November 1, 2007 12:41 PM

A Time To Kill

Michele Harris

Michele Harris (CBS)

(CBS News)  Produced By Lisa Freed and Marc Goldbaum

This story originally aired Nov. 10, 2007. It was updated on June 24, 2008.

Tioga County in upstate New York is the kind of place where people go to escape the problems of the big cities.

So when 35-year-old Michele Harris disappeared, it mystified State Police Captain Mark Lester. "Normally you would expect at some point along this way we're gonna find her," he says. "And we still haven't been able to find her remains."

As correspondent Erin Moriarty reports, in the early morning hours of Sept. 12, 2001, Michele's van was found at the end of her driveway.

But getting a search under way wouldn't be easy. "It's the day after 9/11. We had just sent five or 600 troopers to New York City the night before. Most of our canines had been sent to New York City. Most of our aircraft was working with New York City. So, trying to gear this thing up quickly wasn't happening as easy as it normally would," Lester explains.

Adding to the pressure was that Michele was the wife of Cal Harris, a prominent businessman from a wealthy and influential Tioga County family.

The patriarch, Dwight Harris, bought a string of car dealerships for his three sons to help him run.

Michele, fresh out of college, was working as a secretary at one of the dealerships when she caught the eye of Dwight's youngest son Cal.

"Michele was just like a magnet. She was beautiful. She was full of life. And she smiled all the time. And she was a happy person. And she was young, I think that that was something that thoroughly attracted Cal," remembers Barbara Thayer, Cal and Michele's nanny housekeeper.

And Cal was a catch -- an outstanding athlete in high school, an all-American lacrosse player in college, and by the age of 27 a successful businessman.

Michele, the older of two children from a working class family, had never met anyone like Cal. "Michelle came from a small town, not a wealthy family or anything like that," Barb says. "And then here's this man that kinda sweeps ya off your feet. And you know, you travel and you go to Hawaii and you do fun things. Life could be pretty rosy, you know?"

It was a fairytale romance and no one was happier than Michele when she married Cal and became pregnant.

By the time she was 33, she had four children under the age of six. And Cal provided well: the couple lived on a 252-acre estate, complete with a private lake.

Cindy and Tom Turner spent most weekends with the couple. "You could tell they loved each other very much," Tom says. "I mean, they always wanted to be around each other."

If there were any marital problems, Michele kept them hidden from friends and family, including her sister-in-law Shannon Taylor. "I thought that her life was absolutely perfect. You never saw her when she wasn't smiling or laughing," Shannon remembers.

That is, until Michele's fourth child was born. That's when Shannon would learn that life at the Harris house was no longer quite so perfect.

Michele began talking about Cal's temper and his controlling behavior. "Everything just had to be absolutely perfect," Shannon says.

Asked what would happen if things weren't perfect, Shannon tells Moriarty, "He'd scream. He'd yell. He wanted her to dress a certain way."

"He wanted her thin. He wanted her to look good. And she would lose weight for him," recalls Cindy Turner.

But nothing she did, Michele told friends, seemed to please Cal. "Cal had told her that she was born in Tioga Center, raised in Tioga Center, and she'd die in Tioga Center, like 'You're small town. You're beneath me. You're never going to be up to my level,'" Barb says.

And then Michele discovered Cal was having an affair.

Cal and Michele tried to save the marriage, but in January 2001, after 10 years, Michele filed for divorce. But according to Shannon and Michele's brother Greg, Cal did not want the divorce.

Greg says it was a bitter split, as Michele fought with Cal over money, demanding a full accounting of his businesses.

The situation was made even worse because the couple, forced by the courts, continued sharing the house.

But on Sept. 9, 2001, while horseback riding, Barb remembers Michele seemed happier. "And we were coming back down towards the barn and she said 'I'm so happy. I can't believe it.' She says, 'I'm finally getting my life back. I can't believe how I feel,'" Barb recalls.

Michele had not told her husband yet, but she had decided to accept Cal's financial offer and finalize the divorce. Three days later, just hours before she was supposed to meet her lawyer, Michele disappeared.



© 2007 CBS Interactive Inc.. All Rights Reserved.
Add a Comment See all 51 Comments
by leessa29 December 15, 2011 11:07 AM EST
Law does not state if you think someone did it then convict him. I keep up with a lot of law and there have been alomost 300 convictions overturned due to the wrong person being convicted. This is the reason you don't and shouldn't say someone is guilty without the proof. It's always the husband, blah blah blah, will we ever really know? Cops set their sights on someone and they will make the evidence fit because like all the others believe he did it. I guess any leads or evidence that would have said otherwise is long gone and once again we will never really know the truth. Sometime someone really is innocent, I would rather set a criminal free than sentence an innocent man to life or death for something they haven't done. Can you imagine being the person sitting on death row waiting to die for something you didn't do and no one believed you. It would be anyone's worst nightmare. To all, please think before you speak and spread rumors.
Reply to this comment
by klhudson01 June 26, 2008 5:27 AM EDT
I think this is really a sad case for our judicial system. Someone''s love one lost her life and our justice system failed her and her family. I wonder if Cal with his errogant attitude may have paid off the local mortitian to burrie her or to have her cremated without anyones knowledge? Just my thoughts!
Reply to this comment
by dr1321 June 25, 2008 7:02 PM EDT
i worked for cal. he was a hot headed control freak, and oh by the way he did it and recycled her body at the steel yard and everybody in Owego knows it.
Reply to this comment
by carolcape June 25, 2008 5:19 PM EDT
Cal is Guilty, of course. I heard this case before, but did not know what the outcome was. Sorry to hear that he was released . The man that came forward, this man is probably being paid off. If he is not being paid off, he saw someone who Cal hired to abduct her and murder her and dispose of her body far from his land. My opinion is, She is Not on that Land. Someone took her somewhere else and murdered her and placed her in an unknown location, probably even in another state. A fine tooth comb should be taken to any monies he removed from his accounts previous to this, because he could afford to pay a hit man. Also, the fact that he tried to get rid of her possessions two weeks after she went missing, that proves it in itself. I have things here belonged to my mother who died a year ago of natural causes, I have to go through them and everyday, I put it off and it''s over a year. I know there is things I have to throw out. So give me a break, he is Guilty, Guilty, Guilty. And his new girlfriend indicating he said to her when she went to his home that she was afraid his wife would walk in, his words, "oh, she won''t be coming home". He knew she was dead and that is why she wasn''t coming home. I hope he gets the death penalty.
Reply to this comment
by newsreader57 June 25, 2008 4:49 PM EDT
I haven''t read all the comments but a did read quite a few;no one seems to mention the "private lake" that was part of the estate. The police never mentioned any divers searcing the lake for a body or weapon.
Reply to this comment
by dlucero76 June 25, 2008 2:56 AM EDT
Well there is alot of Polumbo''s, Revolver P.I.''s, Miami SUV''s, and old ladies who wrote about it on here and some of you are probably right-she''s probably under that slab but they will never be able to go in there and dig it up and the bottom line is this guy will walk eventually- no body, murder weapon, just little spots of blood that a Court of Appeals will through out. The bottom line is, as usual the police dropped the ball, they should have secured the home from the very beginning and brought in the pro''s but they didn''t....Sorry.
Reply to this comment
by donnaleac June 25, 2008 2:44 AM EDT
Not only was a new concrete floor poured the day after she went missing but has anyone thought that Cal may have also used one of the cars on his lot to remove the body from the house, dispose of it under the floor where the new concrete was to be poured, and cleaned the vehicle or disposed of it? I think that floor should be jack hammered up to look for evidence.
Reply to this comment
by dlucero76 June 25, 2008 2:14 AM EDT
People need to stop watching so much T.V...What happen to "guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt"? Do I think he did it? YES. Would I have found him guilty?NO. Why? Because the prosecution did not prove their case "Beyond a shadow of a doubt". Come on people, the idea is to let a guilty person walk before putting an innocent guy behind bars. That''s why over and over we are seeing people that were wrongly convicted set free after many years behind bars. And it''s because-Oh I think he did it, or he might have did it, or he could have did it or my gut tells me he did it ..GET REAL!
Reply to this comment
by sariebesq February 7, 2010 1:48 AM EST
The standard is not "beyond a shadow of a doubt" but "beyond a reasonable doubt." That doesn't mean that there are no doubts, but that there are no reasonable doubts. Conjecture and wild stories may be created as explanations, but if they aren't "reasonable" then it's not a reasonable doubt. I think maybe it's you that need to get real or at least be more familiar with the correct criminal standard before commenting.
by sariebesq February 7, 2010 1:49 AM EST
The standard is not "beyond a shadow of a doubt" but "beyond a reasonable doubt." That doesn't mean that there are no doubts, but that there are no reasonable doubts. Conjecture and wild stories may be created as explanations, but if they aren't "reasonable" then it's not a reasonable doubt. I think maybe it's you that need to get real or at least be more familiar with the correct criminal standard before commenting.
by compry June 25, 2008 1:17 AM EDT
the nieghbor who came forward to state he saw Michele at the end of the driveway had told his wife that thier money toubles had been resolved, hinting that he was paid by Cal Harris. The rumours in Owego is that Cal took the body of Michele in the trunk of a car that was then shreded at a local metal recyclable place owned by a criminal named Wietsman who owed a lot of money in taxes and fines. Th fact that the Judge in the murder trial has alowed the testamony of a person whose own wife calls a liar shows that the trial should be moved to a county where the judges would not be bribed so easily by Cal Harris.
Reply to this comment
by leslielyn-2009 June 25, 2008 1:10 AM EDT
WHY HAVE THEY NOT CHECK THE BARN WHERE THE HORSES ARE KEPT, HE COULD HAVE TAKEN HER OUT ON HORSE BACK TO GET RID OF THE BODY, CHECK STABLES, STALLS, AND SADDLES, ETC..... LESLIELYN
Reply to this comment
See all 51 Comments
.
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
48 Hours New iPad app A perfect companion to TV's most popular true-crime series.
48 Hours on Facebook