As a former homicide detective who successfully investigated and had prosecuted one of the first no-body homicide cases in San Diego County, I know there are effective strategies to bring murderers to justice without the victim’s body ever being found. National data also affirms that no-body murder convictions are not only possible, but becoming more prevalent. There have been more than 660 such prosecutions across all states since 2012, with an 86% conviction rate.

This article highlights my investigation of Kim Williams’ murderer, Michael Green, and his conviction in 1999 without a body, without DNA, without a processed crime scene and without a confession or admission. With the advances in technology since then, such prosecutions are even more possible today.

The case of Kim Williams

As in most no-body murder cases, the Kim Williams case began as a report that she was missing. The 37-year-old was reported missing by her mother, who has never heard from or seen her daughter since, even though she had a history of speaking with Kim every day. 

Kim left behind her car that she treasured, with her purse, driver’s license, credit cards and Bible all found inside. The mother reported that it was inconceivable that Kim would leave those items behind, and that Kim never had any mental health issues nor had ever been missing before. 

The mother reported that Kim had told her she feared for her life and safety from her live-in boyfriend, Michael Green, and reported being beaten by him before. Michael refused to talk with Kim’s mother about her whereabouts.

Michael’s statement to police was that he and Kim had a nonviolent argument and, at her request, he dropped her off at a hotel with unknown friends to cool off. He said he has never heard from her since. Michael refused to ever talk further with police. With a lack of additional evidence, Kim’s case was suspended.

Three years later, I heard of Kim’s case and self-initiated an investigation. All such cases begin with the victim and trying to discover as much information as possible about their habits, normal routines, people known to them (past and present), financial transactions, computer and social media searches, and any other information. 

I conducted a three-year-old witness check in the neighborhood of Kim and Michael’s old residence. I discovered Michael had never come back to live in the home after Kim’s disappearance. According to neighbors, he would come to the home late at night to remove items.

During the witness check, I found a homeless woman who knew Kim and who used to live in a rear-yard shed of one of Kim’s neighbors. This woman reported that on the day Kim disappeared, she heard Kim and Michael having a very violent, loud fight inside their home. Kim was screaming for help and the woman heard loud pounding and hitting sounds. Later she saw Michael drive away with Kim sitting motionless in the front seat with a bandana tied across the top half of her head. She feared Kim may have already been deceased.

This witness, who had never been interviewed by police, also described Michael as having blood-drenched pants as he got into his van to drive Kim away. I had her draw a picture of what she saw, and with a red pen she saturated Michael’s lower front pant legs with blood, then depicted smaller and smaller blood drops up the pant legs and all over the waist. 

At trial, a blood spatter expert from DOJ testified that the specific depiction of the blood saturation and spatter patterns on Michael’s pants was consistent with the victim being on the floor and being repeatedly and extremely violently kicked and stomped multiple times. Only a tremendous amount of blunt force would cause the blood to be cast as tiny blood drops all the way up the waist. The more trauma that caused the blood spatter, the smaller the blood drops become.

The landlord of Michael’s residence had documented with photos several indented impressions in the drywall on several interior walls that were in the shape and form of a body, as if someone had been violently pushed or beaten against the wall.

I was also able to prove that from the day of Kim’s disappearance, there was no trace of her at all.

With the above circumstantial evidence, Michael Green was convicted of Kim’s murder because the investigation showed that Michael murdering Kim was the only reasonable explanation as to what could have happened. He was sentenced to 131 years to life in prison.

Investigative strategies

In those few cases where a missing person may have been murdered, often there are significant red flags or even just an uneasy feeling with the officer that something just isn’t right at the time of reporting or shortly afterward. Listen and follow your intuition.

The officer has their best chance early on to get the most detailed information from the reporting party, those who knew the missing person, and any computer and social media information. If the officer suspects a particular person, it is crucial to lock them into as many detailed statements as possible.

It’s essential to prove not only that the victim is dead, but that they were murdered. The investigator must prove that the victim didn’t commit suicide, didn’t run away, isn’t in hiding and didn’t move. This can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt based upon the totality of evidence and circumstances.

Additional strategies include:

• BlueStar, luminol and florescence are effective techniques for discovering latent blood, even years after a scene or an item has been cleaned several times.
• As soon as possible, preserve, freeze, capture and gather all the various forms of electronic information — cellular data, social media postings, automated searches, surveillance camera footage, and video or audio recordings of the area as well as from the missing person and any potential suspects. A recent successful no-body murder conviction proved that only minutes before the suspect called police to report his wife missing, he searched on his computer for ways to conceal a body, how to clean up blood to be undetectable and how long it takes a body to decompose.
• Record detailed statements from anyone who routinely had contact with the missing person, including past associates. 
• Conduct extensive research into every possible alternative scenario other than murder to rule out other reasons for a person’s disappearance.
• Always conduct extensive witness/neighborhood checks, no matter how much time has elapsed. 
• Periodically obtain statements from associates of any potential suspect, and extensively research the suspect’s behavior prior to the disappearance and afterward.

Additional assistance 

The FBI Behavioral Analysis Unit 4 is available to assist in all aspects of the investigation, including investigative suggestions, behavioral analysis of suspects, victimology issues, and resources such as the Violent Criminal Apprehension Program database and FBI laboratory services. BAU staff also serve as a sounding board to discuss cases, determine probable events and action plans, evaluate suspects and provide expertise supporting the likelihood that a victim may be deceased, as well as providing collaborative recommendations for a successful outcome.

Conclusion

Hundreds of no-body murder cases have been successfully prosecuted all over the U.S. The old belief that there is no case without a body is fundamentally baseless. Investigators must cultivate the mindset that if a murder was likely committed, then there is a way to prove it. They just have to never give up and doggedly discover as much circumstantial evidence as possible to prove there is no other reasonable explanation for the victim’s disappearance other than murder at the hands of the suspect.