling friends and family, and
basically anyone and everyone hecould think of that may have
some idea of where his wifecould be.
All kinds of thoughts wererunning through Del's mind at
this point and he thought well,maybe she just had to run to the
(07:20):
store really quick, or maybeshe had to run here, maybe she
had to run there.
But in reality he knew thatTeresa would not have left her
kids all alone.
Teresa had been working in thephoto department at the local
Walmart in Dexter, missouri, andwas scheduled to work the noon
shift on the day of herdisappearance.
(07:41):
She never showed up.
The police were called andarrived within minutes to assess
the scene.
They discovered a list of itemswere missing from the home,
including the family's videocamera, a Nintendo GameCube with
games, a PlayStation along withgames, a large flashlight along
(08:02):
with games, a large flashlight,a digital camera and a car
stereo.
Teresa's purse and cell phonewere also missing.
Police, though, did findTeresa's wedding rings lying on
the floor partially underneaththe couch.
Dale told officers that it wasnot uncommon for Teresa to take
(08:23):
them off if they started toirritate her skin or if she was
sleeping Teresa, to take themoff if they started to irritate
her skin or if she was sleeping.
Teresa's green Jeep Wrangler wasalso still left in the driveway
.
Authorities found no signs of astruggle and no signs of forced
entry, making the fact thatTeresa was missing even more
suspicious.
That foul play was involved.
Two things that really grabbedthe attention of police was the
(08:45):
fact that a key was found brokenoff inside a lock at the home
and the light bulb to the frontporch light had been unscrewed.
So this right there is probablythe biggest red flag for me
anyway, because whatever wasabout to go down at that house
that night could not havehappened with the porch light on
(09:07):
, and because they unscrewed thelight versus turning the light
off tells me that they wereabout to do something before
they actually had access to thehouse.
Speaker 2 (09:19):
Yeah, that seems like a really red flag, really big
red flag, that they would go tothe trouble of unscrewing the
light bulb.
I guess what went through mymind is just once they're in the
house it could have been easilyturned off, but they were
really trying to catch somebodyby surprise.
Speaker 1 (09:36):
Well, exactly, and I'm not sure if they were
planning to break in or maybethey knocked on the door and
then unscrewed the light so thatwhen Teresa tried to look
outside to see who it was, shewouldn't be able to see.
And that's my thinking rightthere, because you're standing
outside on the porch, you don'thave access at this point to the
(09:57):
inside of the home.
It's what after 10 o'clock atnight, so it's very dark.
This is a rural area.
So my thinking is they probablyunscrewed the light so that
when she, or when they knockedand she tried to look out to see
who it was, she couldn't see.
Teresa's sister-in-law reportedthat the porch light was on
(10:20):
when she left the Butler homethat night, and that could
explain why there was no forcedentry, because I mean just
thinking about someoneunscrewing the light bulb and
knocking and she tried to lookto see who it was and couldn't
see, and so she just maybe shethought it was her sister-in-law
coming back for something, andso she opened the door and was
(10:42):
totally caught off guard.
Speaker 2 (10:44):
Yeah, that's where my mind goes as well is that I
think you had said that hersister-in-law left about 10
o'clock that night and somebodywas watching the house.
So I would guess thatsister-in-law left and maybe
shortly thereafter someoneknocks at the door and Teresa
thinks that oh, maybe hersister-in-law forgot something
(11:06):
and probably, honestly, probablydidn't even look outside,
because it could have been thatquickly if somebody was watching
the house waiting for thesister-in-law to leave.
Speaker 1 (11:15):
So it caught her off guard and almost seems like an
ambush that's what seems to makethe most sense seems to make
the most sense, and thenunscrewing the light bulb not
only would serve that purpose ofher not being able to look out
and see who it was, but alsoanyone driving by would not be
able to see what may or may notbe taking place right there.
(11:36):
So cell phone records laterconfirmed that on the night
Teresa went missing, a call wasplaced from Teresa's phone to a
residence in Gideon, missouri,at 3 16 am, and Gideon is
approximately 16 miles, or justover 25 kilometers, southwest of
(11:57):
Risco.
The person living at theresidence did not answer the
phone that night and they toldinvestigators that they didn't
even know Teresa or anyone elsein her family.
Then, after Teresa'sdisappearance, another call was
placed, using her cell phonethis time, to a residence in
Clarkton, missouri, and onceagain the homeowners claimed
(12:21):
that they didn't know who Teresawas.
They did say that they answeredthe phone that day but heard
nothing on the other end.
Investigators were perplexed asto what could have happened to
Teresa.
Authorities asked Dale if hiswife had any enemies or was
having any issues before shewent missing.
He claimed that his wife wasn'thaving any problems that were
(12:45):
concerning before shedisappeared.
However, teresa's co-workersfrom the Walmart store where she
worked painted a very differentpicture.
They claimed that Dale'sex-wife was calling her at work
and even began making threats toTeresa and I actually saw that
someone posted a comment on WebSleuths that Teresa had met her
(13:06):
husband while they were bothworking together at a factory
and, according to the commentergoing by the name K-Mac, teresa
and her husband allegedly beganseeing each other while they
were both still married to otherpeople.
They eventually divorced theirspouses and got married to each
other, and her co workers did infact, back up the story that
(13:28):
Teresa was receiving threateningphone calls, so there was
definitely some hostility.
However, was it enough tomurder Teresa?
That I don't know.
Speaker 2 (13:38):
Yeah, that does seem kind of odd that the husband
would paint the picture thateverything was fine, but then
talking to co workers of Teresa,they paint a different picture.
Speaker 1 (13:50):
Yeah, and I don't know exactly how far everything
went.
I mean far enough that she wasmaking threatening phone calls
to her work.
I think that's taken it a bitfar, but according to her
husband, they had resolvedeverything.
So, like I said, it went so farthat the ex-wife was calling
her at her job and makingthreats what kind of threats, I
(14:13):
have no clue, but they werethreats all the same and then
she disappears.
So that is something that youknow I wouldn't ignore.
Speaker 2 (14:21):
Well, sure, yeah that , especially after she
disappears, and then there's anaccount of that.
But you can't rule out that.
Okay, maybe he was trying notto mention that they had issues.
At this point you have to lookat him at least a little bit as
a suspect.
Speaker 1 (14:39):
Well, and also I think it's the fact that it was
his ex, so he was probably couldhave been.
If she was on the other footand it was her ex, then maybe
she would have made light of thesituation too.
I think it was just the factthat it was his ex and he knows
his ex and so he was probablylike, oh, you know, she's just
that's how she is, just kind ofmaking light of the situation.
(15:03):
I think, no matter whose exitwould have been in a lot of
cases would have just kind ofbrushed it off and been like
we're working this out, soeverything's good.
Speaker 2 (15:15):
I think more of that.
He has a lot on his mind rightnow, of whatever capacity.
His wife is missing, whether hehad anything to do with it or
not.
He has two small children, so Icould see guy or girl, that
being more on the forefront ofhis mind versus if Teresa and
his ex were fighting.
Speaker 1 (15:34):
Well and apparently officers did not really explore
this too far.
I don't think.
Or if they did, they cut it offpretty quick because there's
not a lot of mention in articlesthat I've read from valuable
sources.
It's more along the lines ofweb sleuths Not that web sleuths
(15:56):
can't be valuable sourcesbecause they have solved many
crimes.
However, it's from Reddit andit's from web sleuths and it's
people giving their opinion inspeculation based, if that makes
sense.
So it's not.
It's not coming fromauthorities or anything like
that.
But on March 6, 2007, a femalewitness came forward with some
(16:19):
information that they believecould help officers
investigating Teresa's case.
They explained that in the 24hours after Teresa went missing,
a video camera had beenexchanged for drugs.
Missouri Highway Patrolinvestigator Sergeant JS
Stolting interviewed the witness, who claimed that a man by the
(16:40):
name of Melvin Ray Hewford Jrhad stopped by her house and
talked with her husband.
Hewford claimed that he hadbeaten a guy up over a drug debt
and that he had a video cameraand an easy shot camera.
However, the witness claimedthat she never actually saw the
equipment.
The witness thought that itsounded suspicious given the
(17:02):
time frame and after hearingabout what was missing from the
Butler home after Teresa'sdisappearance.
She was kind of tying two andtwo together.
So on August 2nd 2007 thefemale witness was brought back
into the police station, butthis time with her husband, and
the two were each interviewedseparately.
(17:23):
The husband told investigators,stolting, that Melvin Hewford
had stopped by their housewithin 24 hours after Teresa
Butler had gone missing.
He claimed at that time hedidn't know anything about
Teresa's disappearance.
He told investigators that hehad traded Hewford a gram of
meth in exchange for a digitalcamera and a camcorder.
(17:45):
Once the witness viewed thecontents of the video camera, he
realized it had belonged toTeresa Butler.
He then claimed to haveconfronted Huford about who it
belonged to.
However, huford denied anyknowledge of who it belonged to
or the circumstances surroundingit.
The man then told officers thatafter he realized who the items
belonged to, he gave them tohis wife and told her to get rid
(18:10):
of them.
She then pulled the tape out ofthe video camera and threw the
camera in a ditch, and then thehusband burned the videotape in
a barrel behind a familymember's home.
The couple told investigatorswhere they could find the video
camera.
However, once authoritieslocated the video camera and
pulled it from the ditch.
It had been drenched in waterand was missing the serial
(18:33):
number, making it impossible toprove that the camera had in
fact belonged to Teresa.
Speaker 2 (18:38):
So there's so much there.
Okay, my first question March 6, 2007,.
This is when it was reported,and then they didn't bring them
into the police station tillAugust 2?
That seems like so many monthshad gone by Two, I don't know.
I mean, there's all differentkind of beliefs out there.
(18:59):
I tend to believe that when wehave a guilty conscience, we
bring up things like oh, I sohappen to have came across this
camcorder.
I mean things like that to kindof try to clear our conscience.
And, yes, blame it on somebodyelse, or maybe this couple, if
they're not involved with thedisappearance.
(19:21):
Blaming it on someone else.
They're, of course, saying Idon't know where we got it, but
yet they're trying to get rid ofevidence instead of just
bringing it to the police.
There just seems to be so manyred flags here that either this
couple was directly involved orthat the person that they're
claiming that they got the itemsfrom.
Speaker 1 (19:40):
Well, first of all, I definitely think that there was
a large gap between the timethat the female witness came
forward and it sounds like shetold investigators part of the
story.
Then what was?
It was five months until theybrought the husband in and the
(20:01):
woman back in.
However, they did not havereally anything to go on, except
what this woman said she didn'teven know for sure if it was
Teresa Butler's.
I don't think, because I don'tthink.
At that first interview shesaid she didn't say that they
got rid of the tape and did allthat.
(20:21):
At least that's not what wasreported.
So she said that she wasassuming that it was Teresa
Butler's because Teresa Butlerwas missing.
Teresa Butler was missing.
Also a video camera from thehome and within 24 hours, voila,
here's Melvin Hubert trying totrade this video camera for
(20:44):
drugs.
The drug part is my secondpoint, because it sounds like
they are so heavy involved withdrugs they probably want to stay
pretty clear of the police.
So you saying that theirconscience was eating at them,
I'm sure it was and I'm surethat they knew that this was
(21:04):
Teresa Butler's because theyviewed the tape and they made a
comment to investigators thesecond time they were brought in
that they viewed the tape.
Teresa Butler and her familywere on this tape and they got
rid of the evidence.
Why they would get rid of theevidence is beyond me and then
go into the police station withall this information and if
(21:30):
police didn't have a serialnumber, they have to be able to
prove that that was TeresaButler's.
Speaker 2 (21:36):
Well, exactly, and we've covered cases before of a
disappearance and then all of asudden, you know, people show up
the next day just drivingaround houses, things like that.
It's to me it's kind of liketheir conscience eating at them
a bit.
And whatever the case is, ifthey found this tape, wouldn't
that have made more sense tosomehow get that tape to
(21:58):
Teresa's family so they wouldhave had something to remember
her by?
I mean, who knows if it waslike a Thanksgiving get together
or something that would havebeen so valuable to the family,
but no, they just destroyed it.
Speaker 1 (22:10):
Unfortunately, I think they were just looking out
for themselves and trying tosave their own asses so that
they didn't get in trouble forwhatever they're mixed up with,
and it's unfortunate.
And, yes, I would have lovedfor them to have been honest and
took this tape and all of thisstuff that they had to the
(22:31):
police immediately, but that'snot what they chose to do.
And while they did come forwardand I mean I guess you got to
give them a little bit of creditfor that they tampered with the
evidence.
I mean, I haven't seen anythingsaying that they were charged,
but they were tampering withevidence, so that should have
got him something.
But in january 2018, the samefemale witness was once again
(22:57):
interviewed by investigators andshe told them they also had a
nintendo gameube, a controllerand some games that Melvin
Huford had traded to her husbandfor drugs.
The night, teresa Butler wentmissing, so police confiscated
these items and were much closerto making an arrest in Teresa's
case.
Speaker 2 (23:18):
How convenient that she ended up having these things
.
It kind of seems like thepolice are using a strategy of
so the second time and firsttime 2007, and then we waited
all the way till 2018.
I can kind of see that strategythere.
I don't know, if you do,heather, where, the more time
that they wait, that the womanthat first reported that they
(23:41):
are remembering more things,maybe because they feel like the
statute of limitation.
Now, with all of this, I reallyfeel like that they would have
enough evidence at this point tosay that somehow this woman and
her husband were involved.
Speaker 1 (23:58):
Well, and there's no statute of limitations on murder
.
So I think cops knew that theyhad time.
I think they probably weren'texpecting, unfortunately, to
find Teresa alive.
I think that they pretty muchfigured early on that she didn't
just walk away from her homeand leave her boys and family
(24:19):
had been very adamant that thatwas not Teresa just to leave a
two-year-old and a four-year-oldby themselves and walk off.
And they had no evidence thatshe did walk off.
So I think they had theirsights set on a particular
person of interest from veryearly on.
Teresa's husband, gary DaleButler, had been.
(24:40):
He'd been cleared as a suspectearly on in the investigation
after providing an airtightalibi and agreeing to a
polygraph in which he passed.
Investigators had their sightson someone else, someone who had
been on their radar as a personof interest pretty soon after
Teresa went missing.
(25:00):
In November 2019, 42-year-oldMelvin Ray Hewford of Tallapoosa
, missouri, was charged in NewMadrid County with first-degree
involuntary manslaughter andtampering with physical evidence
.
He confessed to being the onewho had caused Teresa's death.
According to Hewford, he hadbeen at the Butler home doing
(25:25):
meth with Teresa and another man.
Okay, this is according to him.
He claims that he had injectedTeresa with meth before
injecting himself.
He stated that soon afterinjecting Teresa, she began
complaining of chest pain.
He went into the kitchen to gether some water and when he
(25:45):
returned she had no pulse.
He says that he panicked so hewrapped Teresa's body in a tarp
and dumped her in a ditch.
Then he says he returned to herhome to take some items in
order to make her disappearancelook like a robbery.
So okay, I'm sorry, but hisstory sounds like the biggest
(26:06):
crock of BS I have ever heard.
There seems to be a lot ofholes in his story.
First of all, then there's thefact that there is no mention of
Teresa's children, who werethere in the home with her.
Then you have the question, andone that seems to be talked
about quite frequently on RedditDo we even know if Teresa was a
meth user?
(26:27):
According to people on Reddit,her family and other locals in
the community who knew heradamantly claim that Teresa was
not a drug user.
None of the articles I'veresearched are touching on this
very important detail, so Isincerely question this myself.
It was reported, though, thatTeresa had no history of being
(26:49):
unstable and that she had neverleft without telling anyone.
She also had no history ofleaving her children.
Was Teresa a meth user and ifso, did she know Melvin Hubert?
Had they ever met?
Did she have any connection tohim at all?
Did Teresa's husband even knowhim?
There are so many unansweredquestions.
(27:11):
However, I am having a lot oftrouble believing the story to
be true.
Why do we think he was a personof interest so early into the
investigation?
Was it because of the fact hehad Teresa's belongings, or was
there something else that ledthem to Hubert?
Speaker 2 (27:26):
Yeah, there's just a lot of holes there.
There's no evidence, as yousaid, of Teresa being a drug
user at all, but there isevidence that Melvin Ray Hubert
is, and then those two peoplethat he had sold the or, I guess
, traded the drugs for those areat least drug users, users
maybe not all of them doing meth.
(27:47):
So there's so so many holes.
But I also think the police hadno other suspects.
Speaker 1 (27:54):
It sounds like it was reported that they followed
several leads.
They didn't specify what thoseleads were.
But I guess what's so crazy tome is that they are buying this
story.
They're buying it.
They obviously have something.
Even now they have informationthat they're not putting out
(28:17):
there.
And I don't.
Obviously we don't know Teresa,so we don't know what she did
or didn't do, behind closeddoors even.
But her family is saying shewas not a drug user.
Her husband was saying not adrug user.
Could she have been hiding it?
Yeah, I mean she could have,but it's just such a far-fetched
(28:42):
story.
And if he did come over to dometh with her, why unscrew the
light bulb?
That, to me, is like thebiggest red flag in this whole
entire case.
If you are coming over becauseyou know Teresa and you guys are
going to do meth, why are youunscrewing?
Speaker 2 (29:02):
the light bulb, exactly.
I mean, it doesn't seem to makesense.
It doesn't sound like thatthere's, even with co workers
that has said, any connectionwith Teresa and this man.
Somebody would have seensomething if they had gotten
together more than just a fewtimes what it sounds like to me,
which is a little more logicalthat the three of them so the
(29:25):
husband and wife and this guyMelvin they had been watching
the house and I can make allkinds of assumptions somewhere
that Teresa was somehow targetedand they were waiting for the
sister-in-law to leave and thenthey, they came and ambushed her
, robbed her, her, I mean, andTeresa didn't even see it coming
(29:46):
.
Speaker 1 (29:47):
I think that's a very good possibility.
And going right back to thelight bulb situation again, I
still believe it was unscrewedbefore he ever accessed the
house.
Because, even if you wanted toargue, okay, well, he unscrewed
it because he had already killedher and he was trying to get
(30:11):
the body out of the house.
Well, in that case, wouldn'tyou just turn the light off
instead of unscrewing the lightbulb?
So it's all about, for meanyway, the fact that they
unscrewed the, or he unscrewedthe bulb.
I don't even think he reallyknew her.
I don't think that it hadanything to do with coming over
and doing meth.
(30:31):
I think that he's full of crapand there's no body.
So you can't say, oh well, didshe have meth in her system or
anything like that.
So I don't think that policereally had much of a choice but
to believe this ridiculous story.
Speaker 2 (30:48):
Yeah, that's what it seems like.
I mean, what it's sounding likeas well.
Is that, like I was saying, onmy belief that they all three
were involved the husband andwife, their conscience, or
whatever they, like you had saidearlier, at that point you're
looking out for yourself, and sothey reported it pretty early
and I don't know why they waitedso long to question Melvin, but
(31:13):
they were all kind of involvedand he's just trying to figure
out something that maybe theywould believe you also have to
look at.
He didn't get rid of the bodyby himself.
So in this story he's making itseem like that, oh, he got
scared and got rid of the bodyby himself.
So in this story he's making itseem like that, oh, he got
scared and got rid of the body.
Did he ever tell them where thebody was?
At what ditch did he threw her?
Speaker 1 (31:34):
in.
I am going to get to that herein just a second.
There was, though supposedly heclaimed there was another man
there that night that was doingmeth with them.
However, police don't thinkthat that man had anything to do
with what happened to Teresa,so they weren't pursuing him,
and now it's too late because,according to posts on Reddit, he
(31:59):
passed away.
So New Madrid County SheriffTerry Stevens believes that the
fact they found Teresa's weddingring under the couch could have
been a more deliberate move tohide her rings because she
wasn't totally comfortable withthe people who she was
interacting with that night, andmaybe that was her way of
securing them.
(32:19):
I don't think so, because youweren't comfortable enough to
have them around your valuables.
But you know, I mean, I guessthat is a possibility, but I
just can't get past the factthat something far more valuable
was in the home and that washer children.
So would she have let peoplewho she wasn't comfortable
interacting with into her homeand around her children?
(32:41):
But she's hiding her weddingring under the couch?
I don't know, this just doesn'tsound right.
Before being arrested inTeresa's disappearance, hubert
told authorities that while hewas serving time in prison for
unrelated crimes, he contactedhis father and told him that he
hid Teresa's body under the sinkof an abandoned house that his
(33:03):
father owned at the time.
Hubert's father toldinvestigators that he had seen
the body but never touched it.
After Hubert was released fromprison, he returned to the
abandoned house and burnedTeresa's remains.
He then claimed to have crushedthe remaining bones before
dumping them in a ditch.
So, according to Hubert,teresa's body was dumped in a
(33:25):
ditch south of Tallapoosa nearCounty Road 253.
Police have since searched thisexact ditch for any sign of
Teresa.
However, their search effortsturned up nothing.
Melvin Hewford pled guilty onJanuary 10th 2020 and was
sentenced to seven years formanslaughter, in which he
(33:46):
confessed to injecting Teresawith a fatal dose of meth, which
imposes a Class C felony, andhe was also charged with
tampering with evidence, whichis classified as a Class D
felony.
In all, he will spend 10 yearsin prison and be out in a few
years.
It looks like.
So that is just crazy to me,and I kind of feel like maybe
(34:10):
this whole story was so that hecould get a manslaughter charge
instead of a murder charge.
Because if you're saying, hey,we were doing meth and we were,
you know, I shot her up, but Ididn't mean to kill her.
Well, how genius to come upwith such a BS story just to
save your own ass, so that ifyou do get convicted of anything
(34:32):
, it's not going to be whatprobably actually did take place
in my own opinion, which wascold-blooded murder.
He has had a pretty extensivecriminal record prior to
Teresa's disappearance, a recordthat included drug offenses,
and he had already served sixprison sentences since 1997
(34:54):
alone.
Police have announced that theydon't think the second man, like
I mentioned earlier, wasimplicated in the disappearance,
or who was implicated in thedisappearance actually who was
implicated in the disappearanceactually had anything to do with
the case.
I did see reports that theother man has died, and that's
what I mentioned earlier too.
So they've got something.
They had something, but I don'tknow how they decided that that
(35:17):
man was there.
But that man had nothing to dowith it, even moving the body,
because you know damn well, ifhe there and she died and Hubert
panicked, even if that storywas legit, he helped move the
body, I guess, maybe becausethey didn't have proof, maybe
they just didn't have proof, buthe didn't just stand there and
(35:39):
watch as as Hubert drugged thebody out all by himself.
I don't know this whole story.
It just sounds like she's notgetting the justice that she
deserves in this case.
Speaker 2 (35:50):
It absolutely does not seem like she's getting the
justice and it just, I don'tknow, just floors me, that one
that we waited so long, but two,you know, you mentioned earlier
that Melvin saying that he toldhis dad where the body was and
the dad saw the body but didn'tdo anything.
(36:11):
That seems kind of messed up aswell, that I mean that just
prolonged finding the body, orfor the family as well, and
that's just sad.
Speaker 1 (36:20):
Well, I thought the same thing, and it just goes to
show this was not a family withhigh morals.
The son's in prison.
He makes the comment oh hey, bythe way, there's a dead body
under the sink in your house andthe father doesn't notify
authorities or freak out.
I mean, my God, I would lose itif I was told something like
(36:45):
that.
So just kind of gives a littlebackground of how this family
really operates.
But while Teresa's case hasbeen closed, her body has never
been found.
Her family is still searchingfor some sort of closure in the
hopes of bringing Teresa homeand giving her a proper burial.
(37:06):
Family and friends of TeresaButler believe there is more to
this story than what MelvinCuford is telling authorities.
They believe that Teresa wasnot involved in drug use and
that she never would havevoluntarily left her two
children home alone.
Sheriff Terry Stevens has takenTeresa's case to heart.
(37:27):
He kept a picture of her in hisoffice as a reminder that
Teresa disappeared from hishometown and on his watch.
That is something he struggleswith every day.
Teresa's husband, gary DaleButler Jr, passed away on
January 24th 2018 at his home,almost to the day that his wife
(37:54):
and the love of his life wentmissing 12 years earlier.
Thank you for listening toanother episode of Gone in a
Blink.
If you have any information onthe whereabouts of Teresa Butler
, please contact the New MadridCounty Sheriff's Office at area
(38:14):
code 573-748-2516.
We want to thank you forlistening and we really hope
that Teresa's family, andespecially her two boys, find
the closure they are sodesperately searching for.
If you like our show, pleaseconsider giving us a five-star
(38:36):
review on Apple Podcast or onSpotify and to get all the
latest updates on the cases wecover, follow us on any of our
social media sites and I willlink those in our show notes.
And if you have a case thatyou'd like us to cover, drop us
an email at goneinablinkpod atgmailcom.
(38:57):
And last but certainly notleast, please remember be safe,
be smart and try not to blink.
A quiet evening spent with family on a cold January
day.
Small children playing andlaughing.
Their mother close by, engagedin casual conversation with her
sister-in-law.
The children's father isworking the night shift at his
(00:30):
job not far from where thefamily resides.
As it starts to get late, thechildren's mother decides she
needs to head home, get theminto the bath and then put them
to bed for the night.
She too is ready to call it anight.
A devoted mother, she headshome to tend to her small
(00:54):
children, four-year-old Gavinand two-year-old Garrett.
What seemed like such a typicalday with family would soon turn
into a nightmare for everyonewho knew and loved this young
mother of two.
This is the case of TeresaButler.
(01:16):
And this is Gone in a Blink.
Hey, true crime fans, I'm yourhost, heather, and I'm Danielle.
Welcome to episode 34 of Gonein a.
Blink.
I hope everyone is staying warmout there.
(01:37):
Wherever you may be listeningfrom, we have been dealing with
some extreme temperatures herein the Midwest.
Schools seem like they'reclosed more than they're open at
this point, and I'm really justready for springtime.
To be honest, my children aregoing out of their minds with
boredom, and being stuck in thehouse is driving everyone pretty
(01:59):
much crazy and I'll be prettyhonest, I'm ready for them to go
back as well.
How's everything been going atyour house with this cold.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
Well, I, you know, hadn't left the house for a
couple of days and thenyesterday I finally had to go
into work but it was too coldfor my dog to be outside, so I
had to leave him inside andthankfully he didn't do any mess
on the floor or anything likethat.
But I could definitely tell,like, just like with a little
kid, that boredom when I gothome, of course super excited to
(02:29):
see me but wouldn't leave mealone and nothing was making him
, you know, happy, just like alittle kid, bored, just had been
in the house too long.
Speaker 1 (02:38):
That's actually how my nine year old son has been.
He can't understand why we gotall this snow and the
temperatures are in the uppernegatives, so it's way too cold
for him to be playing outside init and it's just driving him
absolutely crazy.
But the weather's kind ofchilling out now.
(02:59):
So I'm ready for spring, thoughReally ready for spring.
So today's case is one out ofRisco, missouri.
Today we are talking about thecase of missing mom Teresa
Butler.
So if you're ready, let's jumpright in.
Teresa Lynn Butler was describedby those who knew and loved her
(03:20):
as having a huge heart and onewho would always go the extra
mile to help anyone in need.
She was married to the love ofher life, gary Dale Butler, and
together they shared twobeautiful children, gavin, age
four, and Garrett, just twoyears old.
They lived in a small but cutelittle home in the rural part of
(03:41):
Risco, missouri, on County Road241, which is also known as
Eight Ditch Road, just off ofHighway 62.
And just a little bit aboutRisco.
It is located approximately 123miles or 198 kilometers north
of Memphis, tennessee, and islocated in the southeast part of
(04:04):
Missouri.
Its population in 2006 wasaround 356, and I believe it was
last updated in 2020 with apopulation of only 286.
So it is a very small, mostlyrural community.
On Tuesday, january 24th 2006,just before 5 pm, dale Butler
(04:28):
got ready for his overnightshift and gave his wife, teresa,
a hug goodbye.
After telling her that he lovedher, he headed to work.
Teresa then took the boys overto her brother, donald Buchanan,
and her sister-in-law, sarahBuchanan's home.
Teresa's husband, dale, wasworking the overnight shift and
wouldn't be home until the nextmorning.
(04:49):
Around 9.30 pm, teresa decidedthat she better get the boys
home so she could give them abath and get them to bed, and as
she headed back to her home,her sister-in-law, sarah,
followed her home so that shecould borrow Teresa's computer
in order to copy some things forwork.
Little did Sarah know at thetime this would be the last time
(05:11):
her or anyone else would eversee Teresa Butler.
According to Sarah Buchanan,the two women and the little
boys arrived at the Butler homearound 10 pm on the night of
January 24th.
Sarah stayed for a short whilebefore heading home.
When Sarah was leaving theButler home, teresa was getting
(05:32):
the boys ready to take theirbaths.
She told Sarah that she wasgoing to bed after she got the
boys to bed.
So Sarah mentions that.
She specifically remembers thatwhen she walked out the front
door of the Butler home, theporch light was on, and this
will later become a very crucialpart of this case.
(05:53):
So around this same time Daletold police that he tried to
call Sarah on his lunch break.
However, it would just gostraight to voicemail.
He later told reporters that itwas like the call wasn't even
going through.
He figured that maybe Teresahad just fallen asleep and so he
really wasn't worried about itat that point.
(06:14):
The next morning Dale returnedhome from work around 10 am and
he recalled walking into thehouse and not seeing anyone in
the front area of the house.
He thought that was kind ofstrange and then, along with the
fact that he tried to callTeresa the night before and she
wasn't answering, he decided towalk through the house in search
(06:34):
for his wife.
So he walked to the backbedroom and there he saw
four-year-old Gavin laying inthe couple's bed curled up in a
blanket.
Two-year-old Garrett wassitting in a chair with an empty
bottle and a soaked diaper.
There was no sign of Teresaanywhere.
Dale walked throughout thehouse calling Teresa's name, and
(06:57):
when he still couldn't locateher, panic really began to set
in.
He grabbed his phone and begancalling friends and family, and
basically anyone and everyone hecould think of that may have
some idea of where his wifecould be.
All kinds of thoughts wererunning through Del's mind at
this point and he thought well,maybe she just had to run to the
(07:20):
store really quick, or maybeshe had to run here, maybe she
had to run there.
But in reality he knew thatTeresa would not have left her
kids all alone.
Teresa had been working in thephoto department at the local
Walmart in Dexter, missouri, andwas scheduled to work the noon
shift on the day of herdisappearance.
(07:41):
She never showed up.
The police were called andarrived within minutes to assess
the scene.
They discovered a list of itemswere missing from the home,
including the family's videocamera, a Nintendo GameCube with
games, a PlayStation along withgames, a large flashlight along
(08:02):
with games, a large flashlight,a digital camera and a car
stereo.
Teresa's purse and cell phonewere also missing.
Police, though, did findTeresa's wedding rings lying on
the floor partially underneaththe couch.
Dale told officers that it wasnot uncommon for Teresa to take
(08:23):
them off if they started toirritate her skin or if she was
sleeping Teresa, to take themoff if they started to irritate
her skin or if she was sleeping.
Teresa's green Jeep Wrangler wasalso still left in the driveway
.
Authorities found no signs of astruggle and no signs of forced
entry, making the fact thatTeresa was missing even more
suspicious.
That foul play was involved.
Two things that really grabbedthe attention of police was the
(08:45):
fact that a key was found brokenoff inside a lock at the home
and the light bulb to the frontporch light had been unscrewed.
So this right there is probablythe biggest red flag for me
anyway, because whatever wasabout to go down at that house
that night could not havehappened with the porch light on
(09:07):
, and because they unscrewed thelight versus turning the light
off tells me that they wereabout to do something before
they actually had access to thehouse.
Speaker 2 (09:19):
Yeah, that seems like a really red flag, really big
red flag, that they would go tothe trouble of unscrewing the
light bulb.
I guess what went through mymind is just once they're in the
house it could have been easilyturned off, but they were
really trying to catch somebodyby surprise.
Speaker 1 (09:36):
Well, exactly, and I'm not sure if they were
planning to break in or maybethey knocked on the door and
then unscrewed the light so thatwhen Teresa tried to look
outside to see who it was, shewouldn't be able to see.
And that's my thinking rightthere, because you're standing
outside on the porch, you don'thave access at this point to the
(09:57):
inside of the home.
It's what after 10 o'clock atnight, so it's very dark.
This is a rural area.
So my thinking is they probablyunscrewed the light so that
when she, or when they knockedand she tried to look out to see
who it was, she couldn't see.
Teresa's sister-in-law reportedthat the porch light was on
(10:20):
when she left the Butler homethat night, and that could
explain why there was no forcedentry, because I mean just
thinking about someoneunscrewing the light bulb and
knocking and she tried to lookto see who it was and couldn't
see, and so she just maybe shethought it was her sister-in-law
coming back for something, andso she opened the door and was
(10:42):
totally caught off guard.
Speaker 2 (10:44):
Yeah, that's where my mind goes as well is that I
think you had said that hersister-in-law left about 10
o'clock that night and somebodywas watching the house.
So I would guess thatsister-in-law left and maybe
shortly thereafter someoneknocks at the door and Teresa
thinks that oh, maybe hersister-in-law forgot something
(11:06):
and probably, honestly, probablydidn't even look outside,
because it could have been thatquickly if somebody was watching
the house waiting for thesister-in-law to leave.
Speaker 1 (11:15):
So it caught her off guard and almost seems like an
ambush that's what seems to makethe most sense seems to make
the most sense, and thenunscrewing the light bulb not
only would serve that purpose ofher not being able to look out
and see who it was, but alsoanyone driving by would not be
able to see what may or may notbe taking place right there.
(11:36):
So cell phone records laterconfirmed that on the night
Teresa went missing, a call wasplaced from Teresa's phone to a
residence in Gideon, missouri,at 3 16 am, and Gideon is
approximately 16 miles, or justover 25 kilometers, southwest of
(11:57):
Risco.
The person living at theresidence did not answer the
phone that night and they toldinvestigators that they didn't
even know Teresa or anyone elsein her family.
Then, after Teresa'sdisappearance, another call was
placed, using her cell phonethis time, to a residence in
Clarkton, missouri, and onceagain the homeowners claimed
(12:21):
that they didn't know who Teresawas.
They did say that they answeredthe phone that day but heard
nothing on the other end.
Investigators were perplexed asto what could have happened to
Teresa.
Authorities asked Dale if hiswife had any enemies or was
having any issues before shewent missing.
He claimed that his wife wasn'thaving any problems that were
(12:45):
concerning before shedisappeared.
However, teresa's co-workersfrom the Walmart store where she
worked painted a very differentpicture.
They claimed that Dale'sex-wife was calling her at work
and even began making threats toTeresa and I actually saw that
someone posted a comment on WebSleuths that Teresa had met her
(13:06):
husband while they were bothworking together at a factory
and, according to the commentergoing by the name K-Mac, teresa
and her husband allegedly beganseeing each other while they
were both still married to otherpeople.
They eventually divorced theirspouses and got married to each
other, and her co workers did infact, back up the story that
(13:28):
Teresa was receiving threateningphone calls, so there was
definitely some hostility.
However, was it enough tomurder Teresa?
That I don't know.
Speaker 2 (13:38):
Yeah, that does seem kind of odd that the husband
would paint the picture thateverything was fine, but then
talking to co workers of Teresa,they paint a different picture.
Speaker 1 (13:50):
Yeah, and I don't know exactly how far everything
went.
I mean far enough that she wasmaking threatening phone calls
to her work.
I think that's taken it a bitfar, but according to her
husband, they had resolvedeverything.
So, like I said, it went so farthat the ex-wife was calling
her at her job and makingthreats what kind of threats, I
(14:13):
have no clue, but they werethreats all the same and then
she disappears.
So that is something that youknow I wouldn't ignore.
Speaker 2 (14:21):
Well, sure, yeah that , especially after she
disappears, and then there's anaccount of that.
But you can't rule out that.
Okay, maybe he was trying notto mention that they had issues.
At this point you have to lookat him at least a little bit as
a suspect.
Speaker 1 (14:39):
Well, and also I think it's the fact that it was
his ex, so he was probably couldhave been.
If she was on the other footand it was her ex, then maybe
she would have made light of thesituation too.
I think it was just the factthat it was his ex and he knows
his ex and so he was probablylike, oh, you know, she's just
that's how she is, just kind ofmaking light of the situation.
(15:03):
I think, no matter whose exitwould have been in a lot of
cases would have just kind ofbrushed it off and been like
we're working this out, soeverything's good.
Speaker 2 (15:15):
I think more of that.
He has a lot on his mind rightnow, of whatever capacity.
His wife is missing, whether hehad anything to do with it or
not.
He has two small children, so Icould see guy or girl, that
being more on the forefront ofhis mind versus if Teresa and
his ex were fighting.
Speaker 1 (15:34):
Well and apparently officers did not really explore
this too far.
I don't think.
Or if they did, they cut it offpretty quick because there's
not a lot of mention in articlesthat I've read from valuable
sources.
It's more along the lines ofweb sleuths Not that web sleuths
(15:56):
can't be valuable sourcesbecause they have solved many
crimes.
However, it's from Reddit andit's from web sleuths and it's
people giving their opinion inspeculation based, if that makes
sense.
So it's not.
It's not coming fromauthorities or anything like
that.
But on March 6, 2007, a femalewitness came forward with some
(16:19):
information that they believecould help officers
investigating Teresa's case.
They explained that in the 24hours after Teresa went missing,
a video camera had beenexchanged for drugs.
Missouri Highway Patrolinvestigator Sergeant JS
Stolting interviewed the witness, who claimed that a man by the
(16:40):
name of Melvin Ray Hewford Jrhad stopped by her house and
talked with her husband.
Hewford claimed that he hadbeaten a guy up over a drug debt
and that he had a video cameraand an easy shot camera.
However, the witness claimedthat she never actually saw the
equipment.
The witness thought that itsounded suspicious given the
(17:02):
time frame and after hearingabout what was missing from the
Butler home after Teresa'sdisappearance.
She was kind of tying two andtwo together.
So on August 2nd 2007 thefemale witness was brought back
into the police station, butthis time with her husband, and
the two were each interviewedseparately.
(17:23):
The husband told investigators,stolting, that Melvin Hewford
had stopped by their housewithin 24 hours after Teresa
Butler had gone missing.
He claimed at that time hedidn't know anything about
Teresa's disappearance.
He told investigators that hehad traded Hewford a gram of
meth in exchange for a digitalcamera and a camcorder.
(17:45):
Once the witness viewed thecontents of the video camera, he
realized it had belonged toTeresa Butler.
He then claimed to haveconfronted Huford about who it
belonged to.
However, huford denied anyknowledge of who it belonged to
or the circumstances surroundingit.
The man then told officers thatafter he realized who the items
belonged to, he gave them tohis wife and told her to get rid
(18:10):
of them.
She then pulled the tape out ofthe video camera and threw the
camera in a ditch, and then thehusband burned the videotape in
a barrel behind a familymember's home.
The couple told investigatorswhere they could find the video
camera.
However, once authoritieslocated the video camera and
pulled it from the ditch.
It had been drenched in waterand was missing the serial
(18:33):
number, making it impossible toprove that the camera had in
fact belonged to Teresa.
Speaker 2 (18:38):
So there's so much there.
Okay, my first question March 6, 2007,.
This is when it was reported,and then they didn't bring them
into the police station tillAugust 2?
That seems like so many monthshad gone by Two, I don't know.
I mean, there's all differentkind of beliefs out there.
(18:59):
I tend to believe that when wehave a guilty conscience, we
bring up things like oh, I sohappen to have came across this
camcorder.
I mean things like that to kindof try to clear our conscience.
And, yes, blame it on somebodyelse, or maybe this couple, if
they're not involved with thedisappearance.
(19:21):
Blaming it on someone else.
They're, of course, saying Idon't know where we got it, but
yet they're trying to get rid ofevidence instead of just
bringing it to the police.
There just seems to be so manyred flags here that either this
couple was directly involved orthat the person that they're
claiming that they got the itemsfrom.
Speaker 1 (19:40):
Well, first of all, I definitely think that there was
a large gap between the timethat the female witness came
forward and it sounds like shetold investigators part of the
story.
Then what was?
It was five months until theybrought the husband in and the
(20:01):
woman back in.
However, they did not havereally anything to go on, except
what this woman said she didn'teven know for sure if it was
Teresa Butler's.
I don't think, because I don'tthink.
At that first interview shesaid she didn't say that they
got rid of the tape and did allthat.
(20:21):
At least that's not what wasreported.
So she said that she wasassuming that it was Teresa
Butler's because Teresa Butlerwas missing.
Teresa Butler was missing.
Also a video camera from thehome and within 24 hours, voila,
here's Melvin Hubert trying totrade this video camera for
(20:44):
drugs.
The drug part is my secondpoint, because it sounds like
they are so heavy involved withdrugs they probably want to stay
pretty clear of the police.
So you saying that theirconscience was eating at them,
I'm sure it was and I'm surethat they knew that this was
(21:04):
Teresa Butler's because theyviewed the tape and they made a
comment to investigators thesecond time they were brought in
that they viewed the tape.
Teresa Butler and her familywere on this tape and they got
rid of the evidence.
Why they would get rid of theevidence is beyond me and then
go into the police station withall this information and if
(21:30):
police didn't have a serialnumber, they have to be able to
prove that that was TeresaButler's.
Speaker 2 (21:36):
Well, exactly, and we've covered cases before of a
disappearance and then all of asudden, you know, people show up
the next day just drivingaround houses, things like that.
It's to me it's kind of liketheir conscience eating at them
a bit.
And whatever the case is, ifthey found this tape, wouldn't
that have made more sense tosomehow get that tape to
(21:58):
Teresa's family so they wouldhave had something to remember
her by?
I mean, who knows if it waslike a Thanksgiving get together
or something that would havebeen so valuable to the family,
but no, they just destroyed it.
Speaker 1 (22:10):
Unfortunately, I think they were just looking out
for themselves and trying tosave their own asses so that
they didn't get in trouble forwhatever they're mixed up with,
and it's unfortunate.
And, yes, I would have lovedfor them to have been honest and
took this tape and all of thisstuff that they had to the
(22:31):
police immediately, but that'snot what they chose to do.
And while they did come forwardand I mean I guess you got to
give them a little bit of creditfor that they tampered with the
evidence.
I mean, I haven't seen anythingsaying that they were charged,
but they were tampering withevidence, so that should have
got him something.
But in january 2018, the samefemale witness was once again
(22:57):
interviewed by investigators andshe told them they also had a
nintendo gameube, a controllerand some games that Melvin
Huford had traded to her husbandfor drugs.
The night, teresa Butler wentmissing, so police confiscated
these items and were much closerto making an arrest in Teresa's
case.
Speaker 2 (23:18):
How convenient that she ended up having these things
.
It kind of seems like thepolice are using a strategy of
so the second time and firsttime 2007, and then we waited
all the way till 2018.
I can kind of see that strategythere.
I don't know, if you do,heather, where, the more time
that they wait, that the womanthat first reported that they
(23:41):
are remembering more things,maybe because they feel like the
statute of limitation.
Now, with all of this, I reallyfeel like that they would have
enough evidence at this point tosay that somehow this woman and
her husband were involved.
Speaker 1 (23:58):
Well, and there's no statute of limitations on murder
.
So I think cops knew that theyhad time.
I think they probably weren'texpecting, unfortunately, to
find Teresa alive.
I think that they pretty muchfigured early on that she didn't
just walk away from her homeand leave her boys and family
(24:19):
had been very adamant that thatwas not Teresa just to leave a
two-year-old and a four-year-oldby themselves and walk off.
And they had no evidence thatshe did walk off.
So I think they had theirsights set on a particular
person of interest from veryearly on.
Teresa's husband, gary DaleButler, had been.
(24:40):
He'd been cleared as a suspectearly on in the investigation
after providing an airtightalibi and agreeing to a
polygraph in which he passed.
Investigators had their sightson someone else, someone who had
been on their radar as a personof interest pretty soon after
Teresa went missing.
(25:00):
In November 2019, 42-year-oldMelvin Ray Hewford of Tallapoosa
, missouri, was charged in NewMadrid County with first-degree
involuntary manslaughter andtampering with physical evidence
.
He confessed to being the onewho had caused Teresa's death.
According to Hewford, he hadbeen at the Butler home doing
(25:25):
meth with Teresa and another man.
Okay, this is according to him.
He claims that he had injectedTeresa with meth before
injecting himself.
He stated that soon afterinjecting Teresa, she began
complaining of chest pain.
He went into the kitchen to gether some water and when he
(25:45):
returned she had no pulse.
He says that he panicked so hewrapped Teresa's body in a tarp
and dumped her in a ditch.
Then he says he returned to herhome to take some items in
order to make her disappearancelook like a robbery.
So okay, I'm sorry, but hisstory sounds like the biggest
(26:06):
crock of BS I have ever heard.
There seems to be a lot ofholes in his story.
First of all, then there's thefact that there is no mention of
Teresa's children, who werethere in the home with her.
Then you have the question, andone that seems to be talked
about quite frequently on RedditDo we even know if Teresa was a
meth user?
(26:27):
According to people on Reddit,her family and other locals in
the community who knew heradamantly claim that Teresa was
not a drug user.
None of the articles I'veresearched are touching on this
very important detail, so Isincerely question this myself.
It was reported, though, thatTeresa had no history of being
(26:49):
unstable and that she had neverleft without telling anyone.
She also had no history ofleaving her children.
Was Teresa a meth user and ifso, did she know Melvin Hubert?
Had they ever met?
Did she have any connection tohim at all?
Did Teresa's husband even knowhim?
There are so many unansweredquestions.
(27:11):
However, I am having a lot oftrouble believing the story to
be true.
Why do we think he was a personof interest so early into the
investigation?
Was it because of the fact hehad Teresa's belongings, or was
there something else that ledthem to Hubert?
Speaker 2 (27:26):
Yeah, there's just a lot of holes there.
There's no evidence, as yousaid, of Teresa being a drug
user at all, but there isevidence that Melvin Ray Hubert
is, and then those two peoplethat he had sold the or, I guess
, traded the drugs for those areat least drug users, users
maybe not all of them doing meth.
(27:47):
So there's so so many holes.
But I also think the police hadno other suspects.
Speaker 1 (27:54):
It sounds like it was reported that they followed
several leads.
They didn't specify what thoseleads were.
But I guess what's so crazy tome is that they are buying this
story.
They're buying it.
They obviously have something.
Even now they have informationthat they're not putting out
(28:17):
there.
And I don't.
Obviously we don't know Teresa,so we don't know what she did
or didn't do, behind closeddoors even.
But her family is saying shewas not a drug user.
Her husband was saying not adrug user.
Could she have been hiding it?
Yeah, I mean she could have,but it's just such a far-fetched
(28:42):
story.
And if he did come over to dometh with her, why unscrew the
light bulb?
That, to me, is like thebiggest red flag in this whole
entire case.
If you are coming over becauseyou know Teresa and you guys are
going to do meth, why are youunscrewing?
Speaker 2 (29:02):
the light bulb, exactly.
I mean, it doesn't seem to makesense.
It doesn't sound like thatthere's, even with co workers
that has said, any connectionwith Teresa and this man.
Somebody would have seensomething if they had gotten
together more than just a fewtimes what it sounds like to me,
which is a little more logicalthat the three of them so the
(29:25):
husband and wife and this guyMelvin they had been watching
the house and I can make allkinds of assumptions somewhere
that Teresa was somehow targetedand they were waiting for the
sister-in-law to leave and thenthey, they came and ambushed her
, robbed her, her, I mean, andTeresa didn't even see it coming
(29:46):
.
Speaker 1 (29:47):
I think that's a very good possibility.
And going right back to thelight bulb situation again, I
still believe it was unscrewedbefore he ever accessed the
house.
Because, even if you wanted toargue, okay, well, he unscrewed
it because he had already killedher and he was trying to get
(30:11):
the body out of the house.
Well, in that case, wouldn'tyou just turn the light off
instead of unscrewing the lightbulb?
So it's all about, for meanyway, the fact that they
unscrewed the, or he unscrewedthe bulb.
I don't even think he reallyknew her.
I don't think that it hadanything to do with coming over
and doing meth.
(30:31):
I think that he's full of crapand there's no body.
So you can't say, oh well, didshe have meth in her system or
anything like that.
So I don't think that policereally had much of a choice but
to believe this ridiculous story.
Speaker 2 (30:48):
Yeah, that's what it seems like.
I mean, what it's sounding likeas well.
Is that, like I was saying, onmy belief that they all three
were involved the husband andwife, their conscience, or
whatever they, like you had saidearlier, at that point you're
looking out for yourself, and sothey reported it pretty early
and I don't know why they waitedso long to question Melvin, but
(31:13):
they were all kind of involvedand he's just trying to figure
out something that maybe theywould believe you also have to
look at.
He didn't get rid of the bodyby himself.
So in this story he's making itseem like that, oh, he got
scared and got rid of the bodyby himself.
So in this story he's making itseem like that, oh, he got
scared and got rid of the body.
Did he ever tell them where thebody was?
At what ditch did he threw her?
Speaker 1 (31:34):
in.
I am going to get to that herein just a second.
There was, though supposedly heclaimed there was another man
there that night that was doingmeth with them.
However, police don't thinkthat that man had anything to do
with what happened to Teresa,so they weren't pursuing him,
and now it's too late because,according to posts on Reddit, he
(31:59):
passed away.
So New Madrid County SheriffTerry Stevens believes that the
fact they found Teresa's weddingring under the couch could have
been a more deliberate move tohide her rings because she
wasn't totally comfortable withthe people who she was
interacting with that night, andmaybe that was her way of
securing them.
(32:19):
I don't think so, because youweren't comfortable enough to
have them around your valuables.
But you know, I mean, I guessthat is a possibility, but I
just can't get past the factthat something far more valuable
was in the home and that washer children.
So would she have let peoplewho she wasn't comfortable
interacting with into her homeand around her children?
(32:41):
But she's hiding her weddingring under the couch?
I don't know, this just doesn'tsound right.
Before being arrested inTeresa's disappearance, hubert
told authorities that while hewas serving time in prison for
unrelated crimes, he contactedhis father and told him that he
hid Teresa's body under the sinkof an abandoned house that his
(33:03):
father owned at the time.
Hubert's father toldinvestigators that he had seen
the body but never touched it.
After Hubert was released fromprison, he returned to the
abandoned house and burnedTeresa's remains.
He then claimed to have crushedthe remaining bones before
dumping them in a ditch.
So, according to Hubert,teresa's body was dumped in a
(33:25):
ditch south of Tallapoosa nearCounty Road 253.
Police have since searched thisexact ditch for any sign of
Teresa.
However, their search effortsturned up nothing.
Melvin Hewford pled guilty onJanuary 10th 2020 and was
sentenced to seven years formanslaughter, in which he
(33:46):
confessed to injecting Teresawith a fatal dose of meth, which
imposes a Class C felony, andhe was also charged with
tampering with evidence, whichis classified as a Class D
felony.
In all, he will spend 10 yearsin prison and be out in a few
years.
It looks like.
So that is just crazy to me,and I kind of feel like maybe
(34:10):
this whole story was so that hecould get a manslaughter charge
instead of a murder charge.
Because if you're saying, hey,we were doing meth and we were,
you know, I shot her up, but Ididn't mean to kill her.
Well, how genius to come upwith such a BS story just to
save your own ass, so that ifyou do get convicted of anything
(34:32):
, it's not going to be whatprobably actually did take place
in my own opinion, which wascold-blooded murder.
He has had a pretty extensivecriminal record prior to
Teresa's disappearance, a recordthat included drug offenses,
and he had already served sixprison sentences since 1997
(34:54):
alone.
Police have announced that theydon't think the second man, like
I mentioned earlier, wasimplicated in the disappearance,
or who was implicated in thedisappearance actually who was
implicated in the disappearanceactually had anything to do with
the case.
I did see reports that theother man has died, and that's
what I mentioned earlier too.
So they've got something.
They had something, but I don'tknow how they decided that that
(35:17):
man was there.
But that man had nothing to dowith it, even moving the body,
because you know damn well, ifhe there and she died and Hubert
panicked, even if that storywas legit, he helped move the
body, I guess, maybe becausethey didn't have proof, maybe
they just didn't have proof, buthe didn't just stand there and
(35:39):
watch as as Hubert drugged thebody out all by himself.
I don't know this whole story.
It just sounds like she's notgetting the justice that she
deserves in this case.
Speaker 2 (35:50):
It absolutely does not seem like she's getting the
justice and it just, I don'tknow, just floors me, that one
that we waited so long, but two,you know, you mentioned earlier
that Melvin saying that he toldhis dad where the body was and
the dad saw the body but didn'tdo anything.
(36:11):
That seems kind of messed up aswell, that I mean that just
prolonged finding the body, orfor the family as well, and
that's just sad.
Speaker 1 (36:20):
Well, I thought the same thing, and it just goes to
show this was not a family withhigh morals.
The son's in prison.
He makes the comment oh hey, bythe way, there's a dead body
under the sink in your house andthe father doesn't notify
authorities or freak out.
I mean, my God, I would lose itif I was told something like
(36:45):
that.
So just kind of gives a littlebackground of how this family
really operates.
But while Teresa's case hasbeen closed, her body has never
been found.
Her family is still searchingfor some sort of closure in the
hopes of bringing Teresa homeand giving her a proper burial.
(37:06):
Family and friends of TeresaButler believe there is more to
this story than what MelvinCuford is telling authorities.
They believe that Teresa wasnot involved in drug use and
that she never would havevoluntarily left her two
children home alone.
Sheriff Terry Stevens has takenTeresa's case to heart.
(37:27):
He kept a picture of her in hisoffice as a reminder that
Teresa disappeared from hishometown and on his watch.
That is something he struggleswith every day.
Teresa's husband, gary DaleButler Jr, passed away on
January 24th 2018 at his home,almost to the day that his wife
(37:54):
and the love of his life wentmissing 12 years earlier.
Thank you for listening toanother episode of Gone in a
Blink.
If you have any information onthe whereabouts of Teresa Butler
, please contact the New MadridCounty Sheriff's Office at area
(38:14):
code 573-748-2516.
We want to thank you forlistening and we really hope
that Teresa's family, andespecially her two boys, find
the closure they are sodesperately searching for.
If you like our show, pleaseconsider giving us a five-star
(38:36):
review on Apple Podcast or onSpotify and to get all the
latest updates on the cases wecover, follow us on any of our
social media sites and I willlink those in our show notes.
And if you have a case thatyou'd like us to cover, drop us
an email at goneinablinkpod atgmailcom.
(38:57):
And last but certainly notleast, please remember be safe,
be smart and try not to blink.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com