Security footage from Hadler farm

Security footage from Hadler farm gives the investigation a timed record of the day Karen Hadler and her children were shot, while withholding the detail that would settle one of its central questions: who was driving Luke Hadler’s silver pickup when it returned. Greg Raco presents the recording as a reason to scrutinize Mal Deacon’s possible knowledge of the shootings, but its sequence of vehicles, silences, and muffled sounds supports a firm account of movements without identifying the person behind the wheel.

Installation and recording conditions

Luke Hadler installed the camera after a series of equipment burglaries in the area about a year before the shootings. Other local farmers had similar devices. The system was modest: a low-resolution color image, described by Greg Raco as barely more than a basic home camera, recorded a rolling twenty-four hours, uploaded the footage to the family computer, and erased it after a week unless someone actively saved it. The recording’s presence in the investigation therefore depended on it having been retained rather than left to the system’s ordinary deletion cycle.

The camera was mounted above Hadler Farm’s largest barn and pointed across the yard to record arrivals and departures. Its view included one side of the house and only a narrow section of the driveway in an upper corner. Vehicles consequently appeared at the edge of the frame and were not shown in full: the blue hatchback was visible from its hood down to its tires, while the taller silver pickup appeared only from the headlights down on its arrival. This restricted view still captured identifying details, including number plates, but not the occupants.

The recording initially looked so still that Aaron Falk took it for a photograph. Its sound was also poor: wind buffeted the microphone, leaving the audio muffled. Those technical limitations shape what the footage can establish. The image supplies a sequence and recognizable vehicles; the sound marks the shootings, but does not make the scene fully audible or visually reveal what happens at the house.

The day recorded

Greg Raco locates the relevant afternoon and summarizes the morning’s movements. Luke Hadler drives away in his truck shortly after 5:00 A.M., apparently heading to his own fields. Shortly after eight, Karen leaves for school with Billy and Charlotte. Karen worked part-time in an administrative role there, and Charlotte attended the on-site day care. The camera records the family members leaving separately, rather than presenting a single departure by the household.

According to Greg Raco, no one comes or goes during the day until 4:04 P.M., when Karen and the children return. The hatchback’s partial image allows the front number plate to be read when enlarged; Greg Raco identifies it as Karen’s car. The recording registers the arrival through the vehicle’s brief passage at the edge of the frame and the sounds of car doors. It then shows nearly an hour without another arrival or departure. Greg Raco emphasizes that he had watched the entire day’s recording in real time, presenting the quiet interval as something he checked rather than inferred from a quick search.

At 5:01 P.M., a silver pickup passes through the visible slice of driveway. Its height distinguishes it from the hatchback, and its number plate identifies it as Luke Hadler’s truck. The view does not show the driver. After the pickup appears, the audio records a car door and then, following a pause, the first of two dull booms. The image itself remains static. A second boom follows after the recording’s timer has advanced; the footage does not show what causes either sound. The distinction matters: the recording places the sounds in the sequence but does not provide a clear visual account of the violence.

Departure and evidentiary limits

The pickup remains associated with the scene for three minutes and forty-seven seconds from its first appearance, then rattles away through the corner of the frame. As it leaves, the back wheels, the bottom of the tray, and its number plate are visible. Greg Raco reports no other arrival or departure until a courier comes thirty-five minutes later. Taken together, the entry and exit make Luke Hadler’s truck the recording’s most consequential object: it is present around the time of the shootings and leaves afterward, but the camera never identifies its driver.

The footage thus bears differently on two questions that might otherwise be confused. It supports the claim that Luke Hadler’s vehicle was at the farm, and its timing makes that fact significant to the inquiry. It does not establish that Luke himself returned in it. Greg Raco expressly acknowledges this limit when Aaron Falk asks whether the recording leaves doubt. He points to the unseen driver and sets the video alongside other evidence: ammunition, Karen’s killing at the doorstep, and a search in Billy’s room. Those matters are part of Raco’s wider case, not details the footage itself reveals.

Role in the investigation

Greg Raco first introduces the recording while discussing Mal Deacon’s nephew, Grant Dow, who was not home at the time. Mal Deacon had said he saw nothing and might have heard the shots without recognizing them as anything other than farm activity. The video shifts attention from what Mal Deacon may have heard to a recorded movement that can be checked against the timeline. It gives the investigators a concrete basis for asking who used Luke Hadler’s truck, while stopping short of answering that question.

The scene also makes Falk confront the gap between a persuasive pattern and conclusive identification. The truck’s number plate, the timed sounds, and its eventual departure appear to form a coherent sequence; the unseen driver keeps that sequence from becoming proof of Luke Hadler’s presence. Falk challenges Greg Raco’s confidence, asking why he is so certain Luke was not responsible when Raco had not known him. In this exchange, the recording is neither a complete solution nor a neutral confirmation of a single interpretation. Its precise timestamps strengthen the case’s chronology, while its narrow frame preserves the uncertainty that the investigation must resolve.