Barely 11 days into his job as a rookie Mason City police officer, Mike McKelvey found his new department thrust into the highest-profile crime in the small Iowa city’s history: the abduction of a popular local news anchor, 27-year-old Jodi Huisentruit.
Thirty years later, the KIMT-TV anchor is still missing, her case remains unsolved, and Captain McKelvey is about to become the city’s fifth police chief since Jodi was abducted on her way to work on June 27, 1995.
In a phone interview with FindJodi’s Caroline Lowe, McKelvey shared his memories of that time and what gives him hope that his department will finally solve Jodi’s case on his watch as police chief.
His remarks have been edited for brevity and clarity.
FindJodi’s interview with Mason City’s next police chief, Mike McKelvey.
Q: Tell us about your early time on the force before Jodi was abducted.
A: I was hired and started here in October 1994. But back then, and it still is, you had to attend the academy and become certified within the first year. So I got hired too late to make the fall academy with the waiting list. I got into the March academy in 1995, and then I graduated in June 1995. My graduation day, I believe, was June 16, 1995, and just a few days later was Jodi’s disappearance.
Q: What would you have been doing in those first few days when you were officially an officer, from June 16 to June 27? Were you still in field training?
A: Yes, it was mostly the initial stages of field training. You ride with other officers and you kind of gradually start taking over stuff. So pretty much writing reports with officers, learning the paperwork, the formats, that type of stuff. Our field training process is three to four months.
Q: If we can move to June 27, do you remember what shift you were working that day?
A: It would have been the afternoon shift. I am pretty sure it was close to all hands on deck [on Jodi’s case], calling people in. Because I was so new and not trained, I was a little limited on what I could do. But, you know, the other officers were out stopping cars, talking to people, doing field reports. Obviously, the Key Apartments was a big, big circus there, just trying to manage everything, trying to talk to tenants and other people that might have been in the area. Just trying to see what they remembered if they were there, lock people into their stories. I believe they were starting to do searches and stuff like that. So there was a lot going on.
Q: What role did you play at this point?
Captain McKelvey as a rookie officer in 1995.
A: I remember being stationed as a crime scene logger. We had to log people coming and going, just to make sure nobody entered or tampered with anything at the area. So, at one point, that was my specific duty, just kind of watching the area I was assigned to and reporting who left and who entered.
Q: What do you remember from that assignment, standing at what became one of the most famous crime scenes in Iowa?
A: I was fairly new to the area but, to me, Jodi was a local celebrity.I mean, everybody knew her. Everybody saw her on the news.And, now, nobody can find her. Obviously, the apparent scene in the parking lot made it look like foul play was involved. A lot of people were worried, concerned. This was the real deal.
Q: It’s not something you’re used to seeing in a town of 28,000 people or so, or even in a bigger city. It’s unusual to see somebody so visible go missing, right?
A: Correct.
Q: Did you ever meet Jodi or see her out and about in the community?
A: I don’t recall seeing her specifically, because I think she worked mostly in the early morning when I started and a lot of my stuff was mainly in the afternoons and on the third shift.
Q: Over the years, did you at any point become an investigator on the case or have any role as a supervisor on Jodi’s case?
A: I was never an investigator assigned to it. But, like I said, over the years, being a captain and working with the various chiefs and investigators on this, we had have had outside people come in and examine this case such as profilers, evidence specialists. The hard part is we get a lot of phone calls or tips from psychics, clairvoyants, whatever. And some of those come in from other countries. Some of them are like, ” I’m pretty sure I can sense or see where Jodi’s buried. There’s a farm. There’s a cornfield.” But they can’t give anything more specific. So that’s frustrating. I don’t know if some of these people are legit, sincere or just trying to find some kind of fame. But some of these tips are so generic for our area it’s hard to do much with them.
Q:It seems they’d be distracting from an investigation that needs to be done on legitimate tips.
A: Yes. And the other thing is our investigators assigned to Jodi’s case, they have always remained in close contact with Jodi’s family and relatives, so we try to be very respectful, keep them involved. But, again, some of the media clickbait frenzies pop up from time to time. We try to keep them included and get their input just so that doesn’t get too disruptive or retraumatize them when these sensational things blow up. We are very concerned about the family, relatives and friends.
Q: The media coverage must be kind of a mixed blessing for you. You want to keep Jodi visible to get a lead. At the same time, you can get flooded with stuff that’s not helpful.
A: Yes. Over the years, there have been various podcasts, web presentations, interviews and everything else. It’s great to get the message out, keep it fresh. Something may click in the brain of someone hearing such information. It’s like, “Yeah, I did see that 20 years ago” and then they call us. It’s human nature, people wanting to help, to fill in the Swiss cheese holes. But how can we vet their memory from 20 years ago and to be 100% sure they saw something when maybe they didn’t? Over the years some of our earlier witnesses have given some recent interviews that are a little different from they told us and what we have documented on Day One. I get everyone wants to solve this case, but if people say something different now in interviews than from what we have written down from back in the day, that may be a problem should this ever go to prosecution. That’s the thing we wrestle with.
We definitely want to try to get this solved and brought to prosecution. But time is not our friend on this.
Q: Some people perceive that time is a friend because of advancement in forensics. But from Day One, there hasn’t been a lot of forensic evidence in Jodi’s case, unlike others I have covered where you have DNA right away or camera surveillance. So much seems to be missing in Jodi’s case. Is that accurate?
A: Back in the day, DNA was just coming to the forefront. But there a lot of possibilities of how the crime happened. Was the person in her apartment? Was the person in the hallway on the scene or was the person just lurking in the parking lot and snatched her? So, I mean all those things are going to factor into how much DNA or other evidence might have been available. Were they wearing gloves, that type of thing. If somebody truly snatched her out of the parking lot and left from there, there may not be a lot to recover on. Nowadays, most everybody’s got video cameras and cell phones and have all kind of ways to be on track. But back in 1995, that technology just wasn’t there.
Those apartments are so close to East Park. If somebody heard screaming or something like that early in the day, the park should be closed. But every now and then you get somebody driving by or riding a bike that might be screaming. Maybe nobody heard it or didn’t think anything about it until everybody realized that Jodi was apparently kidnapped later when it got out on the news later that morning. So yeah, we were already a few hours behind the curve.
Q; Were you at some point in your career taking calls on this case?
A: As a supervisor, we get tips all the time. Sometimes they are phone calls, sometimes they are emails that are forwarded from various outside agencies. And, then, if I talk to them, I have got to note the specifics, and that is forwarded to an investigator. But generally, if it is a request and needs a call back, those things are just forwarded directly to the investigators.
Q: Have you had a chance to look at the whole case file, or is that something you would do eventually as chief?
A: Yes but I can’t say I know every little nook and cranny of the case. I have seen and accessed the filing cabinets and evidence rooms.From time to time, we do an evidence audit, just to make sure the evidence is there, accounted for, and in the filing cabinets. But, there is a lot of information. So I can’t handle every little detail on every specific point, without going through the notes.
Q: But, overall, you feel close to knowing all the basics of the case, or all the key information?
A: Yes, but without all the minutia.
Q: As you jump into your new role as chief, how much do you expect to be involved in the management of Jodi’s case? How is the investigation managed?
A: We have a lieutenant that’s assigned to the investigators. But a lot of this case is tip-by-tip specific. So, if we get a new tip, something develops, obviously people will be assigned. Sometimes our folks have to travel, and depending on how far away, where it is all is involved, you know, we just roll with it and deal with it and make it happen. Sometimes, we’ve got outside agencies we contact for follow-up tips if it’s time sensitive and we can’t get our people there right away. So, like I said, it just depends upon on what the tip is and how we investigate it, whether we send our own people or have to enlist the help of law enforcement from other agencies.
Q: How much are the Iowa DCI and FBI involved with Jodi’s case?
A: Probably the closest partners on this are the Department of Public Safety for Iowa (DCI) and our staff. That includes the crime scene and crime lab people.But we have also used the FBI. Usually, it’s when we have to get to people out of Iowa fast. Sometimes we reach out to them to see if they can assign a field agent to do that. But, primarily, it’s going to be the DCI folks.
Q: What are things that give you some hope in 2025 that you didn’t have in 1995?
A: I applaud you guys and other agencies or businesses that are keeping this alive. I think just trying to keep it as factual as possible and objective and just getting it out there but not spinning it into clickbait and assumptions.
Q: What do you think is most helpful from our FindJodi team in terms of whatever we can do to help in the investigation or keep it visible?
A: I think just trying to get the word out, keep it fresh. Maybe there’s someone today that maybe wasn’t willing to share something early on but could have a tip or remember something now that comes forward. Like I said, we just have to verify and try to get that they are credible. If what they are saying is different from what they told us years ago, that’s going to be a problem. We’ll try to deal with that and look into it. But it’s important to keep trying to keep it fresh, keep it real, keep it alive. That’s all of our goals, that we all want to resolve this. And, we are all desperate to know where Jodi is and we want to bring the person or people involved to justice.
We appreciate everything FindJodi has done, is doing and will do. We are all in this together.
Q:As the fifth police chief to be in charge of Jodi’s case, what gives you hope on an investigation that’s more than thirty years old?
A: The public interest in Jodi’s case helps keep it alive. Jodi’s disappearance is not just an Iowa thing. It’s not just a U.S. thing. We get calls from people in other countries. Technology has made it available to get international attention.
Unfortunately, we see other high-profile cases involving newscasters and elected officials where bad people do bad things. And it kind of reinforces that Jodi’s case may not have been an isolated thing because we see other current day examples of similar types of bad behavior from people that’s just not fair. That’s not right to Jodi. Time isn’t anyone’s friend. Not for Jodi’s family, friends and relatives. We want to try to bring them some closure, as well.
Q; What do you think it would mean to the Mason City community, and beyond, to get answers and justice in Jodi’s case?
A: I think just closing that chapter would mean healing and recovery because there’s always been that unanswered question: Was it somebody in the community? Was it a drifter? There’s all kinds of speculation. So I think not only for Jodi, who was one of us, but the other question is who could have done something like this to Jodi? And so there’s, I think, a little nervousness or apprehension just trying to figure that out.
Q: Do you think Jodi most likely could be found locally?
A: I wouldn’t even want to comment on that. You have probably seen the various shows, episode and webcasts. There’s a whole bunch of quote-unquote-people of interest, right? And we have run down leads on numerous folks. And that is a difficulty of this investigation, the more coverage it gets.
We cannot be tunnel vision focused on one or two people, because there is always the possibility that it’s somebody we haven’t even looked at or was unknown. So, again, by keeping this alive, it keeps the investigative objective. New tips come in, new people of interest are named, and we start looking at those. But it would be dangerous for me to say it was somebody that lived in the area or somebody that wasn’t, because we’re not sure on that right now ourselves.
If a cop would say, “Well, it was definitely somebody that lived in Mason City that did this,” it might keep a tipster from sharing information. You might have someone that was trying to wrestle with their own emotions, like, “Do I go to the cops with this because it was somebody that lived in the next state or county away, but the cops just said it was somebody local, so, okay, my conscience is clear. No, I won’t come forward with this tip.” That could totally sabotage this case. That is why I think it is dangerous to make an erroneous statement on something like that to lock people into something geographically or any kind of specific scenario when you don’t know.
Q: What about the role of DNA in Jodi’s case? Chief Jeff Brinkley was quoted in a recent interview as saying no DNA has been established in Jodi’s case. He mentioned some things collected as evidence have potential to provide DNA but they haven’t been tested yet.
A: With the evolving nature of DNA over the years, the ability to sample smaller and smaller bits of possible DNA evidence has gotten better, meaning you can possibly glean some information from touch DNA. If we put samples in the DNA database and nothing comes back, there is still hope that when retesting is done, something pops up. Some other law enforcement agencies have used DNA home test saliva kits to get suspects identified in their cases. So, some of these new things that are occurring now we didn’t have back in 1995.
Q: Is there anything we haven’t touched on that you’d like to get out there?
A: I’d like to address those who post social media junk suggesting that the reason this hasn’t been solved is because the police department was directly involved in Jodi’s disappearance. I never witnessed that, and I do not believe it to be true. I have seen how hard all the investigators over the years have worked on this. They have put their own appointments and stuff on hold to go out of state to chase down leads. Again, I see the social media junk, and but I do not believe it to be true.
I’d also like to reinforce to the community that we take Jodi’s case very seriously and are hopeful we can bring closure to Jodi’s family and friends very soon. I would like nothing else but to do this before I retire because I was there at the very early stages.
Anyone with information on Jodi’s case should contact the Mason City Police Department at (641) 421-3636 or email Iowa DCI Special Agent Ryan Herman at rherman@dps.state.ia.us. You can also reach out to FindJodi anonymously.
