Page 1
1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
2 ATLANTA DIVISION
3 ROBERT CHRISTIAN WOLF,
Plaintiff,
4 Civil Action File
vs.
5 No. 00-CIV-1187(JEC)
JOHN BENNETT RAMSEY and
6 PATRICIA PAUGH RAMSEY,
Defendants.
7 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
8
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF
9
STEVEN THOMAS
10
September 21, 2001
11 9:07 a.m.
12 1100 Fourteenth Street
Denver, Colorado
13
14 Kelly A. Mackereth, CSR, RPR, CRR, and Notary Public
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2
1 APPEARANCES
2 For the Plaintiff:
3 DARNAY HOFFMAN, ESQ.
4 (By telephone)
5 Law Office of Darnay Hoffman
6 210 West 7th Street, Suite 209
7 New York, NY 10023
8 (212) 712-2766
9 .
10 For the Defendants:
11 JAMES C. RAWLS, ESQ.
12 Powell, Goldstein, Frazer & Murphy, L.L.P.
13 191 Peachtree Street, N.E.
14 Sixteenth Floor
15 Atlanta, GA 30303
16 (404) 572-6600
17 L. LIN WOOD, ESQ.
18 The Equitable Building
19 100 Peachtree Street
20 Suite 2140
21 Atlanta, GA 30303
22 (404) 522-1713
23 -and-
24 .
25 .
3
1 For the Deponent:
2 CHARLES P. DIAMOND, ESQ.
3 O'Melveny & Myers
4 1999 Avenue of the Stars
5 Los Angeles, CA 90067-6035
6 (310) 553-6700
7 SEAN R. SMITH, ESQ.
8 Dow, Lohnes & Albertson
9 One Ravinia Drive
10 Suite 1600
11 Atlanta GA 30346-2108
12 (770) 901-8800
13 .
14 Also present:
15 JAY R. REN, CLVS
16 TODD TOMPKINS, Videographer Intern
17 O.M. "Ollie" Gray
18 .
19 .
20 .
21 .
22 .
23 .
24 .
25 .
4
1 Deposition of Steven Thomas
2 September 21, 2001
3 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is
4 9:07. We're on the record. This is the
5 deposition of Steve Thomas for the case of
6 Robert Christian Wolf versus John Bennett
7 Ramsey and Patricia Paugh Ramsey, Case Number
8 00-CIV-1187 in the U. S. District Court,
9 Atlanta Division, State of Georgia. Today is
10 September 21st, 2001.
11 We are located at 1100 Fourteenth
12 Street, Denver, Colorado. The court reporter
13 is Kelly Mackereth of Boverie, Jackson, Busby
14 and Speera. The videographer is Jay R. Ren,
15 certified legal video specialist for Ren Video
16 Services.
17 The attorneys will identify
18 themselves beginning with the attorney on the
19 left and the deponent's right.
20 MR. WOOD: My name is Lin Wood.
21 I represent John and Patsy Ramsey.
22 MR. RAWLS: I'm Jim Rawls. I'm
23 co-counsel with Lin Wood representing John and
24 Patsy Ramsey.
25 MR. GRAY: My name is Ollie Gray.
5
1 I'm an investigator in this case.
2 MR. DIAMOND: I am Chuck Diamond
3 of O'Melveny & Myers representing the witness,
4 Steve Thomas.
5 MR. SMITH: I'm Sean Smith, and I
6 also represent Steve Thomas.
7 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: Also, on the
8 phone.
9 MR. WOOD: Your turn, Darnay.
10 MR. HOFFMAN: I'm Darnay Hoffman,
11 and I represent the Plaintiff, Robert
12 Christian Wolf.
13 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The reporter
14 will now swear in the witness.
15 MR. WOOD: You ready for us?
16 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: Yes, we're
17 ready to swear in the witness.
18 MR. WOOD: Would you swear the
19 witness, please.
20 STEVEN THOMAS, having been first
21 duly sworn, was examined and testified as
22 follows:
23 EXAMINATION
24 BY-MR.WOOD:
25 Q. This will be the deposition of
6
1 Steve Thomas. The deposition is taken
2 pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil
3 Procedure and the Federal Rules of Evidence.
4 The deposition is taken pursuant
5 to subpoena duly served and notice duly filed
6 and also pursuant to the order and rulings of
7 Judge Jewell Carnes in denying Mr. Thomas'
8 motion to quash the subpoena. And I would
9 also note for the record that within the
10 ruling of Judge Carnes' counsel for
11 Mr. Thomas and for the parties have agreed as
12 to the date and the location of the
13 deposition.
14 I understand that Mr. Thomas will
15 read and sign the deposition. We would agree
16 that can be undertaken before an authorized
17 notary public. Everybody set?
18 MR. DIAMOND: Go ahead.
19 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) All right.
20 Mr. Thomas, you've been sworn. Let me ask
21 you for the record, please, to state your
22 full name.
23 A. My full name is William Steven
24 Walton Thomas.
25 Q. You go by Steve?
7
1 A. I do.
2 Q. Do you have any preference? I'll
3 probably call you Mr. Thomas but if you would
4 rather I call you Steve or something you just
5 let me know?
6 A. Steve, Mr. Thomas.
7 Q. All right. I may bounce back and
8 forth. What is your --
9 MR. DIAMOND: Let's stay on a
10 last-name basis. It is a sworn testimony.
11 MR. WOOD: Yeah.
12 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Well, let me ask
13 you this if you would, Mr. Thomas, would you
14 give me your present residence address?
15 A.
16
17 MR. DIAMOND:
19 A.
20
21 MR. DIAMOND: That's what I think
22 he wanted.
23 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Do you have any
24 present plans to move from that residence?
25 A. Ultimately I will leave Colorado
8
1 but, no, for the moment, that's where I'm
2 residing.
3 Q. Do you have any plans even though
4 they may be tentative in terms of when you
5 would hope to leave Colorado?
6 A. Certainly not before this matter
7 is resolved.
8 Q. This matter being the Chris Wolf
9 case or this matter being the lawsuit filed
10 by John and Patsy Ramsey against you?
11 A. Both.
12 Q. Okay. So we would be safe to say
13 you're here in Colorado at least through the
14 duration of those two matters; is that true?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q.
17 A.
18 Q.
19 A.
20 Q.
21 A.
22
23 Q.
24 A.
25 Q.
9
1
2 A.
3 Q.
4 A.
5 Q.
6 A.
7 Q.
8 MR. DIAMOND:
9
10 MR. WOOD:
11
12 MR. DIAMOND:
13
14
15
16 MR. WOOD:
17
18 take it. If you have an instruction to the
19 witness to make, make it and we'll move onto
20 the next question.
21 MR. DIAMOND: We'll designate that
22 confidential. We can talk about that at the
23 conclusion of the deposition.
24 MR. WOOD: Sure. We're going to
25 have at some point a protective order to
10
1 present you with that you all will have the
2 opportunity to sign onto.
3 MR. DIAMOND: Yeah, I've seen
4 that.
5 MR. WOOD: Yeah, and that would
6 protect that information if he wants to give
7 it to me. If you all want to then designate
8 it within the time period allowed by law so
9 subject to that designation I assume you will
10 let him answer.
11 MR. DIAMOND: I will.
12 Q. (BY MR. WOOD)
13
14
15 A.
16 Q.
17 A.
18 Q.
19 A.
20 Q.
21 A.
22 Q.
23 A.
24 Q.
25 A.
11
1 Q.
2
3
4 A.
5 Q.
6
7 A.
8 Q.
9
10 A.
11 Q.
12 A.
13
14
15 MR. DIAMOND: Do you know? If
16 you don't know, you don't know.
17 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) That's something
18 you could get copies of down the road if we
19 need it I'm sure, true?
20 A. I'm sure we have those somewhere.
21 Q. Okay. Do you have any other --
22 do you engage in any other present activities
23 for compensation in terms of trying to earn
24 money, other than your business as a
25 carpenter?
12
1 A. Occasionally I'm asked to speak.
2 Q. Speak in what capacity?
3 A. Occasionally I'm asked to speak to
4 different groups, law enforcement primarily.
5 Q. Do you solicit invitations to
6 speak from organizations?
7 A. Recently we have in conjunction
8 with some defense fund raising.
9 Q. When you say "we have" who is we?
10 A. People who are helping me with
11 that legal defense fund raising.
12 Q. Who is "we" then, please, by name?
13 A. Sherill Whisenand.
14 Q. Anyone else?
15 A. No.
16 Q. And what is Sherill Wisinhunt?
17 MR. DIAMOND: Whisenand.
18 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Whisenand. When
19 did you first meet her?
20 A. I probably first spoke with her in
21 1999.
22 Q. And who is she employed with?
23 A. Currently I believe she's
24 self-employed.
25 Q. What is the name of her company,
13
1 do you know?
2 A. I also think she -- I do think
3 she also has other employment but the name of
4 her company is Wise Connections.
5 Q. Is she a public relations person?
6 A. I don't know how she bills
7 herself.
8 Q. What do you see her as?
9 A. A friend.
10 Q. You don't know what her business
11 is?
12 A. I know she works with Dr. Laura
13 as a producer with that radio show.
14 Q. You don't know what type of
15 business she does in connection with her work
16 Wise Connections?
17 A. Yes, she helps me with speaking.
18 Q. Did she form that company Wise
19 Connections just to help you?
20 A. I don't know.
21 Q. Do you know whether it existed
22 before she met you?
23 A. I don't know.
24 Q. How did you come to meet her?
25 A. Through a mutual friend.
14
1 Q. Who is that?
2 A. Anthony Robbins.
3 Q. Tony Robbins, the fellow we see on
4 TV?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And when did you -- I'm sorry.
7 You first spoke with her, is that when you
8 met her in 1999?
9 A. No, I did not meet her in person
10 until some point after that. I spoke with
11 her for a period of time on the telephone.
12 Q. And I assume that that was in
13 connection with, what, raising funds did you
14 tell me?
15 A. At what point are you talking
16 about --
17 Q. When you met --
18 A. -- when I first met her?
19 Q. Yeah.
20 A. No, I wasn't raising funds in
21 1999. When I first met her was simply we
22 struck up a friendship when I was calling
23 Tony Robbins' office.
24 Q. When did you get into, in effect,
25 a business relationship with her, when did
15
1 that start?
2 A. I think at some point I tired of
3 taking media calls and the calls for speaking
4 and she volunteered to take those for me.
5 Q. When did that happen?
6 A. Probably late '99, 2000, sometime
7 during the calendar year of 2000.
8 Q. Or late the calendar year of 1999?
9 A. Possibly. I don't recall.
10 Q. Well, your answer was when I said
11 when did that happen you said probably late
12 '99, 2000, sometime during the calendar year
13 2000; is that correct?
14 A. I'm trying to give you a sense
15 for when that occurred.
16 MR. DIAMOND: What's your best
17 recollection? I'm sorry, I lost the thread.
18 The time period --
19 MR. WOOD: I'm trying to find out
20 -- yeah, hold on one second, I'll tell you
21 exactly. I asked him the date of when he
22 entered into, in effect, a business
23 relationship with her, the date.
24 A. I think it would have been the
25 calendar year sometime during 2000 because
16
1 that's when the calls and the requests came.
2 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Let me see if this
3 will help you. Was it prior to the
4 publication of your book?
5 A. I don't recall, but as I mentioned
6 I think when I had her take over these calls
7 and requests was after the flurry, after the
8 book was released.
9 Q. Does that lead you to believe that
10 in probability you did not engage in a
11 business relationship with Sherill Whisenand
12 until after the April 2000 publication of
13 your book "JonBenet, Inside the Ramsey Murder
14 Investigation"?
15 A. Well, there's not a bright line in
16 my head because I still consider her a friend
17 and when that transitioned at some point to
18 some business work the friendship certainly
19 didn't cease and that doesn't stand out in my
20 head.
21 Q. Did you have any flurry of phone
22 calls from the media prior to the publication
23 of your book?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Did you handle all of those or do
17
1 you recall Sherill Whisenand handling some of
2 them?
3 A. She may have handled some of
4 those.
5 Q. So that tells me it may be that
6 you were involved in a business relationship
7 with her prior to the publication of your
8 book possibly?
9 A. Well, when you say business
10 relationship --
11 Q. When she's handling media calls
12 for you?
13 A. The fact that she took calls for
14 me she certainly did that as a friend as
15 well because she volunteered to do that.
16 (Exhibit-1 was marked.)
17 MR. DIAMOND: Counsel, I expect
18 you're going to tie this into a line of
19 questioning that has to do with the work that
20 he did as a police investigator in connection
21 with the Ramsey case?
22 MR. WOOD: Stay tuned. I'm going
23 to let you look at it and I'm going to ask
24 him questions about it.
25 MR. DIAMOND: Well, I'm going to
18
1 limit you to that because that's what this
2 deposition is about.
3 MR. WOOD: If you have an
4 instruction under the Federal Rules of Civil
5 Procedure to make, Mr. Diamond, feel free to
6 make it. I've asked you to take a look at
7 this exhibit. I'm going to ask Mr. Thomas
8 to take a look at it. It's been marked for
9 purposes of identification as Exhibit 1.
10 MR. DIAMOND: Go ahead.
11 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) You're familiar
12 with the website set up with respect to your
13 lecture for hire, true?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And this is, I take it you would
16 agree, a true and correct copy of that
17 website page?
18 A. That's not from my website, that's
19 from another website, but I'm familiar with
20 that page, yes.
21 Q. Okay. And this obviously
22 advertises your willingness to lecture on the
23 JonBenet Ramsey case for compensation, true?
24 MR. DIAMOND: Counsel, the only
25 reason I can see you asking these questions
19
1 is concerning the jurisdictional debate that
2 we currently have pending --
3 MR. WOOD: I'm asking what he
4 does for a living.
5 MR. DIAMOND: You can ask him
6 what he does for a living. He's told you
7 what he does for a living. He's a carpenter
8 and he does public speaking --
9 MR. WOOD: I'm asking him about
10 that solicitation.
11 MR. DIAMOND: I'm not going to
12 let you inquire about that.
13 MR. WOOD: If you have,
14 Mr. Diamond, if you have a -- we're not here
15 to argue with each other and I don't --
16 MR. DIAMOND: Well --
17 THE REPORTER: One at a time.
18 MR. WOOD: Let me finish, then
19 you'll have time.
20 MR. DIAMOND: Certainly.
21 MR. WOOD: I simply asked him
22 about this for purposes of establishing what
23 he does for a living in whole or in part.
24 If you have an instruction to make under the
25 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, just make
20
1 it. I don't need to debate it.
2 MR. DIAMOND: I will.
3 MR. WOOD: If you instruct him
4 not to answer the question, state the
5 privilege, as I understand that's what you're
6 limited to. State the privilege and make
7 your instruction and we can address it at a
8 later time.
9 MR. DIAMOND: I'm fully prepared
10 to do that.
11 MR. WOOD: All right.
12 MR. DIAMOND: And I intend to do
13 that. I want to give you an opportunity to
14 tell me how this relates to the subject
15 matter of the deposition --
16 MR. WOOD: I did.
17 MR. DIAMOND: -- within the
18 framework that Judge Carnes said you were
19 allowed to inquire. And, you know, if you're
20 prepared to tender a good cause showing, I'm
21 happy to let him answer. Obviously, on its
22 face this is going nowhere but to the
23 jurisdictional dispute that my client and your
24 client are currently engaged in unless there
25 is some other reason. He's already told you
21
1 what he does for a living.
2 I'll have the pending question
3 read, and then I'll decide whether to
4 instruct him or not.
5 MR. WOOD: I don't think there is
6 a pending question. I think he told me that
7 it was a -- he was familiar with this
8 website and has his own website.
9 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) What is your
10 website address?
11 A. It's not necessarily my website.
12 It's a website that was created by a
13 supporter of mine, and the address is
14 www.forstevethomas.com.
15 MR. DIAMOND: He wanted to know
16 your website. Do you have a website?
17 THE DEPONENT: I thought that was
18 the one he was talking about.
19 MR. DIAMOND: No. Do you have a
20 website?
21 THE DEPONENT: No.
22 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) So did you
23 misspeak a minute ago when you said something
24 about your website because you said that's
25 not from my website, that's from another
22
1 website but I'm familiar with that page. Did
2 you misspeak when you said the words "my
3 website"?
4 A. There is a website owned by a
5 third party who is a supporter of mine.
6 Q. Who is that?
7 A. A woman I know as B.J.
8 Q. You don't know her full name?
9 A. Barbara, I don't know her last
10 name.
11 Q. Do you know where she lives?
12 A. Ohio.
13 Q. Where in Ohio?
14 A. I don't know.
15 Q. So other than the
16 lecture-for-profit business and the carpentry
17 business, do you have any other employment at
18 the present time?
19 A. No.
20 Q. Did you authorize Plaintiff's
21 Exhibit Number 1 to be posted to solicit
22 speaking engagements?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Have you ever been deposed before?
25 A. In a civil proceeding?
23
1 Q. Let's start there, in a civil
2 proceeding?
3 A. No. No.
4 Q. That makes me believe that you
5 have been deposed in a criminal proceeding;
6 is that true?
7 A. Well, certainly I'm not familiar
8 with the civil aspect of this as much as I
9 am the criminal half of things. I have
10 given testimony certainly in criminal cases,
11 but I have never been deposed in a setting
12 like this.
13 Q. The testimony you have given in
14 criminal cases has been, I assume, either in
15 hearings or trials in a courtroom?
16 A. In front of grand jurors, yeah.
17 Q. Right. You've never sat in a
18 deposition where no judge is present, no
19 grand jury is present, just the lawyers where
20 we take what is called a deposition; is that
21 your testimony?
22 A. I was present in a deposition
23 many, many years ago in the 1980s in a
24 police case but I don't recall that I ever
25 had to give testimony.
24
1 Q. Was that some sort of a civil
2 lawsuit?
3 A. Exactly.
4 Q. Were you a defendant in that
5 matter?
6 A. The city and myself and other
7 officers, yes.
8 Q. And where was that?
9 A. The City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado.
10 Q. Were you sued for a violation of
11 civil rights?
12 A. No, I don't think that was the
13 basis of the suit.
14 Q. What was the basis?
15 A. We stopped a car we believed to
16 be stolen. It turned out not to be and the
17 people felt wronged by that.
18 Q. So you were sued as a defendant
19 along with others and the City of Wheat
20 Ridge, Colorado?
21 A. Correct.
22 Q. Do you know how that case was
23 resolved?
24 A. I think it settled.
25 Q. Moneys paid to the plaintiff?
25
1 A. That's my understanding.
2 Q. On your behalf as well as the
3 city's behalf?
4 A. I don't know.
5 Q. But that was -- was that filed in
6 the Wheat Ridge or the county of Wheat Ridge?
7 A. I don't know.
8 Q. But in Colorado?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Were you deposed?
11 A. That's what I just said, no. I
12 don't -- I don't know that I had to give any
13 testimony in that.
14 Q. I thought you said you were
15 present for deposition; I may have
16 misunderstood. I don't know if you were
17 there watching someone in attendance or
18 whether you were actually deposed and you're
19 not sure of which; is that right?
20 A. I recall being in a setting
21 similar to this where the other parties were
22 on the other side of the table and there was
23 some Q and A, but I think it was the other
24 side.
25 Q. Other than that lawsuit, have you
26
1 ever been sued in any other matters?
2 Obviously we know about the John and Patsy
3 Ramsey lawsuit against you. Other than those
4 two cases, have you ever been sued in a
5 civil case?
6 A. I don't recall any other, no,
7 civil suit in my capacity as a police officer
8 or as a citizen.
9 Q.
10
11 A.
12 Q.
13
14 A.
15 Q.
16 A.
17 Q.
18
19 MR. DIAMOND: Counsel, what is
20 that relevant to?
21 MR. WOOD: Well, it may very well
22 be relevant to jury --
23 MR. DIAMOND: I'm sorry.
24 MR. WOOD: It may very well be
25 relevant to jury issues.
27
1 MR. DIAMOND: I'm sorry, to jury
2 issues?
3 MR. WOOD: Yes, sir. When you
4 select a jury, I may want to know his former
5 wife's residence or name or employment in the
6 jury selection process. Now, let me say this
7 to you, Mr. Diamond, I'm not going to debate
8 relevance. My question is simple. If you
9 have an instruction to make to the witness,
10 make it. But we can't waste time going back
11 and forth discussing relevance.
12 I ask that question of every
13 witness in a deposition. It's done for jury
14 purposes. It's a legitimate question. May
15 we please get an answer and move on?
16 MR. DIAMOND: You may answer
17 whether or not she lives in the State of
18 Georgia.
19 A.
20
21 Q. (BY MR. WOOD)
22
23
24 A.
25 Q.
28
1
2 A.
3
4
5 Q.
6
7 A.
8
9 Q.
10
11
12
13 A.
14 Q. Tell me if you would, Mr. Thomas,
15 about what your deposition preparation was in
16 this case. What did you do to prepare for
17 the deposition?
18 A. I met with my attorneys and they
19 explained to me how --
20 MR. DIAMOND: You don't need to
21 get into the context.
22 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Yeah, I don't want
23 to know what, unless your attorneys want me
24 to know, I suspect they don't. I don't need
25 to know what you and your attorneys
29
1 discussed. I would like to know the fact of
2 the meeting, when it took place and how long
3 it lasted.
4 A. I met on Wednesday, September
5 19th, with Mr. Sean Smith for several hours
6 and then yesterday, September 20th of 2001, I
7 met again several hours with Mr. Smith and
8 with Chuck Diamond.
9 Q. Tell me how many hours, your best
10 estimate as to how many hours several hours
11 is on the 19th, let's start there, with
12 Mr. Smith.
13 A. A full day. We took a long
14 lunch, but I think we began our day at 9:30
15 a.m. and ended around 5 p.m.
16 Q. And then yesterday, how long?
17 A. Similar.
18 Q. 9:30 to 5 with a lunch break?
19 A. Yeah, we may have gone past 5
20 o'clock last evening, maybe 6 or 7 p.m.
21 Q. And was Mr. Diamond here yesterday
22 during the day?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. At the beginning of your meeting
25 at 9 a.m. or 9:30 a.m.?
30
1 A. I certainly believe so.
2 Q. I only asked because I was under
3 the impression he was not available to be
4 here yesterday but that's all right, that's
5 not an issue for you to worry about.
6 Did you review any written
7 materials in preparation for your deposition?
8 A. I reviewed my book.
9 Q. That book being, identified earlier
10 "JonBenet, Inside the Ramsey Murder
11 Investigation." You have a copy of the hard
12 back with you I see?
13 A. It's a hard back I looked at,
14 yes.
15 Q. Okay. Did you review any other
16 written materials?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Do you have notes that you
19 utilized in writing your book?
20 A. No, let me interrupt you. I did
21 stuck in -- stuck in this book was a
22 two-page report from the Chris Wolf matter
23 that I did review.
24 Q. Do you have a copy of that?
25 A. No.
31
1 Q. Is that something we could see?
2 MR. DIAMOND: What's that?
3 MR. WOOD: The two-page report on
4 the Chris Wolf matter that he reviewed in
5 preparation, is that something we could take
6 a look at?
7 MR. DIAMOND: We don't have it,
8 it's not with him today.
9 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Was this something
10 prepared by your attorneys?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Who was it prepared by?
13 A. This was, I found stuck in a book
14 this summer a two-page report that I had
15 written as a police detective on the Jackie
16 Dilson, Chris Wolf matter.
17 Q. And you have that where presently
18 located?
19 A. That's probably in a folder
20 sitting at home.
21 Q. And you will maintain possession
22 of that at my request in the event we decide
23 we would like to ask for that formally,
24 subject to your attorney's agreement that we
25 would be entitled to it down the road?
32
1 A. Certainly.
2 MR. DIAMOND: Happy to hold on to
3 it.
4 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) I assume that what
5 you're telling me, Mr. Thomas, is you've got
6 two pages of notes that you've made yourself
7 on Chris Wolf relating to the investigation
8 of Chris Wolf?
9 A. No.
10 Q. Tell me what exactly, maybe I
11 didn't understand you, what those two pages
12 are.
13 A. It's not notes. It's a two-page
14 typewritten report that I had prepared.
15 Q. For the Boulder Police Department?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Do you remember the date of that
18 report?
19 A. January 1998.
20 Q. January of '98?
21 A. I'm sorry, January of 1997.
22 Q. Okay. Did you prepare any other
23 written reports for the Boulder Police
24 Department about Chris Wolf, other than the
25 two-page report you've referred to that is
33
1 dated January of 1997?
2 A. Certainly.
3 Q. Have you had an opportunity to
4 review them in preparation for your
5 deposition?
6 A. No.
7 Q. Do you -- did you have notes from
8 which you relied on in whole or in part in
9 writing your book "JonBenet, Inside the Ramsey
10 Murder Investigation"?
11 MR. DIAMOND: Counsel, I'm going
12 to instruct him not to answer.
13 MR. WOOD: On what privilege?
14 MR. DIAMOND: Not on privilege,
15 the limitation that was imposed by Judge
16 Carnes or the condition in which he allowed
17 this deposition to go forward.
18 MR. WOOD: Excuse me, I don't
19 know --
20 MR. DIAMOND: Counsel, you let me
21 finish and I'll let you finish.
22 MR. WOOD: I apologize for
23 interrupting, but let me say this to you --
24 MR. DIAMOND: Well, then don't
25 interrupt me. I will finish what I'm saying.
34
1 MR. WOOD: Mr. Diamond --
2 MR. DIAMOND: Maybe --
3 THE REPORTER: Please, one at a
4 time.
5 MR. WOOD: Excuse me. We're
6 going to take a break off the record. I'm
7 not going to let you yell at me. Calm down.
8 We'll come back and we'll start again in five
9 minutes. We'll go off the record and not
10 waste deposition time.
11 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is now
12 9:34. We're going off the record.
13 (Recess taken from 9:35 a.m. to
14 9:45 a.m.)
15 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is
16 9:45. We're back on the record.
17 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) I'm going to try
18 to make sure I can avoid any problems that
19 Mr. Diamond might have with my question. Let
20 me go back and withdraw the last question and
21 restate it. What I would like to know,
22 Mr. Thomas, is do you have notes pertaining
23 to your involvement in or the investigation
24 of the murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
25 A. The Boulder Police Department has
35
1 those notes. I don't know that I have any
2 notes.
3 Q. You left the Department by
4 resignation of August the 6th, right?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. 1998?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. When did you turn over all of
9 your notes to the Boulder Police Department?
10 A. Shortly thereafter.
11 Q. Who did you turn them over to?
12 A. I returned my briefcases and those
13 contents, along with all my police equipment,
14 which was inventoried, to Commander Dave Hayes
15 and Sergeant Michael Ready.
16 Q. Did you turn over your case
17 notebooks?
18 A. Everything.
19 Q. How many case notebooks did you
20 turn over?
21 A. What do you mean by case
22 notebooks?
23 Q. Don't you know what the case
24 notebook was used in this case, sir, filled
25 out by all of the detectives on a daily
36
1 basis?
2 MR. DIAMOND: He may ask you for
3 an explanation, what you're referring to.
4 You're not going to help him out?
5 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Do you know, sir,
6 what the case notebooks were in this case in
7 terms of the notebooks prepared by the
8 detectives, I believe on a daily basis?
9 A. A case notebook that was
10 prepared --
11 Q. Did you have --
12 A. -- on a daily basis?
13 Q. Yes. Did you have a notebook
14 that you kept, maintained with respect to
15 your investigation?
16 A. I had folders and my working
17 papers which I maintained with respect to my
18 parts of the investigation.
19 MR. DIAMOND: He's asking about a
20 notebook.
21 THE DEPONENT: Yeah, I know.
22 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) You didn't have
23 them in any notebook form?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Now, those working papers, all of
37
1 that was turned back into the Boulder Police
2 Department shortly after you resigned in
3 August of 1998?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. You maintained no notebooks; is
6 that right?
7 A. I maintained copies of those.
8 Q. So you have copies of your
9 reports?
10 A. No, I didn't say that. I don't
11 know that I have those copies anymore.
12 Q. Well, you said you maintained
13 copies. Copies of what?
14 A. I maintained copies of what was in
15 my working file briefcase which I returned to
16 the Boulder Police Department.
17 Q. How many pages of documents are we
18 talking about?
19 A. A couple hundred maybe.
20 Q. Do you have those presently in
21 your possession, custody or control?
22 A. No.
23 Q. What did you do with them?
24 A. I don't know.
25 Q. They just mysteriously disappeared?
38
1 A. No, I have moved twice in the
2 interim. We have some things in storage.
3 We, my wife moved overseas. If I still had
4 a cardboard box full of those documents or
5 materials. I'm unaware of their present
6 location.
7 Q. When do you last recall looking at
8 them or reviewing them?
9 (Discussion off the record between
10 the deponent and Mr. Diamond.)
11 A. I last looked at those in --
12 MR. DIAMOND: He has mentioned the
13 first full report that he --
14 MR. WOOD: Yeah, well, let him
15 answer that.
16 MR. DIAMOND: Are you excluding
17 that?
18 MR. WOOD: No, I'm not excluding
19 anything. I want to learn everything.
20 A. Early 2000.
21 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) How early 2000?
22 A. Probably February or March.
23 Q. That was the last time you saw
24 them?
25 A. Right.
39
1 Q. And when did you move?
2 A. I moved -- I sold my house this
3 summer, summer of 2001.
4 Q. And did you pack up your
5 possessions?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. So you don't have any explanation
8 to offer as to what happened to your JonBenet
9 Ramsey working papers since you last claimed
10 to have seen them sometime in February or
11 March of 19' -- of 2000?
12 A. Yeah, after I last looked at them,
13 this was a cardboard box full of these
14 documents. And to your question, yeah, I
15 don't know where they are currently.
16 Q. You did not destroy them
17 intentionally, did you?
18 A. No.
19 Q. You didn't intentionally lose them,
20 did you?
21 A. No.
22 Q. You didn't think they were
23 valuable to keep?
24 A. No, not necessarily.
25 Q. When did you -- in terms of that,
40
1 you did know at some point that the Ramseys
2 indicated they were going to file a lawsuit
3 against you if you published a book, didn't
4 you?
5 A. Repeat the question, please.
6 Q. You knew early on when your book
7 was published that the Ramseys had stated
8 that they were going to file a lawsuit
9 against you?
10 A. I had heard through the media that
11 they had made those threats.
12 Q. You didn't think it might be wise
13 to keep up with your notes to have those in
14 the event there was a lawsuit?
15 A. Those are all available in the
16 Boulder Police Department.
17 Q. So everything that you had, the
18 200 pages is available from the Boulder
19 Police Department; is that right?
20 A. Yes, as I said, I turned
21 everything back to the Boulder Police
22 Department.
23 Q. In fact, there's quotes in your
24 book, for example, of interview testimony from
25 different individuals. For example, there are
41
1 quotes alleged to have been made by Burke
2 Ramsey in June of 1998, by John Ramsey in
3 June of 1998, by Patsy Ramsey in June of
4 1998, by John Ramsey in April of 1997, by
5 Patsy Ramsey in April of 1997 during police
6 or district attorney interviews.
7 MR. DIAMOND: You'll represent
8 that is the case?
9 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Yeah, well, that
10 is the case, isn't it; you know that to be
11 true, don't you?
12 A. That the book contained --
13 Q. Quotes from the interviews of
14 April 1997 and June of 1998 of John and
15 Patsy Ramsey and from Burke of June of 1998?
16 A. Yeah, I would agree with that.
17 Q. I'm just trying to find out, for
18 example, your notes, would they -- would the
19 notes have those quotes in them?
20 A. What notes are you referring to?
21 Q. The notes that you can't find now.
22 How would you have quotes --
23 MR. DIAMOND: I'm going to object.
24 MR. WOOD: Let me.
25 MR. DIAMOND: He didn't say he
42
1 couldn't find them. He said he doesn't know
2 where they are. You haven't asked him
3 whether he's been looking for them recently,
4 have you?
5 MR. WOOD: Well, I mean, I will
6 ask him that in a minute. Again, Chuck,
7 we'll move quicker if you limit yourself to
8 instructions on privilege.
9 MR. DIAMOND: Mischaracterizes his
10 testimony in your --
11 MR. WOOD: That's not an objection
12 on privilege, nonetheless.
13 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Mr. Thomas, I'm
14 trying to figure out whether you had notes
15 that would have had these precise quotes in
16 them and that's how you were able to use
17 them to come up with the quotes in your
18 book. Or did you come up with those quotes
19 from their various interviews from your mind's
20 eye, your own recollection only? Do you
21 follow me?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Which was the case?
24 A. They were either in notes which I
25 had or in documents I subsequently received.
43
1 Q. And what documents did you
2 subsequently receive about the investigation?
3 A. After I left the police
4 department, over a period of time I received
5 through the mail various documents concerning
6 the investigation.
7 Q. From whom?
8 A. Anonymously through the mail.
9 Q. Postmarked from where?
10 A. Boulder or Denver.
11 Q. And were these documents police
12 files or reports on the JonBenet Ramsey
13 investigation?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Were they documents from the
16 district attorney's office on the JonBenet
17 Ramsey investigation?
18 A. What do you mean from the district
19 attorney's office?
20 Q. Well, for example, a report
21 prepared by Michael Kane, as opposed to a
22 report prepared by Mark Beckner. One works
23 for the Boulder PD and one works for the
24 district attorney or did. You know the
25 difference.
44
1 A. No, these were Boulder Police
2 Department documents.
3 Q. And how many pages of documents
4 did you receive subsequent to the time that
5 you left the Boulder Police Department that
6 concerned the JonBenet Ramsey murder
7 investigation?
8 A. Several hundred.
9 Q. Where are those documents?
10 A. Unknown. They would be in the
11 same box if I still have it.
12 Q. So how many -- let me see if I've
13 got all the sources of written materials that
14 you had after you left the Boulder Police
15 Department on August the 6th, 1998. You had
16 some couple hundred pages of your work papers
17 that you had copied, correct?
18 A. Correct.
19 Q. You didn't make copies of police
20 reports?
21 A. In what context are you talking
22 about?
23 Q. In this 200 some odd pages of
24 your working papers, were there also copies
25 of police files, police reports on the
45
1 JonBenet Ramsey investigation?
2 A. Yes, these were my working papers,
3 yes.
4 Q. Well, for example, would it only
5 be reports prepared by you or did you have
6 copies of reports prepared by other officers?
7 A. As I was the affiant on the
8 master affidavit in this case I certainly was
9 in possession of reports from others to
10 include in any search or arrest warrant in
11 this case.
12 Q. So the answer is yes?
13 A. To what question?
14 Q. The one I asked you. Did you
15 have copies of other officers' reports on the
16 JonBenet Ramsey case in your working papers?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. You make reference to being the
19 affiant on the master affidavit. Did your
20 working papers then include copies of all of
21 the documents that you had and had in any
22 way relied on in preparing the master
23 affidavit in the JonBenet Ramsey case?
24 A. If I understand you correctly, no.
25 Q. Were you authorized to keep those
46
1 copies by the Boulder Police Department?
2 A. When I resigned abruptly, I
3 returned all those papers to the Boulder
4 Police Department and there was no further
5 communication between us.
6 Q. But did you tell them you had
7 kept copies of the papers?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Am I correct that everything you
10 had in your physical possession in terms of
11 case files, case reports, notes, at the time
12 that you resigned, whatever you turned over
13 to the Boulder Police Department at the time
14 of your resignation, you made copies of and
15 kept yourself; is that right?
16 A. I believe so.
17 Q. And that was only a couple hundred
18 pages?
19 A. I believe so, yes.
20 Q. And did you keep, for example, a
21 transcript of the April 30, 1997 interview
22 that you conducted with Patsy Ramsey?
23 A. I don't know.
24 Q. So subsequent to leaving, from
25 what period of time until what period of time
47
1 were you receiving anonymous police file
2 information on the JonBenet Ramsey case that
3 you say totaled several hundred pages? When
4 did it start and when did you last get
5 something?
6 A. Initially after I had made my
7 intentions known that I was going to tell my
8 story through a book. And that was probably
9 early, maybe January of 1999 and throughout
10 that calendar year of 1999.
11 Q. Any materials in the year 2000?
12 A. Not that I recall.
13 Q. Did you make any efforts to
14 solicit information from any member of the
15 Boulder Police Department about the
16 investigation after you left?
17 MR. DIAMOND: May I ask a
18 clarifying question? Solicit written
19 materials or just talking to somebody?
20 MR. WOOD: Information, case
21 information about the case.
22 A. Can you repeat the question
23 please?
24 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Sure, did you make
25 any efforts to solicit information about the
48
1 JonBenet murder investigation from any member
2 of the Boulder Police Department after you
3 left the department in August of 1998?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Do you have any idea who sent you
6 any of these alleged anonymous documents?
7 A. These are smart people. No.
8 Q. How do you know they were accurate
9 if you don't know who sent them to you?
10 A. Because I had previously seen all
11 of them.
12 Q. So this was information that was
13 contained in the case file that you didn't
14 copy when you left the force, but it predated
15 your leaving the force; is that true?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Did you ever receive any
18 information about grand jury testimony or
19 evidence in the case?
20 A. Never.
21 Q. Did you ever receive any
22 information about the investigation in terms
23 of efforts and information subsequent to the
24 investigation August 1998? Let me withdraw
25 that and make it a little bit cleaner.
49
1 I want to know, you tell me the
2 information you got predated your resignation
3 date. Did you ever get any new information,
4 that is to say information that was generated
5 about the case after August of 1998?
6 A. Without reviewing this box, I
7 would have to say as we sit here now that it
8 was all pre-August '98. I don't recall
9 sitting here that any of it was post-August
10 '98.
11 Q. So that the documents that you
12 have and the information that you had about
13 the case, your best recollection is that
14 would have been limited to information
15 generated prior to August of 1998, true?
16 A. Yes.
17 MR. DIAMOND: Counsel, I see no
18 relevance to this line other than to find out
19 what he knew at the time he wrote the book.
20 I instruct him not to answer. If you want
21 to take this up with the judge, I am happy
22 to do so. If you want to make a record as
23 to why this is relevant to the Wolf case,
24 I'm happy to listen to you. Otherwise, he's
25 instructed not to answer. Move on.
50
1 MR. WOOD: Is there a privilege
2 being asserted?
3 MR. DIAMOND: You heard me, move
4 on.
5 MR. WOOD: Sir, if you will be
6 polite, we will be polite, also.
7 MR. DIAMOND: Go ahead. I am
8 happy to be polite.
9 MR. WOOD: Yes, sir, please do.
10 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) My question is,
11 I'm trying to find out about your knowledge
12 concerning the JonBenet Ramsey investigation.
13 And it seems from what I am hearing that
14 your knowledge is limited to information about
15 the case from the date of the murder in 1996
16 through August of 1998. Is that right?
17 MR. DIAMOND: From police sources
18 is what you have asked him about?
19 MR. WOOD: My question is on the
20 table, now, sir. We can call Judge Carnes
21 and correct the problem that we're
22 experiencing with you if we need to. I hope
23 we don't need to.
24 MR. DIAMOND: We may well have
25 to.
51
1 MR. WOOD: We certainly may have
2 to if you keep interrupting inappropriately
3 under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
4 procedure for depositions.
5 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Could you answer
6 my question, please, Mr. Thomas?
7 A. Could you repeat it for me,
8 please?
9 Q. Sure. I'm going to read it right
10 back to you. I'm trying to find out about
11 your knowledge concerning the JonBenet Ramsey
12 investigation. And it seems from what I'm
13 hearing that your knowledge is limited to
14 information about the case from the date of
15 the murder in 1996 through August of 1998; is
16 that right?
17 A. No, after August of 1998, I
18 certainly followed media accounts and what was
19 released publicly and followed the case with
20 some interest.
21 Q. Fair enough. Let me add that in.
22 Can I then say in terms of drawing a circle
23 around your knowledge of the JonBenet Ramsey
24 murder investigation, that your knowledge
25 consists of knowledge about the police
52
1 information and to some extent district
2 attorney information from the date of the
3 murder until the time you left in August of
4 1998 and subsequent to 1998 has been
5 supplemented by what you have learned either
6 through media accounts or through official
7 statements from the Boulder Police Department
8 or the district attorney's office; is that
9 right?
10 A. Very confusing question. Can you
11 break that up for me? I don't understand
12 what you --
13 Q. I just want to find out what
14 you've got. You've got your personal
15 knowledge. You've got the police file
16 information that you described for me, the
17 copies of the documents you copied, the
18 documents that have been sent to you
19 subsequent. And that all dealt, you believe,
20 pre-August 1998, right?
21 A. I'm not following you, Mr. Wood.
22 Q. Well, stick with me. I'll try
23 and make it simple for you.
24 A. Please.
25 Q. More simple. You've told me about
53
1 the documents. I've covered all the
2 documents, haven't I? You've got the
3 documents you copied and you've got the
4 documents that were anonymously sent to you,
5 right?
6 A. Yes, that's correct.
7 Q. Do you have any other documents
8 about this investigation, other than those
9 documents? Do you?
10 A. Oh, I'm sorry. If I understand
11 the question correctly, no, as I said, not
12 that I recall because post-August '98 began
13 the grand jury. And certainly I don't have
14 any information from the grand jury room.
15 Q. So we've got your personal
16 knowledge about your involvement in the case,
17 right?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. We've got your knowledge from the
20 written documents that you've just described
21 for me?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And then subsequent to August of
24 1998, your knowledge about the case and its
25 status would be limited to what you have
54
1 either seen or heard in the media or what
2 may have been officially stated by law
3 enforcement authorities, right?
4 A. As far as I recall, I don't
5 recall anything, as I have said, post August
6 of 1998 coming my way, but I'm not limiting
7 myself to that, if that answers your
8 question.
9 Q. As we sit here today, can you
10 think of anything other than that? Is that
11 your best recollection as you sit here today,
12 sir?
13 A. Yes, as I sit here right now, if
14 I understand this correctly, that's my answer.
15 Q. And I'm sure that you came to
16 this deposition in an effort to prepare for
17 it and to refresh yourself about the
18 investigation, you knew you were going to be
19 asked about it, didn't you?
20 A. The question being I know I was
21 going to be asked about the investigation?
22 Q. Sure.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. JonBenet Ramsey, that was the
25 first murder investigation that you were
55
1 involved in; is that right?
2 A. As a detective, yes.
3 Q. You were involved in a murder
4 investigation in some other capacity?
5 A. I had been on homicide scenes as
6 a uniformed officer.
7 Q. But as a detective actively
8 investigating the murder, was JonBenet Ramsey
9 the first murder investigation in that
10 capacity for you?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Can we also say that it was the
13 only one?
14 A. No.
15 Q. So you were involved as a
16 detective in other homicide investigations?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Tell me about those. How many?
19 A. One other.
20 Q. When was that?
21 A. In 1997, I believe.
22 Q. Is that the one where the police
23 officer was present when someone shot someone
24 else in a domestic dispute?
25 A. Yes.
56
1 Q. And then the person came down and
2 admitted that he had shot or she had shot
3 their spouse?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And that was kind of the end all
6 of that case, wasn't it? Pretty open and
7 shut, wouldn't you agree?
8 A. When you say end all, yes, that
9 concluded rather quickly.
10 Q. Yeah, I mean as I understand that
11 case, there was a domestic dispute call, the
12 police officer was there and one of the
13 spouses shot the other one and killed them,
14 right?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And then came down to the police
17 headquarters, and I believe you may have even
18 been the person talking to the perpetrator,
19 and that person admitted to shooting his --
20 was it his spouse or her spouse?
21 A. Her spouse.
22 Q. Her spouse. Anything other than
23 that one case prior to the JonBenet Ramsey
24 murder investigation, did you have any other
25 case where you were involved in a homicide
57
1 investigation as a detective?
2 A. No.
3 Q. Okay. So it was the only other
4 one; JonBenet Ramsey was your last one I'm
5 sure, right?
6 A. No, the last one was this
7 Jakob-Chien homicide we're describing.
8 Q. That was the last one, I thought
9 that was in -- oh, I'm sorry, that was in
10 1997 but your involvement ended in '97. The
11 last one you've been involved in went through
12 '98 and that was JonBenet Ramsey?
13 A. Right.
14 Q. From the time you were assigned to
15 the JonBenet Ramsey case up until the time
16 that you left, were you assigned to any other
17 homicide case?
18 A. Other than the one we noted, no.
19 Q. And I take it the JonBenet Ramsey
20 case, other than the case that you noted,
21 pretty much was your full-time job; is that
22 right?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And have you ever had any
25 training, formal training, in handwriting
58
1 analysis?
2 A. No.
3 Q. Have you ever had any formal
4 training in criminal profiling?
5 A. No.
6 Q. Other than the 1997 case where you
7 obtained the confession from the spouse who
8 shot her husband while the police officer was
9 present on the premises, and other than the
10 Ramsey case, have you ever conducted any
11 other interrogations of murder suspects or
12 potential suspects?
13 A. On reported homicides, no, not
14 that I'm aware of.
15 Q. Would you be willing to authorize
16 us, subject to your counsel's recommendation
17 or right to object if he asked, would you be
18 willing to authorize us to obtain a copy of
19 your Boulder Police Department personnel file?
20 MR. DIAMOND: You don't have to
21 answer that. If you want to make a request
22 to me, I will respond.
23 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) How many internal
24 affairs investigations have you been the
25 subject of?
59
1 A. I believe just one.
2 Q. When was that?
3 A. In the early to mid part of 19 --
4 of the 1990s.
5 Q. Was that Wheat Ridge or Boulder?
6 A. That was with the Boulder Police
7 Department.
8 Q. Did that stem out of a shooting?
9 A. No.
10 Q. Or did it -- just give me a
11 general idea of what it involved.
12 A. An unauthorized vehicular pursuit.
13 Q. And that's the only one, the only
14 internal affairs investigation?
15 A. That's right. The incidents that
16 you refer to -- there was no further -- to
17 be an internal affairs complaint there has to
18 be a complainant and you mentioned the
19 shooting incident, there was no complaint.
20 Q. Is there any reason why the
21 two-page report on Chris Wolf was in your
22 book, why, for example, that was separated
23 out from the other box of materials?
24 A. No, I didn't say in my book. I
25 said in a book. And this summer when I knew
60
1 the Wolf case was pending, I was pleased to
2 find that folded in half and stuck in a
3 book.
4 Q. What book was it stuck in?
5 A. A book on my desk, on my library
6 shelf.
7 Q. Why were you pleased to find it?
8 A. Because I knew I would be giving
9 testimony in this case and it might help me
10 recollect some of what I did four or five
11 years ago.
12 Q. You could also refresh yourself
13 with some of the statements you made in your
14 book about Mr. Wolf, couldn't you?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. You recall Chris Wolf, don't you?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Am I correct that the Boulder
19 Police Department conducted a thorough
20 investigation of Chris Wolf?
21 A. I'm aware and was a participant in
22 the Boulder Police Department investigating
23 Mr. Wolf, yes.
24 Q. My question was though, sir, do
25 you agree that the Boulder Police Department
61
1 conducted a thorough investigation of Chris
2 Wolf?
3 A. I know what I did with my
4 involvement with Mr. Wolf, but I don't have
5 personal knowledge of what the detectives who
6 subsequently closed him out as a suspect did
7 to satisfy themselves.
8 Q. Well, take a look, if you would,
9 at page 273 of your book.
10 MR. DIAMOND: For the record, do
11 we have the hard cover?
12 MR. WOOD: Yeah, this is a hard
13 cover.
14 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) 273 and this is
15 just in context apparently on an incident
16 you're describing that occurred on February
17 the 25th of 1998, with Mayor Bob Greenlee.
18 Do you know Mayor Greenlee?
19 MR. DIAMOND: Can you point to
20 where you are, at the top of the page?
21 MR. WOOD: Just hang on a second,
22 pay attention, you'll get there.
23 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) In context do you
24 recall the February incident with Mayor
25 Greenlee about Chris Wolf?
62
1 A. I don't recall the date being a
2 specific date in February but I certainly
3 recall meeting with Mr. Greenlee, yes, about
4 Chris Wolf.
5 Q. Look at the top of page 273. If
6 you would follow with me, quote, We need to
7 check this out, the mayor snorted. We need
8 a thorough investigation into this. End
9 quote. "I guess he wanted me to cower in
10 his presence. Greenlee trapped himself, not
11 me." Quote, We are thoroughly investigating
12 him, end quote, "I replied. Even as we
13 spoke, Chris Wolf was in an interview room
14 voluntarily giving handwriting, hair and DNA
15 samples and a statement."
16 Have you followed me?
17 A. I have followed you.
18 Q. Have I read that correctly?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. So it was your understanding that
21 the Boulder Police Department was thoroughly
22 investigating Chris Wolf, true?
23 A. Yes, even contemporaneous with my
24 exchange with the mayor on that particular
25 day.
63
1 Q. And the investigation of Mr. Wolf
2 had started back in January of 1997; is that
3 right?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. How did -- how did Chris Wolf
6 first become a suspect in the JonBenet Ramsey
7 murder investigation, Mr. Thomas?
8 A. Through a citizen informant.
9 Q. And who was that citizen
10 informant?
11 A. Jackie Dilson.
12 Q. Tell me your recollection of what
13 Jackie Dilson did that resulted in Mr. Wolf
14 becoming a suspect in the Ramsey murder
15 investigation.
16 A. I participated in a meeting with
17 Jackie Dilson in which she offered an account
18 with some dubious issues on the front end.
19 She offered a piece of physical evidence that
20 was exculpatory to Mr. Wolf. There were
21 questions surrounding her stability and mental
22 condition. Nonetheless, we investigated
23 Mr. Wolf over a period of approximately 12 to
24 15 months, during which time Ms. Wolf's --
25 MR. DIAMOND: Ms. Wolf?
64
1 A. I'm sorry, Ms. Dilson's accounts
2 grew increasingly suspicious by way of making
3 admissions and information known to us in a
4 less than timely fashion.
5 And then continuing to supply
6 information that became increasingly void of
7 credibility, including linking Access Graphics
8 and Lockheed Martin in some conspiracy
9 involving arms sales to "Third World countries
10 and Chris Wolf planting by way of this
11 conspiracy somehow a stun gun video inside
12 the Ramsey home.
13 Additionally, she tried to
14 implicate Mr. Wolf in other crimes, including
15 another homicide, and another individual or
16 team of detectives were assigned to attempt a
17 different tact with Mr. Wolf and were
18 successful in gaining his compliance and
19 cooperation, and I was made aware that they
20 subsequently internally cleared him from
21 involvement in the Ramsey matter.
22 MR. DIAMOND: Before you ask him
23 the next question, may I have a minute with
24 the witness?
25 MR. WOOD: If we note on the
65
1 record the time and it's not charged against
2 us.
3 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is
4 10:17. We're going off the record.
5 MR. WOOD: We don't have to go
6 off the record.
7 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: Oh, never mind.
8 We're still on the record.
9 MR. DIAMOND: Go ahead.
10 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Had you completed
11 your answer?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Now, if I am hearing you, you
14 gave me kind of a general overview of the
15 Chris Wolf matter as pertains to Jackie
16 Dilson that apparently she came to you as a
17 citizen informant, the Boulder Police
18 Department, provided information and then as
19 that information was investigated, apparently
20 you, perhaps others, felt that it was not
21 necessarily credible and had suspicions about
22 it as it pertains to Jackie Dilson, am I
23 right?
24 A. If you're asking me were there
25 questions about Jackie Dilson's credibility,
66
1 yes.
2 Q. But you didn't know that the first
3 day you met her, I mean you accepted on face
4 value the information and you followed up on
5 it to investigate Mr. Wolf, true?
6 A. No, no, other detectives and
7 myself who were present at that immediately
8 had serious questions about her stability and
9 credibility.
10 Q. But not so much so that you did
11 not follow up on it, true?
12 A. We followed up on dozens of such
13 suspects who came to us by way of citizen
14 information.
15 Q. We know it is true that Chris
16 Wolf was a Boulder Police Department suspect
17 in the JonBenet Ramsey investigation, right?
18 A. You used the word suspect. That
19 was always an issue inside the police
20 department who would and wouldn't be on this
21 proverbial suspect list. But as we sit here
22 today, certainly he, among many others, I
23 considered a suspect in the case.
24 Q. And you later learned that the
25 district attorney's office viewed Mr. Wolf as
67
1 a suspect, true?
2 A. True in that, after the fact, I
3 came to learn that they were conducting some
4 investigation that I had been previously
5 unaware of.
6 Q. It is clear from your involvement
7 that Mr. Wolf became a suspect in the
8 JonBenet Ramsey murder investigation as a
9 result of Jackie Dilson, true?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Several months later, it was
12 several months after January of 1997 before
13 any information was provided by the Ramsey --
14 John and Patsy Ramsey's investigators to law
15 enforcement about Mr. Wolf; is that true?
16 A. I'm sorry, give me that time line
17 again, Mr. Wood.
18 Q. Yeah, several -- if this helps any
19 at all as I understand it, and you may tell
20 me you don't know or you may agree with me,
21 Steve Ainsworth started looking into Chris
22 Wolf in August of 1997. Does that coincide
23 with your recollection?
24 A. No.
25 Q. When do you think Steve Ainsworth
68
1 began to look at him?
2 A. June of 1997.
3 Q. Okay. Subsequent to that, the
4 Ramseys' investigators began to provide some
5 information to the district attorney's office
6 about Mr. Wolf; is that your understanding?
7 A. I have no personal knowledge of
8 what the Ramsey investigators were or weren't
9 doing.
10 Q. They didn't provide you with any
11 information about Mr. Wolf, did they?
12 A. Me personally, no, not that I'm
13 aware of.
14 Q. Are you aware of any information
15 that the Ramsey investigators provided to the
16 Boulder Police Department about Mr. Wolf?
17 A. I can't speak for others, but
18 certainly none came to me directly.
19 Q. You were operating from the
20 standpoint that you were following up on Ms.
21 Dilson's information and developing and
22 investigating that information and any leads
23 or other areas that your investigation might
24 take you with respect to Chris Wolf, true?
25 A. Mr. Wolf, if I understand it
69
1 correctly, if you're asking me if I was
2 following up on information that Dilson
3 was --
4 Q. Mr. Wood. That's okay.
5 A. I'm sorry, Mr. Wood, that
6 Ms. Dilson was providing regarding Chris Wolf,
7 yes, I was doing that.
8 Q. You said when she first came to
9 you she provided you with a piece of
10 exculpatory evidence. What was that?
11 A. From a pillow case, Ms. Dilson
12 produced a length of rope that was
13 immediately visually inconsistent to the
14 persons present with the murder ligature in
15 the homicide case.
16 Q. Well, now how is that exculpatory.
17 You're saying it wouldn't be incriminating but
18 how does it as a piece of evidence prove to
19 be exculpatory of Mr. Wolf?
20 A. It may be a choice of words on my
21 behalf but she did not produce us -- or
22 produce any physical evidence that
23 incriminated him. There was nothing that she
24 produced that evening by way of physical
25 evidence that included him in the running, so
70
1 to speak.
2 Q. That would be a better way of
3 phrasing it than to say it was exculpatory,
4 wouldn't you agree?
5 A. I won't quibble with you on that,
6 Mr. Wood.
7 Q. I don't want you to quibble with
8 me. I want you to tell me whether it's a
9 more accurate statement that the evidence that
10 she presented to you with respect to the rope
11 did not incriminate Mr. Wolf, but nor did it
12 prove to be itself exculpatory of Mr. Wolf,
13 is that accurate?
14 A. Okay. True, sure.
15 Q. Okay. Tell me about the first
16 time you had a chance to meet Mr. Wolf, what
17 you recall about that.
18 A. On a particular date in January of
19 1997, shortly after Dilson's information, we
20 had Mr. Wolf brought into the police
21 department in which we had a rather
22 unpleasant exchange and little or no
23 information was obtained from him at that
24 time.
25 Q. Was his conduct at that time what
71
1 you would characterize as suspicious?
2 A. Everything depends on context but
3 he was not, certainly not cooperative.
4 Q. Well, didn't you ask him to write
5 certain words that were from the ransom note
6 found in the Ramsey house?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And didn't he refuse to do so?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. That certainly was not consistent
11 with innocence, was it?
12 A. Sometimes I've found that a lack
13 of cooperation like that may not be any more
14 indicative of guilt than a cooperative person
15 who turns out to be guilty.
16 Q. So someone's refusal to cooperate
17 with you by either agreeing to an interview
18 or submitting to a handwriting exemplar is
19 not viewed by you necessarily as being
20 indicative of guilt, true?
21 A. It's not evidence.
22 Q. Well, you said, I believe, that
23 you have found that a lack of cooperation
24 like that may not be any more indicative of
25 guilt than a cooperative person who turns out
72
1 to be guilty; is that right?
2 A. Yeah, in response to your
3 question.
4 Q. So let me put it in the terms
5 that you put it. It is not evidence of
6 guilt by simply refusing to cooperate with
7 the police by either agreeing to an interview
8 or submitting to a handwriting exemplar, true?
9 A. Are you reading back to me my
10 statement or your question?
11 Q. I'm asking you a question. Don't
12 worry about what I'm reading; I'm asking you
13 a question.
14 A. Repeat the question for me,
15 please.
16 Q. It is not evidence of guilt on
17 the part of someone who simply refuses to
18 cooperate with the police by either agreeing
19 to an interview or submitting to a
20 handwriting exemplar, true?
21 MR. DIAMOND: If that's what he
22 said that doesn't make sense.
23 A. I have lost you one more time,
24 Mr. Wood.
25 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) You don't
73
1 understand the question?
2 A. No.
3 Q. An individual who is not
4 cooperative and does not agree to a police
5 interview or agree to a police request to
6 provide a handwriting exemplar, that refusal
7 to cooperate is not evidence of that
8 individual's guilt, true?
9 A. I would agree with that.
10 Q. Thank you.
11 A. In that context.
12 Q. In what context?
13 A. We're talking about Mr. Wolf here.
14 Q. Well, I was talking about any
15 individual.
16 A. Then repeat the question to me,
17 please.
18 Q. An individual who is not
19 cooperative and does not agree to a police
20 interview or agree to a police request to
21 provide a handwriting exemplar, that
22 individual's refusal to cooperate is not
23 itself evidence of that individual's guilt,
24 true?
25 A. That is not evidence you can take
74
1 to a judge in an affidavit, certainly not.
2 Q. Not evidence of guilt?
3 A. Not evidence in a courtroom, as I
4 understand it.
5 Q. Okay. The -- there is the use of
6 the word hobbled, do you know what that
7 means?
8 A. In the context of police work?
9 Q. Yes.
10 A. Yes, sir.
11 Q. What does that mean to hobble
12 somebody?
13 A. When you have a violent or a
14 physically resistive or combative individual
15 or suspect who you cannot otherwise control,
16 the hobbling procedure, as I understand it,
17 beyond handcuffs behind the back include
18 restraining the ankles and legs through the
19 use of what is called a hobble.
20 Q. When you first met Chris Wolf and
21 had this incident you have generally described
22 for us, did you have to hobble him?
23 A. I think I was involved in that
24 personally. He was hobbled before he was
25 transported to jail.
75
1 Q. Who helped you hobble him?
2 A. There were other officers present
3 and I don't know that -- I can't speak for
4 Gosage but if I participated, and I may very
5 well have, there were other people present,
6 including I think a Detective Whiten, a
7 traffic sergeant, Detective Chromiak, maybe
8 some uniform people.
9 Q. Why did you all have to hobble
10 him?
11 A. Because he was physically
12 uncooperative and resistive.
13 Q. How did you hobble him? In other
14 words, you said it is always putting
15 handcuffs behind the back and restraining the
16 ankles and legs. Is that the standard
17 technique?
18 A. Yes, that's my --
19 Q. One way to do it?
20 A. -- that's my recollection of how
21 he was hobbled that day.
22 Q. Would he let you take a picture
23 of him?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Did you get any information from
76
1 him in terms of being able to get answers to
2 any questions?
3 A. As was the case with most of the
4 interviews, I'm sure there's a transcription
5 that will bear it out, but I don't recall,
6 as we sit here today, what information we may
7 have gotten from him in that interview room
8 that particular day.
9 Q. Do you know if you got any?
10 A. As I sit here now, I don't know
11 that we got any information from him that
12 day, maybe beyond the name, rank, serial
13 number type of personal information.
14 Q. Do you know how it came to be
15 that he was stopped by the Boulder Police
16 Department and brought to the office?
17 A. I do.
18 Q. Tell me about that.
19 A. The confidential informant in this
20 case --
21 Q. That's Ms. Dilson?
22 A. Ms. Dilson.
23 Q. Okay.
24 A. Wanted to remain confidential as
25 she had some concerns. And in attempting to
77
1 maintain her CI status, we used a ruse with
2 some information that she had provided us
3 about Mr. Wolf's driving record and had him
4 stopped and picked up legally on that basis.
5 Q. Why did you want him to provide
6 you with a handwriting exemplar from the
7 Ramsey ransom note?
8 A. Because when information came into
9 the Boulder Police Department suggesting as in
10 this case as detailed as Jackie Dilson made
11 it appear, someone's possible involvement in
12 this homicide, we had to have some sort of
13 initial screening process that was done on
14 scores of people where you try to obtain
15 non-testimonial physical evidence to see if
16 there was anything linking a particular
17 individual to the ransom note or the crime,
18 as well as a preliminary interview and/or
19 alibi confirmation.
20 Q. You didn't on -- in January you
21 did not get a preliminary interview with
22 Chris Wolf, right, tried but failed?
23 A. That's right.
24 Q. Didn't get a handwriting exemplar,
25 right?
78
1 A. That's right.
2 Q. Didn't get any non testimony --
3 testimonial physical evidence from him, did
4 you?
5 A. No, sir.
6 Q. He really, short of not
7 cooperating and becoming violent sufficiently
8 that he had to be hobbled, you really weren't
9 able to conduct any type of an initial
10 screening process on Chris Wolf in January of
11 1997, true?
12 A. True.
13 Q. And then it was 1998, February of
14 1998, when you were finally able to get him
15 to provide non-testimonial evidence?
16 A. As I said earlier, I'm not real
17 sure of the date or it being February but
18 I'll --
19 Q. Take a look at your book; it may
20 be helpful in that. 271, the bottom of the
21 page. "On February 25th the mayor chewed me
22 out." Does that help you?
23 A. Sure.
24 Q. Okay.
25 A. I --
79
1 Q. So in February of 1998, that's
2 when the Boulder Police Department first
3 obtained non-testimonial evidence from Chris
4 Wolf, hair sample, DNA sample, and handwriting
5 exemplar, right?
6 A. To my knowledge, yes.
7 Q. What was his alibi?
8 A. Well, as I mentioned earlier very
9 briefly, after this difficult encounter with
10 Mr. Wolf by Detective Gosage and myself, it
11 was determined at some level to attempt a
12 different tact at gaining his cooperation.
13 And so they put Detective Weinheimer, possibly
14 others, on to that lead and they took it
15 from there. And I don't know, I don't have
16 any personal knowledge of how they wound up
17 coming to the determination that he was
18 cleared other than letting the others in the
19 investigative team know that he had been
20 sufficiently cleared.
21 Q. You don't know on what basis?
22 A. I don't.
23 Q. You don't know what Chris Wolf's
24 alibi was?
25 A. I do not.
80
1 Q. Chris Wolf has indicated to us
2 that he was never asked to take a polygraph
3 exam. Do you have any factual information to
4 dispute that?
5 A. I don't have any knowledge of
6 that.
7 Q. If Jackie Dilson said Chris Wolf
8 lived with her and that I believe she woke
9 on the morning of the 26th of December and
10 he was coming out of the shower and that his
11 clothes were dirty, do you recall that being
12 information provided by Ms. Dilson?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. If that were his only alibi, that
15 is to say, well, I was at home with Jackie
16 Dilson who I lived with at the time and
17 Jackie Dilson who he lived with at the time
18 came to the police with suspicions that he
19 might have been involved in the murder,
20 wouldn't you ask Mr. Wolf to, as you say,
21 sit down on the box, get on the box and take
22 a polygraph exam to see how he did on that
23 alibi?
24 A. Certainly. There are many people
25 in this case I would have liked to have
81
1 steered toward the box.
2 Q. I'm asking you about Mr. Wolf.
3 Wouldn't that be standard procedure with an
4 alibi that is related only to being with the
5 person who thinks that you may have been
6 involved in the murder that you would say,
7 well, Mr. Wolf, if that's your alibi that you
8 weren't out that night let's put it -- put
9 you on a polygraph exam and see what you
10 say; wouldn't that be standard procedure?
11 A. Certainly in some departments but
12 it had been my experience that the Boulder
13 Police Department had never embraced and had
14 no policy, that I'm aware of, in place
15 regarding polygraphy.
16 Q. So there was no standard practice
17 in the Boulder Police Department about when
18 to seek a polygraph examination from a
19 suspect?
20 A. For example, in other departments
21 who have in-house polygraphers.
22 Q. Well, I'm asking you about the
23 Boulder Police Department?
24 A. I'm trying to get to that.
25 Q. Let's get to that for me, if you
82
1 would, please.
2 MR. DIAMOND: Let him finish.
3 A. Regarding the Boulder Police
4 Department, there was no in-house polygrapher
5 and it didn't appear to me that there was
6 any sort of a policy in place, although I
7 personally favored the use of polygraphs in
8 some cases. In which to -- and how it was
9 necessarily applied, we certainly were able to
10 polygraph some other potential suspects in
11 this case but I don't know that Mr. Wolf
12 ever was.
13 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) You don't have any
14 basis to dispute his statement that he was
15 never asked to take a polygraph, do you?
16 A. No.
17 Q. And do you -- are you aware of
18 any efforts by the Boulder Police Department
19 to ever obtain Mr. Wolf's computer and the
20 hard drive from his computer to have it
21 analyzed as part of its thorough
22 investigation?
23 A. If I recall correctly, Jackie
24 Dilson early in this investigation of
25 Mr. Wolf had volunteered to me that she would
83
1 supply me with items belonging to Mr. Wolf,
2 bed sheets, underwear, writings, et cetera,
3 and I explained to her that she could not
4 act as an agent on behalf of law enforcement.
5 And she may have volunteered the computer
6 equipment you mentioned.
7 Q. But you didn't accept her offer?
8 A. I couldn't.
9 Q. Because you thought it would raise
10 questions of chain of custody and
11 admissibility?
12 A. Not because I thought so. Because
13 that, if my understanding is correct and I
14 think the legal advisor and even Hofstrom,
15 you can't have a private citizen act as an
16 agent on your behalf to circumvent a search
17 warrant.
18 Q. Well, you couldn't -- you could
19 test the material and gain potentially
20 valuable information even if that information
21 might not be admissible in court, couldn't
22 you, sir?
23 A. I wasn't trained that way in the
24 least. And I know from dope work, you can't
25 use a citizen to act as your agent.
84
1 Q. So if Jackie Dilson walks in and
2 says here is a piece of evidence, here is a
3 rope --
4 A. Sir.
5 Q. -- did you tell her, did you say
6 wait a minute, I can't take that rope from
7 you, Ms. Dilson?
8 A. Very different.
9 Q. How is that different --
10 A. Here we --
11 Q. -- her offering to bring you
12 articles of clothing or his computer?
13 A. It's my understanding, and here is
14 the difference, is she volunteered evidence on
15 the front end without any prior knowledge on
16 our behalf, which is acceptable, according to
17 our in-house legal advisor.
18 But when an individual makes it
19 known to you as a detective that they would
20 go out and seek to gather evidence on your
21 behalf and bring that to you for testing,
22 that's entirely inappropriate.
23 Q. Did you have after Mr. -- based
24 on Ms. Dilson's statements to you and
25 Mr. Wolf's actions when you had him brought
85
1 in under the ruse, did you have probable
2 cause at that time in your view to obtain a
3 search warrant of Ms. Dilson's property to
4 obtain items of evidence to be analyzed?
5 A. As a matter of fact, I went to
6 Mr. Hofstrom, at the time the chief trial
7 deputy in the DA's office, and this was just
8 one of scores of examples in which we needed
9 the power of the DA's office either through
10 warrant or preferably grand jury subpoena to
11 secure evidence.
12 And during the course of, it's
13 been my experience, during the course of '97
14 and '98 received certainly no grand jury, but
15 very little support from Mr. Hofstrom in the
16 DA's office and in this case made my
17 Detective Sergeant Wickman aware of our
18 inability based mostly on the DA's office
19 reluctance to move forward further
20 investigating Wolf at that time.
21 Q. Thank you. My question was, did
22 you have in your mind probable cause
23 sufficient to obtain a search warrant of Ms.
24 Dilson's residence to obtain items of evidence
25 based on the information she had provided to
86
1 you and the conduct of Mr. Wolf when you had
2 him in the office under the ruse?
3 MR. DIAMOND: Did he conclude then
4 or are you asking him to look now in
5 hindsight?
6 MR. WOOD: I think my question is
7 extremely clear.
8 MR. DIAMOND: Reread it, please.
9 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) I would be glad to
10 do it. My question was, did you have in
11 your mind probable cause sufficent to obtain
12 a search warrant of Ms. Dilson's residence to
13 obtain items of evidence based on the
14 information she had provided to the department
15 and the conduct of Mr. Wolf when you had him
16 in the police department under the ruse. Did
17 you think as a police officer that you had
18 probable cause to get a warrant to get these
19 items and property?
20 A. I understand the question,
21 Mr. Wood.
22 Q. Okay. Thank you. What is the
23 answer?
24 A. The answer is one of the items
25 that I or anyone else would have relied on
87
1 to put within the four corners of a warrant
2 affidavit did not include any physical
3 evidence and would have been based almost
4 soley on the information provided by an
5 unreliable, mentally unstable informant. And
6 I would have had -- I don't know that I
7 would have put forth my name on a search
8 warrant affidavit and taken it to a judge
9 based solely on Jackie Dilson's information.
10 Q. I didn't ask you that. I asked
11 you based on Jackie Dilson's information and
12 Mr. Wolf's conduct when you had him in the
13 department under the ruse?
14 A. Well, I'm not making my answer
15 clear obviously to you.
16 Q. I don't think you are but maybe
17 I'm not understanding it.
18 A. No. I'm saying I did not have
19 sufficient facts and circumstances to put in
20 a warrant affidavit.
21 Q. When did you conclude that Jackie
22 Dilson was unreliable and mentally unstable?
23 Did you conclude that on the first meeting
24 with her?
25 A. Yes, Mr. Wood. And I suggest you
88
1 read that transcript and the comments of the
2 other detectives walking out of the office
3 that night. It was -- she had, God bless
4 her, mental health problems. She's on
5 medication. She's an alcoholic and just was
6 not deemed terribly reliable. But
7 nonetheless, we chose to move forward with
8 that information and look at Mr. Wolf.
9 Q. Let me make sure I understand how
10 the Boulder Police Department was working now.
11 You were involved at this time specifically
12 with Chris Wolf, right?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. So if I understand you --
15 MR. DIAMOND: Can he answer the
16 question?
17 A. At what time?
18 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) You said yes, at
19 this time in January of 1997 so here is what
20 I understand. You, Mr. Thomas, as a
21 detective of the Boulder Police Department
22 took an individual that you decided in one
23 meeting was on medication, was an alcoholic,
24 was not reliable, had mental problems, was
25 mentally unstable, and you set up a ruse to
89
1 have a man brought into the Boulder Police
2 Department to try to get him to give you a
3 handwriting exemplar of the Ramsey note, to
4 try to get his photograph, and then you
5 hobbled this man based on an informant that
6 you tell me today was an alcoholic, mentally
7 unstable and unreliable; is that the way you
8 did business with Mr. Wolf?
9 A. She provided sufficient details
10 that warranted looking further at Mr. Wolf.
11 Q. So, I mean, you felt like you
12 then did have a legitimate basis to
13 investigate Mr. Wolf as a suspect in the
14 case, even though you had some concerns about
15 Ms. Dilson's reliability and mental status; is
16 that a fair statement?
17 A. As I just said, there -- she
18 provided some sufficient details to look
19 further at Mr. Wolf in this case.
20 Q. So you felt like, then, that you
21 did have a legitimate basis to investigate
22 Mr. Wolf as a suspect in the case even
23 though you had some concerns about
24 Ms. Dilson's reliability and mental status; is
25 that a fair statement?
90
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Thank you. Back when you all had
3 the June 1998 presentation that is referred
4 to -- is that referred to as the VIP
5 presentation?
6 A. We can refer to it as that.
7 Q. Did you ever hear it referred to
8 as that when you had the VIPs there?
9 A. I think so.
10 Q. Let's refer to it as the June
11 1998 VIP presentation so we know what we're
12 talking about. Did, in fact, the detectives
13 during that presentation present a long list
14 of suspects who had been considered and
15 dropped, including Randy Simons, Kevin
16 Rayburn, Bud Henderson, Linda Hoffman-Pugh,
17 Joe Barnhill and Chris Wolf?
18 A. I would certainly have to review
19 any notes and reports from the police files
20 on that, but that's not inconsistent with my
21 recollection.
22 Q. You recall then the presentation
23 including a statement that Chris Wolf was a
24 suspect who had been eliminated?
25 A. No, that's not what I'm saying.
91
1 What I am saying is I don't recall that --
2 there was a lot of information exchanged over
3 two days at this VIP presentation. It very
4 well may have been said but you asked me
5 right now, I don't have that specific
6 recollection about that particular individual.
7 Q. Do you know whether Chris Wolf's
8 DNA was ever tested?
9 A. I have no personal knowledge of
10 that.
11 Q. Was Chris Wolf one of the 73
12 individuals, that number that you referenced
13 with respect to your comments about 73
14 suspects having their handwriting analyzed, is
15 he one of the 73?
16 A. I don't know.
17 Q. Well, how did you come up with
18 the number 73?
19 A. From Detective Trujillo's briefing
20 to other detectives about CBI's examinations.
21 Q. Do you know whether -- do you
22 know as a fact firsthand or from what you've
23 heard whether Chris Wolf's handwriting was
24 ever analyzed by the Boulder Police
25 Department?
92
1 A. As I said previously, I don't know
2 the details of Detective Weinheimer's
3 subsequent investigation of Chris Wolf.
4 Q. Is the answer no, you don't know?
5 A. The answer to what?
6 Q. To my question.
7 A. What is the question, sir?
8 Q. Listen carefully. From -- my
9 question was, do you know as a fact,
10 firsthand or from what you heard, whether
11 Chris Wolf's handwriting was ever analyzed by
12 the Boulder Police Department, yes or no?
13 A. I don't know that.
14 Q. Do you know?
15 A. I don't know that.
16 Q. Okay. Do you know whether
17 Mr. Wolf, I guess you can tell me this is
18 pretty easy, maybe you'll understand this one.
19 Clearly you don't know whether he was -- his
20 handwriting eliminated him as the author of
21 the note, do you?
22 A. As I have said, I don't know the
23 details of Detective Weinheimer's investigation
24 but took Detective Weinheimer's statement that
25 Chris Wolf was cleared at face value.
93
1 Q. Knowing what you know about how
2 the Boulder Police Department, what would one
3 use to clear someone, what could possibly
4 clear an individual here? One would be a
5 solid alibi, right?
6 A. Yes, sir.
7 Q. Verified, right?
8 A. Yes, sir.
9 Q. What else?
10 A. Handwriting, certainly.
11 Q. Handwriting. That eliminated John
12 Ramsey as the author of the ransom note?
13 A. Is that a question?
14 Q. Yes.
15 A. What is your question?
16 Q. You said handwriting and I said
17 handwriting, that eliminated John Ramsey as
18 the author of the ransom note, true?
19 A. That's my understanding.
20 Q. All right. What else besides
21 alibi and handwriting?
22 A. I don't know what was being done
23 with it on the back end, but certainly a
24 polygraph examination.
25 Q. So you would eliminate based
94
1 solely on a polygraph?
2 A. No.
3 Q. All right. You would take it
4 into consideration?
5 MR. DIAMOND: You have to answer
6 audibly.
7 A. We would take our polygraph
8 examinations into consideration, yes, sir.
9 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) All of your
10 polygraph examinations were done by the FBI,
11 weren't they?
12 A. I believe so.
13 Q. You didn't have anybody on the
14 Boulder Police Department that was trained in
15 polygraph examinations, did you?
16 A. I don't know if anybody received
17 polygraph training but we did not have an
18 in-house polygrapher.
19 Q. Okay. So we've got alibi,
20 handwriting, polygraph, what else?
21 MR. DIAMOND: Polygraph coupled
22 with other things he said.
23 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Well, yeah,
24 polygraph alone would not be sufficient to
25 clear someone, would it?
95
1 A. Not necessarily, no.
2 Q. Right. So now what else could be
3 utilized, as you understood this
4 investigation, to clear a suspect?
5 A. Witnesses.
6 Q. Witnesses as to alibi?
7 A. Yes, certainly that.
8 Q. Witnesses as to what else?
9 A. Well, I think you're hitting the
10 highlights. Beyond that, I don't know how
11 specifically those determinations beyond that,
12 the obvious, people were being cleared.
13 Q. You're familiar with the use of
14 the term forensics, aren't you?
15 A. I am.
16 Q. What would be forensic evidence
17 that could clear someone in the JonBenet
18 Ramsey investigation?
19 A. Handwriting.
20 Q. Anything else?
21 MR. DIAMOND: You're saying
22 standing by itself?
23 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Standing by itself,
24 if I were going to say, well, John Doe has
25 been eliminated as a suspect in the JonBenet
96
1 Ramsey investigation based on forensic
2 evidence, what is the only forensic evidence
3 that you were aware of that could have itself
4 eliminated someone from being involved?
5 A. Besides the handwriting?
6 Q. I want the answer. If it's
7 handwriting, if there was anything else, let
8 me know that.
9 A. Well, I know the big controversy
10 -- thank you very much -- was whether or not
11 DNA was clearing people in this case.
12 Q. And ultimately it was not, was it?
13 A. I don't know. I certainly don't
14 hold myself out as a DNA expert.
15 Q. No, but I mean, you knew the
16 approach the investigation was taking from the
17 time of your involvement through August of
18 '98 and the DNA either quite simply either
19 eliminated everybody or it eliminated nobody
20 if it wasn't a match, true?
21 A. There was a huge controversy about
22 the DNA.
23 Q. So it was not in and of itself
24 viewed as a forensic piece of evidence that
25 eliminated anyone, was it?
97
1 A. Correct.
2 Q. Other than handwriting, what else
3 was the basis for a forensic evidence that
4 would eliminate someone as a suspect in the
5 Ramsey case?
6 A. May I have just a moment?
7 Q. Sure.
8 (Discussion off the record between
9 the deponent and Mr. Diamond.)
10 A. Mr. Wood, unless I'm missing
11 something entirely obvious, no, the
12 handwriting, the ransom note, et cetera, was
13 the sort of cornerstone piece of evidence in
14 this case and I think that's how most people
15 were being cleared.
16 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Well, when you say
17 most people were being cleared, had the
18 Boulder Police Department concluded that the
19 murderer and the author of the note were one
20 and the same, that is to say, had the
21 Boulder Police Department concluded that there
22 could not have been involvement by more than
23 one person?
24 A. I think there was some division on
25 that point.
98
1 Q. Because actually the handwriting,
2 only if eliminated under analysis, only really
3 eliminates an individual as the author of the
4 note but does not in and of itself eliminate
5 the person from involvement in the crime,
6 true?
7 A. I think the collective consensus
8 was that certainly it wasn't a leap the
9 author of the note was involved in the crime.
10 Q. I don't think that would be a
11 leap. But the question is elimination as the
12 author of the note did not in and of itself
13 eliminate one from involvement in the crime,
14 true?
15 A. By way of a conspiracy that you're
16 suggesting that --
17 Q. I'm just suggesting straight up,
18 sir, handwriting analysis that eliminates you
19 as the author of the note does not in and of
20 itself eliminate you from involvement in the
21 crime, true?
22 A. One could argue that, yes, sir.
23 Q. Fiber evidence was not a forensic
24 test that was used to eliminate in and of
25 itself, was it?
99
1 A. As far as elimination of suspects,
2 I don't have firsthand knowledge of the fiber
3 evidence testing and that wasn't an assignment
4 I had in this case. But no, I don't believe
5 that fiber evidence in and of itself was any
6 sort of eliminator.
7 Q. Do you know whether any fiber
8 tests were ever conducted on non-testimonial
9 evidence voluntarily provided by Chris Wolf,
10 any fibers ever tested to your knowledge?
11 A. I got the impression that it was.
12 Q. Where did you get that impression?
13 A. From Jackie Dilson after she
14 turned over to Investigator Ainsworth and/or
15 Smit in June of '97 what she told me were, I
16 think, bed linens, a leather jacket, a diary,
17 maybe underwear, and she told me that she had
18 been told they were going to submit that for
19 testing.
20 Q. Do you know whether it was tested?
21 A. I do not.
22 Q. Do you -- you certainly have no
23 idea of what any of the results would have
24 been if tested, true?
25 A. Correct.
100
1 Q. Do you know how many handwriting
2 exemplars Mr. Wolf gave?
3 A. No, as I said before I don't know
4 the breadth or depth or extent of Mr. --
5 Detective Weinheimer's investigation into
6 Mr. Wolf.
7 Q. What was the standard practice in
8 terms of when you were obtaining handwriting
9 exemplars from suspects for analysis, how many
10 exemplars were standardly obtained?
11 A. It's my recollection that
12 initially, and I can only speak to what
13 myself and Gosage were doing routinely, we
14 were asking for the voluntary completion of
15 what is known as a London letter, as well as
16 a second sheet including words or phrases
17 from the ransom note and that initial screen
18 was what I'm assuming after booked into
19 evidence was eventually going to CBI for
20 analysis to see if there was any reason to
21 further investigate an individual.
22 Q. Your understanding is there were
23 73 suspects whose handwriting was analyzed?
24 A. At the time of the VIP
25 presentation, at the time I left, yes --
101
1 Q. June of 1998?
2 A. -- that was the number.
3 Q. And of those 73, how many of
4 those individuals were eliminated as the
5 author of the note based on the handwriting
6 analysis itself?
7 A. And I'm not a handwriting expert,
8 but under entire elimination, I don't know.
9 Q. I don't want to know about entire
10 elimination unless you're using that in a
11 phrase, maybe you are. I want to -- you've
12 got 73 people whose handwriting was tested,
13 and you've either got a result from CBI that
14 says we've got a match, right, or you've got
15 a result from CBI that says basically
16 inconclusive or you've got a result from CBI
17 that says elimination, right?
18 A. No, I don't think it's that
19 simple.
20 Q. Well, I'm not trying to make it
21 more complicated than that. But maybe you
22 know more about it and if you do, then, that
23 would be helpful for me to learn. I want to
24 know, though, from the bottom line that we
25 can agree that it is simple when it comes to
102
1 the question of elimination, that's simple
2 because that's one of the categories,
3 elimination --
4 A. Right.
5 Q. -- right?
6 A. Right.
7 Q. And how many of the 73 were
8 eliminated as the author of the note based on
9 the handwriting examples or exemplars?
10 A. I don't know.
11 Q. Not many, true?
12 A. I know that the majority fell into
13 the no evidence to indicate category.
14 Q. But they couldn't go to
15 elimination, could they?
16 A. Again, I don't know.
17 Q. Didn't you talk with the
18 handwriting expert, sir?
19 A. Are we talking about the CBI
20 expert?
21 Q. Any of them. There were four
22 with respect to Patsy Ramsey, weren't there?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. How many other of the 73 had four
25 different examiners look at their handwriting?
103
1 A. I don't know.
2 Q. Do you know of any? Can you name
3 one?
4 A. I'm trying to recall with those
5 three additional examiners if other suspects'
6 historical writings or exemplars were provided
7 to them. As I sit here today, I don't know.
8 But if any, the number would be few.
9 Q. Do you know whether the Boulder
10 Police Department obtained historical writings
11 with respect to Chris Wolf's handwriting?
12 A. I don't know. I didn't get very
13 far with Mr. Wolf, Mr. White -- or Mr. Wood,
14 I'm sorry.
15 Q. That's okay. Fleet White's
16 handwriting was tested?
17 A. I believe so, yes.
18 Q. Was he eliminated?
19 A. He fell into a category that he
20 was no longer, if my understanding is
21 correct, and this wasn't my assignment, but
22 by way of detective briefings, Mr. White was
23 not in the running, if you will, by way of a
24 handwriting exemplar.
25 Q. My question is not in the running.
104
1 My question is was he eliminated as the
2 author of the note based on a handwriting
3 analysis conducted by the Boulder Police
4 Department or the CBI?
5 A. I don't know what the CBI expert
6 concluded as far as a categorical elimination
7 of Mr. White.
8 Q. John Ramsey was categorically
9 eliminated, wasn't he?
10 A. Again I would liken it to
11 Mr. White. I simply learned that Mr. Ramsey
12 was not a candidate based on his handwriting.
13 Q. You don't know whether John Ramsey
14 was eliminated by the examiner at CBI as an
15 author of the note based on that and his --
16 the analysis of his exemplars, you don't know
17 that as we sit here today?
18 A. He may very well have fallen into
19 that majority of no evidence to indicate but
20 if you're telling me that he fell into the
21 elimination category, I won't dispute that
22 because we never had any concerns after some
23 of these results that he was the author of
24 the note.
25 Q. Well, the question is not what I'm
105
1 suggesting to you. Do you know? Do you
2 have any idea whether his report from CBI
3 came back and said John Ramsey has been
4 eliminated based on the CBI analysis as the
5 author of the ransom note? Do you know one
6 way or the other, sir?
7 A. As to what category he fell into?
8 Q. Whether he was eliminated by the
9 CBI analysis is my question, please, sir?
10 A. As to the category he fell into,
11 including a category of elimination, I don't
12 have personal knowledge.
13 Q. Do you have any knowledge,
14 secondary or otherwise?
15 A. As I told you a minute ago,
16 Mr. Wood, it was my understanding from our
17 briefings that he was not a candidate as the
18 author of the note. I don't know what else
19 I can -- how many ways I can answer that
20 question for you.
21 Q. I just want to know if you know
22 the results of the CBI analysis of John
23 Ramsey's handwriting?
24 MR. DIAMOND: Any more clearly
25 than he just told you?
106
1 MR. WOOD: That's my question.
2 Do you want to answer for him? Because if
3 so --
4 MR. DIAMOND: I think you --
5 MR. WOOD: -- I would love to
6 swear you in and examine you under oath, but
7 I think it would be a waste of our time.
8 MR. DIAMOND: I think you're not
9 listening to the answers. We're not --
10 MR. WOOD: Why don't you worry
11 about your side of the table and let me
12 worry about mine. If I'm not understanding
13 him, that's my fault. I mean, it's my walk
14 away without the information, right? I think
15 I'm understanding. I'm just not sure I'm
16 getting a straight answer. It seems to me
17 that this gentleman should know, as he claims
18 to be one of the lead detectives on the
19 case, whether John Ramsey's CBI handwriting
20 analysis came back elimination.
21 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) And you don't
22 know, do you?
23 A. As I have told you, Mr. Wood, I
24 stand on my answer, yeah, I know that he was
25 not -- that he was eliminated by way of
107
1 handwriting. But if you're asking me if the
2 CBI examiner reached a conclusion of
3 elimination, I'm sitting here again telling
4 you I don't have personal knowledge of that.
5 Q. Let me go that route because I
6 think I understand you. Do you know how
7 many of the 73 individuals were eliminated by
8 way of handwriting?
9 A. By way of falling into the
10 category of elimination.
11 Q. That were eliminated by way of
12 handwriting, your words.
13 MR. DIAMOND: I think he means by
14 the Boulder Police Department.
15 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) I mean that were
16 eliminated by way of handwriting, certainly by
17 the Boulder Police Department. You're the
18 one that says 73?
19 A. Out of those 73?
20 Q. Out of those 73, I want to know
21 how many were eliminated by way of
22 handwriting?
23 A. If you're asking me how many of
24 those 73 fell into the elimination category
25 based on question document examiner
108
1 conclusions, is that what you're asking me?
2 Q. I think so.
3 A. Yeah.
4 Q. What is the answer?
5 A. I don't know.
6 Q. You don't have any idea?
7 A. No. As I have previously said on
8 the record that number is probably very few.
9 The majority of those, as I have said, fell
10 into the no evidence to indicate category.
11 Q. Did a lot of them have
12 similarities?
13 A. Did a lot of who?
14 Q. A lot of the 73 people, did their
15 -- did their analysis show similarities?
16 A. I don't know, I'm not a
17 handwriting expert.
18 Q. Did you review the reports on any
19 of the 73?
20 A. Have you seen the -- if you've
21 seen the CBI reports, that's not how they're
22 stated in a narrative form like that. No, I
23 never saw anything like that.
24 Q. Nor does the CBI do handwriting
25 analysis and reach a conclusion, for example,
109
1 that 24 of 26 letters of the alphabet are
2 similar, they don't do that, do they, sir?
3 A. Well, according to Detective
4 Sergeant Wickman, he came back and told us
5 that.
6 Q. But you know that Mr. Ubowski has
7 in fact denied that as being accurate?
8 A. No, I don't know that.
9 Q. You didn't see his statement with
10 respect to the fact that he had never
11 concluded anything about Patsy Ramsey in terms
12 of 24 of 26 letters of the alphabet being
13 similar?
14 A. Well, you can ask --
15 Q. I'm asking you this question,
16 please.
17 A. I know and I'm trying to answer
18 it for you.
19 Q. Please do.
20 A. Wickman came back from CBI and
21 told that to John Eller and he told that to
22 me and that was Trujillo's account and other
23 detectives were told that.
24 Q. You didn't hear it from Ubowski?
25 A. No, I didn't deal with Ubowski.
110
1 Q. You didn't see it in writing from
2 Ubowski?
3 A. No.
4 Q. After your book came out you
5 weren't aware that Ubowski publicly stated
6 that he had never concluded that Patsy Ramsey
7 was the author of the note and that he had
8 never concluded that 24 of the 26 letters of
9 the alphabet from her writing were similar?
10 A. Well, you had two questions.
11 Q. Are you familiar with my question?
12 MR. DIAMOND: Will you let him
13 answer the question, please?
14 MR. WOOD: I will. I think I've
15 let him answer every question so far.
16 MR. DIAMOND: You didn't. You
17 didn't.
18 MR. WOOD: Well, I'm certainly
19 going to because I want to get his answer to
20 every question. Let's let him do it. I'll
21 restate it.
22 MR. DIAMOND: I would like the
23 reporter to reread it.
24 MR. WOOD: I'll withdraw it and
25 restate it.
111
1 MR. DIAMOND: All right.
2 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) After your book
3 came out, sir, were you aware that
4 Mr. Ubowski publicly denied the accuracy of
5 the statement that he concluded Patsy Ramsey
6 wrote the ransom note?
7 A. No. You're telling me this for
8 the first time.
9 Q. Are you familiar that Mr. Ubowski
10 stated that he had never reached the
11 conclusion that 24 of her letters out of the
12 26 letters of the alphabet were matched with
13 the ransom note?
14 A. No, I have not heard that.
15 Q. And you stated to the contrary in
16 your book, didn't you?
17 A. Yeah, I stated what I was told by
18 my detective sergeant.
19 Q. And you weren't even, I guess,
20 aware that Mr. Ubowski and the CBI said they
21 don't even make that kind of analysis with
22 respect to the 24 out of the 26 letters of
23 the alphabet, you don't know anything about
24 that --
25 A. No.
112
1 Q. -- in terms of the public
2 statement by the CBI after your book was
3 published?
4 A. The CBI made a public statement?
5 Q. Yes, sir.
6 A. As an organization, I haven't seen
7 that.
8 MR. WOOD: I'll show it to you
9 when we come back a little bit later on.
10 Let's take five minutes.
11 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is
12 11:06. We're going off the record. This is
13 the end of tape one.
14 (Recess taken from 11:06 a.m. to
15 11:15 a.m.)
16 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is
17 11:15. We're back on the record. This is
18 the beginning of tape two.
19 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) I think you told
20 me this, but I want to make sure so we don't
21 leave here with any confusion on this point.
22 Do you know whether the DNA of Chris Wolf
23 was ever tested by law enforcement
24 authorities?
25 A. Once again, no, I don't have
113
1 personal knowledge of that.
2 Q. Thank you. Do you have any
3 knowledge, and I'm including not personal but
4 secondhand, but did you ever hear anything
5 about whether his DNA was tested from anyone,
6 doesn't have to be personal knowledge to you,
7 did you ever get it hearsay or otherwise that
8 his DNA had been tested?
9 A. No, as I sit here right now,
10 Mr. Wood, yeah, I don't have any recollection
11 of any of -- conversation about Mr. Wolf's
12 DNA testing.
13 Q. And I take it from what you've
14 told me, you would have no idea why Tom
15 Wickman might have contacted Chris Wolf in
16 1999 asking him at the time that Wolf lived
17 in New Orleans, asking him to come by the
18 Boulder Police Department on his next visit
19 to Boulder; you would have no knowledge about
20 that, would you?
21 A. What was the time period?
22 Q. 1999.
23 A. No. No, of course not.
24 Q. Was in fact Chris Wolf
25 investigated in any fashion by the Boulder
114
1 Police Department in connection with the
2 murder of Susannah Chase?
3 A. I believe so, yes.
4 Q. Was he a suspect in this case?
5 A. Courtesy of Jackie Dilson, I
6 believe so.
7 Q. And was he cleared with respect to
8 the Susannah Chase murder?
9 A. Again, I believe so.
10 Q. Do you know why or on what basis
11 he was cleared?
12 A. No.
13 Q. Did you ever get any hearsay from
14 any of the detectives about what basis they
15 relied on in clearing Chris Wolf in either
16 the Susannah Chase murder or the JonBenet
17 Ramsey murder?
18 A. For some reason, and I don't know
19 why this stands out, that Yamaguchi, the
20 detective who led the Chase murder, I
21 believe, I think they had DNA evidence in
22 that case.
23 Q. How about with the JonBenet Ramsey
24 case, any hearsay as to what he -- the basis
25 upon which he was allegedly cleared?
115
1 A. No. If I'm answering the same
2 question, yeah.
3 Q. Just trying to make sure I've got
4 your answer down. You don't -- you didn't
5 hear from a hearsay standpoint, you didn't
6 get anything from any of the detectives about
7 the basis upon which he was allegedly cleared
8 by the department, right?
9 A. No, other than relying on
10 Weinheimer's clearance of him.
11 Q. The statement that he is cleared?
12 A. Right.
13 Q. But you don't know why --
14 A. Right.
15 Q. -- or any basis, right?
16 A. That's correct.
17 Q. Secondhand or otherwise, correct?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Now, you do know that after the
20 Boulder Police Department had investigated
21 Mr. Wolf, that the district attorney's office
22 was still actively investigating an intruder
23 theory and that Fleet White, Bill McReynolds
24 and Chris Wolf were on the top of their
25 suspect list. You do know that to be true,
116
1 don't you, sir?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And that would have been in 1998?
4 A. As to when the DA's office was
5 conducting this investigation?
6 Q. Yes.
7 A. They were doing a lot of things
8 we were entirely unaware of. But if you're
9 telling me they were doing that in 1998, I
10 won't contest it.
11 Q. Well, what you do know is that
12 the Boulder Police Department investigated
13 Chris Wolf as a suspect and you know that
14 even after the Boulder Police Department had
15 investigated him that the Boulder district
16 attorney's office was still investigating
17 Chris Wolf as a suspect and that he was,
18 along with Fleet White and Bill McReynolds,
19 on the top of the DA's list?
20 MR. DIAMOND: Just for
21 clarification, after the Boulder Police
22 Department cleared him?
23 MR. WOOD: Yeah.
24 A. No, I don't know that time line.
25 Certainly the DA investigators would but there
117
1 was a period in here where there -- this was
2 not a hand-in- glove fit and there was not a
3 lot of communication being shared.
4 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Timing aside, we
5 can get clear agreement that Chris Wolf was
6 from your knowledge not only a suspect for
7 the Boulder Police Department, but at the top
8 of the list, along with McReynolds and Fleet
9 White, of the suspect list of the Boulder
10 district attorney's office in its
11 investigation, true?
12 A. Certainly seemed to be.
13 Q. And that was your understanding
14 and knowledge, right?
15 A. That they were still interested in
16 those parties, yes.
17 Q. That Mr. Wolf was on the top of
18 their suspect list, along with McReynolds and
19 Fleet White?
20 A. That was my impression.
21 Q. And knowledge, I mean not just
22 impression, you knew that as being a fact,
23 didn't you?
24 A. Yeah, they were still investigating
25 those three individuals.
118
1 Q. Now, what was Don Foster's -- did
2 he give a written report to you on Chris
3 Wolf's handwriting?
4 A. He may have. That would be in
5 the Boulder Police Department.
6 Q. Did you -- do you recall ever
7 reviewing it?
8 A. I may or may not have. I know
9 that we took him handwriting of several
10 potential suspects. But no, as I sit here
11 today, I don't recollect Mr. Foster or
12 Dr. Foster's written report on Chris Wolf.
13 Q. Did Don Foster examine hundreds of
14 writing examples from people ranging from
15 family members to Internet addicts, from
16 neighbors to Chris Wolf to the McReynolds
17 family and a library of books, films and
18 videotapes?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Do you know what he concluded with
21 respect to each of the individuals that he
22 analyzed?
23 A. Yeah, that they were not the
24 author of the ransom note.
25 Q. He eliminated everybody, Don Foster
119
1 did, didn't he?
2 A. But one, yes.
3 Q. Right. In fact Don Foster told
4 you that of all of the hundreds of people of
5 the samples that he had looked at that he
6 had conclusively eliminated everybody and that
7 it was impossible for anyone to have written
8 that note other than Patsy Ramsey; that's
9 what Don Foster told you, right?
10 A. Those are your words, not his, but
11 I --
12 Q. Excuse me.
13 A. If I could finish.
14 Q. Yeah, you sure can.
15 A. He stated unequivocally that she
16 was the author of the ransom note.
17 Q. Do you, again, I'm sorry if I
18 didn't hear you or understand you earlier,
19 you don't know whether any search warrant was
20 ever issued with respect to Chris Wolf, do
21 you, firsthand knowledge or you have none and
22 hearsay otherwise you have not heard of any
23 search warrant?
24 A. I know Steve Ainsworth was out
25 there, I believe. And there was some
120
1 discussion regarding that, but I don't know
2 if he was out there by way of a search
3 warrant or not, I would doubt it.
4 Q. Do you know what was done with
5 the pillow case that Jackie Dilson brought to
6 the Boulder Police Department when you first
7 met with her?
8 A. Actually, she didn't come to the
9 Boulder Police Department. We met her at a
10 third-party location.
11 Q. Where was that?
12 A. The office of her attorney.
13 Q. Did you all ever ask her to
14 submit to any type of mental health
15 examination?
16 A. Jackie Dilson?
17 Q. Yes.
18 A. Not that I'm aware of.
19 Q. What was your basis for concluding
20 that she was mentally instable -- unstable?
21 A. Ten or 11 years of police work in
22 dealing with thousands of people, but beyond
23 that I think the transcript of that exchange
24 and some of what I have earlier mentioned
25 about Third World conspiracies led me to that
121
1 conclusion.
2 Q. Do you have any formal training in
3 psychology?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Do you have any formal training in
6 psychiatry?
7 A. No.
8 Q. Do you have any license to conduct
9 mental health examinations?
10 A. No.
11 Q. You told me that you all met at a
12 third party's office but you didn't tell me
13 what I wanted to know and, that is, do you
14 know what was done with the pillow case that
15 Jackie Dilson presented to the Boulder police
16 when you first met with her?
17 A. If my recollection is accurate, I
18 believe Detective Gosage took custody and
19 maintained that chain on that piece of
20 aforementioned rope. But I do not know
21 whether or not he took the pillow case.
22 Q. And you don't know firsthand or
23 secondhand, hearsay or otherwise if any
24 testing was ever done on the pillow case,
25 forensic testing; is that right?
122
1 A. When you mentioned hearsay or
2 third hand, again, it was my understanding
3 that she delivered to the Boulder County
4 district attorney's office and their
5 investigators a number of items subsequent to
6 our meeting.
7 Q. I want to go back. I told you I
8 would do it, let's do it now. Look at page
9 281 of your book, please, the hardback copy.
10 The top of the page, the first actually it
11 starts with "Don Foster from Vassar." Do you
12 see it?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. The first paragraph there under
15 that starts "'In my opinion, it is not
16 possible that any individual except Patsy
17 Ramsey wrote the ransom note.'" Have I read
18 that correctly?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Earlier we were talking about
21 whose words. Don Foster stated that it was
22 impossible for anyone else to have written
23 the note except Patsy Ramsey, true?
24 A. This is his statement, yes, sir.
25 Q. It was not -- and so I was
123
1 accurate earlier, that he said to you it's
2 impossible that anyone else wrote it?
3 A. Well, when I asked about your
4 earlier quotation, I don't think you said
5 this verbatim. But --
6 Q. Fine. But he did tell you it was
7 impossible, didn't he, it was not possible,
8 which is saying to you as a detective, it's
9 impossible that anyone else wrote it according
10 to Don Foster, right?
11 A. Yes, that was the conclusion that
12 he shared with me, Mr. Wood.
13 Q. But when you worked with him, and
14 you worked with him a lot, didn't you? You
15 all spent a considerable amount of time
16 discussing this case, didn't you, you and Don
17 Foster?
18 A. When you say considerable amount
19 of time, you know, no, I didn't spend weeks
20 or days with Don Foster, but he was an
21 outside expert that we used in this case,
22 yes.
23 Q. At any time did Don Foster,
24 himself, ever disclose to you that he had
25 written a letter to Patsy Ramsey?
124
1 A. Yeah, I became aware of that at
2 some point.
3 Q. After the district attorney's
4 office presented you with the information
5 about Jamison, true?
6 A. I believe that's correct.
7 Q. Did Don Foster when you were
8 working with him for whatever period of time
9 you spent with him, when he was giving you
10 his conclusions about the JonBenet Ramsey case
11 and the impossibility that anybody else wrote
12 that note except Patsy Ramsey, did he ever
13 look at you and say, you know, you probably
14 ought to know, though, that I did write a
15 letter to Patsy Ramsey where I told her that
16 I was convinced that she was innocent? He
17 never told you that, did he?
18 A. We had that conversation at some
19 point.
20 Q. After he had already been outed by
21 the Boulder DA, true?
22 A. Possibly.
23 Q. Do you think you had it before
24 then and didn't disclose it to your police
25 department in the presentation?
125
1 A. No, that sounds reasonable.
2 Q. You would have if you would have
3 known it, you would have told the police
4 department about that in the June
5 presentation, wouldn't you, sir?
6 A. Right.
7 Q. Well, actually the presentation
8 with Foster was in March, wasn't it?
9 A. If we're talking about 1998.
10 Q. We are.
11 A. It was the spring of 1998.
12 Q. Right. Now, your materials, just
13 so that I have got this down, how many boxes
14 were these police records and file copies of
15 reports and things, both the ones you copied
16 and the ones anonymously sent to you from,
17 you believe, from someone in the Boulder
18 Police Department, right?
19 A. Logic would conclude that.
20 Q. Yeah, and that was your
21 conclusion?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And, you know, how many boxes did
24 you store those materials in?
25 A. One cardboard box.
126
1 Q. Size?
2 A. A file-size cardboard box, a
3 banker's box.
4 Q. How was it marked?
5 A. Unmarked.
6 Q. What color was it?
7 A. White.
8 Q. Did you have a concern? I mean,
9 you've been in law enforcement for a number
10 of years. You've got an ongoing
11 investigation. Did you take any particular
12 precautions to maintain the integrity of those
13 documents?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Did you give them to Don Davis?
16 A. Don Davis doesn't have -- no, he
17 doesn't have that box or any of those
18 records.
19 Q. Did he look at them?
20 A. Are you talking about the
21 preparation of the book?
22 Q. I'm talking about the reports.
23 Did Don Davis ever see the reports --
24 A. He may have.
25 Q. -- and the copies of the file
127
1 that you made?
2 A. He may have.
3 Q. Have you ever made any effort to
4 find them?
5 A. No.
6 Q. When did you learn that they were
7 lost?
8 MR. DIAMOND: He didn't say ever
9 they were lost.
10 MR. WOOD: I'm sorry?
11 MR. DIAMOND: He never testified
12 that they were lost.
13 MR. WOOD: Misplaced or lost.
14 Can we agree one of the two things occurred?
15 I always kind of figured lost means
16 misplaced, too. When you've lost something,
17 you've lost it. It doesn't imply
18 intentionally. Although, one might draw their
19 own conclusion.
20 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) The point is when
21 did you -- if you -- you've made no effort
22 to look for them. When did you first learn
23 that the file box was either lost or
24 misplaced and couldn't be found?
25 A. The last time I recall looking in
128
1 that box was at some point in the weeks
2 prior to the book coming out.
3 Q. I'm not asking you the last time
4 you looked at it. I'm asking you when you
5 first learned that you couldn't find it. You
6 came here today under oath and told me --
7 A. I haven't been looking for it,
8 Mr. Wood.
9 Q. Because you've told me under oath,
10 sir, that you can't find it, haven't you?
11 MR. DIAMOND: I don't think he
12 has. I don't think he's ever testified to
13 that. Why don't you ask him that.
14 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Didn't you tell me
15 where -- do you know where it is?
16 A. No.
17 Q. Have you made any effort to look
18 for it in recent months?
19 A. No.
20 Q. You didn't think that, you know,
21 Lin Wood is going to examine me on the
22 Ramsey investigation, I ought to try to read
23 over some of my reports and remember some
24 things so I'm up to speed; you didn't ever
25 have that thought as you came into this
129
1 deposition?
2 A. No, I'm here to answer your
3 questions today.
4 Q. But why would you not want to
5 refresh your recollection about the
6 investigation when you know I'm going to be
7 asking you about it and you knew that?
8 A. I did. As I told you earlier, I
9 reread my book.
10 Q. But your -- all these reports and
11 all these copies of police reports, there is
12 a lot more information there than what is in
13 your book, isn't there, sir?
14 A. There may be, yeah. The book is
15 not a police report, it's a narrative.
16 Q. No, then it's not complete. It
17 certainly is not as complete as the hundreds
18 of pages of police files, reports and copies
19 of reports that you have had at least at
20 some point in time in your possession, is it?
21 A. It's not a reproduction of the
22 30,000 plus page case file, no. That's
23 ridiculous. No.
24 Q. It's not a reproduction of the
25 hundreds of pages that you had in your
130
1 possession, is my question, is it, sir?
2 A. No.
3 Q. I mean, if we want to find out
4 what information you know about this
5 investigation from the police reports, we
6 can't get an answer to that from reading the
7 book. We would have to look at all the
8 files and the reports that you had, wouldn't
9 we?
10 A. I'm here to answer your questions
11 today.
12 Q. Answer that one for me. If I
13 want to try to find out what information you
14 had known or what you knew about this
15 investigation from all these hundreds of
16 police reports that you copied or that were
17 sent to you, I can't get that answer from
18 your book. I can only get that answer if I
19 can look at those files and reports, true?
20 A. Okay.
21 Q. Is that true?
22 A. Sure.
23 Q. Do you know Jeff Shapiro?
24 A. I did, so I guess in present
25 tense I do if I knew him at one time.
131
1 Q. Do you know of Mr. Shapiro's
2 documentation of telephone conversations by
3 taping them?
4 A. In a particular context I do.
5 Q. Do you have any knowledge,
6 recollection of telephone conversations between
7 you and Jeff Shapiro when you were in
8 Quantico, Virginia preparing to meet with the
9 FBI? Did you talk with Mr. Shapiro during
10 that time period?
11 A. I did.
12 Q. Do you have any notes about those
13 conversations?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Do you have any recollection of
16 the substance of those conversations?
17 A. Vaguely.
18 Q. You did, in fact, provide
19 information to Ann Bardach at Vanity Fair
20 about the JonBenet Ramsey investigation,
21 didn't you, sir?
22 A. I did.
23 Q. You also provided information about
24 the JonBenet Ramsey investigation to Carol
25 McKinley, didn't you, sir?
132
1 A. We discussed the politics of the
2 investigation. I consider Carol a friend
3 now.
4 Q. While you were still on the force
5 active in the investigation, you provided
6 information about it to Ann Bardach at Vanity
7 Fair, you discussed it with Carol McKinley
8 and you also provided it to the supermarket
9 tabloid The Globe through Jeff Shapiro, true?
10 A. No, I disagree with your
11 characterization of whatever you're trying to
12 say about Shapiro. I wasn't supplying him
13 with information about --
14 Q. You didn't --
15 A. -- the case.
16 Q. You didn't tell Jeff Shapiro to
17 come get in a tree at the Ramsey house
18 because you were all going over there and
19 sleep there one night?
20 A. I think the tree was his own
21 doing but I did mention to him that we were
22 going to be at the Ramsey house, yes.
23 Q. Well, we'll go into Mr. Shapiro
24 and that a little bit later.
25 MR. WOOD: Darnay?
133
1 MR. HOFFMAN: Yes.
2 MR. WOOD: Give me two seconds.
3 MR. HOFFMAN: Should I start?
4 MR. DIAMOND: In two seconds.
5 MR. WOOD: Darnay?
6 MR. HOFFMAN: Yes.
7 MR. WOOD: I'm going to turn it
8 over to you and you have at it.
9 MR. HOFFMAN: Thank you very much,
10 Mr. Wood.
11 MR. WOOD: Where are we on time
12 so that I know what I did? I might have
13 gone over five minutes longer than I meant
14 to.
15 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: Total?
16 MR. WOOD: Total time of
17 testimony.
18 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: Two hours and
19 ten minutes.
20 MR. WOOD: Two hours and ten
21 minutes. Thank you.
22 EXAMINATION
23 BY-MR.HOFFMAN:
24 Q. Hello, Mr. Thomas.
25 A. Hello, Mr. Hoffman. How are you?
134
1 Q. Fine. How are you?
2 A. Fine. Thank you.
3 Q. Can you hear me all right?
4 A. I can.
5 Q. All right. Mr. Thomas, you have
6 a copy of your hardcover book with you, don't
7 you?
8 A. Yes, sir.
9 Q. All right. Could you just turn
10 to page 14 of your book?
11 A. Okay.
12 Q. Yes, do you see the first full
13 paragraph on page 14 that begins "The
14 district attorney"?
15 A. Yes, sir.
16 Q. Could you just read the first
17 sentence out loud, please?
18 A. Certainly. "The district attorney
19 and his top prosecutor, two police chiefs and
20 a large number of cops, although so at odds
21 on some points that they almost came to
22 blows, all agreed on one thing - that
23 probable cause existed to arrest Patsy Ramsey
24 in connection with the death of her
25 daughter."
135
1 Q. Is that an accurate statement?
2 A. Yes, sir.
3 Q. Now, I would like to ask you some
4 questions with respect to that statement. To
5 begin with, if you wouldn't mind, regarding
6 one of the two police chiefs, could you turn
7 to page 299 of your book?
8 A. Okay.
9 Q. Yes. The second paragraph on 299
10 begins "Even after DeMuth's recital of our
11 shortcomings," could you just read those two
12 sentences?
13 A. "Even after DeMuth's recital of
14 our shortcomings I felt we held a decent
15 hand. Commander Beckner told me later that
16 he thought we had gone far beyond showing
17 probable cause."
18 Q. Would you read the next sentence?
19 A. Certainly. "'I think she (Patty
20 Ramsey) did it,' he said. 'We should just
21 charge them both with felony murder and
22 aiding and abetting'".
23 Q. Is that an accurate statement of
24 what you heard?
25 A. Yes, it is.
136
1 Q. Did Mr. -- actually Commander
2 Beckner tell you that personally?
3 A. On more than one occasion.
4 Q. Could you please explain or
5 elaborate a little further on each occasion
6 how that statement came about?
7 A. Certainly. Inside the police
8 department situation room that housed this
9 Ramsey investigation, there were probably a
10 handful of occasions on which or in which
11 Mark Beckner made statements like that or
12 similar to that indicating that we had
13 sufficient facts and circumstances rising to a
14 level of probable cause for an arrest of
15 Patsy Ramsey.
16 Q. Do you know approximately how many
17 times -- on how many occasions he made that
18 statement?
19 MR. WOOD: Wait, let me ask you a
20 question if I could, Darnay, for
21 clarification. Are you asking him for -- I'm
22 sorry, I have to get my mike on. Are you
23 asking him for the statement that Patsy
24 Ramsey was a killer or for the statement that
25 there was probable cause for an arrest, which
137
1 is --
2 MR. HOFFMAN: I'm asking for the
3 statement that is actually in the book which
4 is that there is probable cause for an
5 arrest.
6 MR. WOOD: Okay. All right.
7 That's what I wanted to clarify. Thank you.
8 A. Mr. Hoffman, could you repeat your
9 question to me?
10 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) I'm sorry, can
11 you tell me approximately how many, the
12 number, how many times or how many occasions
13 he made that statement?
14 A. As I may have mentioned, a handful
15 that I overheard. There was no disputing
16 that among the detective team. He may have
17 said that outside of my presence. In fact,
18 I think he -- I think he did in relation to
19 what we're talking about.
20 Q. But within your own presence, how
21 many times do you think approximately he said
22 that?
23 MR. WOOD: Again, talking about
24 there is probable cause for an arrest?
25 MR. HOFFMAN: Probable cause for
138
1 an arrest, that statement.
2 MR. WOOD: Thank you.
3 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) The gist of
4 that statement that there was probable cause
5 for an arrest?
6 A. A half a dozen times.
7 Q. Half a dozen times. Did on any
8 of those occasions, did he explain why he
9 felt there was probable cause for an arrest?
10 A. Mr. Hoffman, at that time I think
11 he was sufficiently familiar with the facts
12 of the investigation to make that conclusion
13 on his own as did, as you previously
14 mentioned, the other detectives in the case.
15 Q. All right. Do you know if the
16 prior commander, Commander John Eller, ever
17 commented on who he thought may have in fact
18 either written the ransom note or committed
19 the crime of murdering JonBenet Ramsey?
20 MR. WOOD: Do you want him to
21 answer two questions? Why don't you ask him
22 one at a time.
23 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Okay. Was
24 there ever an occasion when John Eller
25 expressed an opinion as to whether or not
139
1 there was probable cause to arrest someone
2 for the murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
3 A. Yeah. And, Mr. Hoffman, if you
4 can direct me back to the first page you
5 asked about.
6 MR. DIAMOND: Fourteen.
7 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Page 14.
8 A. Yeah. Eller was one of those
9 commanders that I think I -- I'm sorry, I
10 didn't define it as a commander but Eller was
11 certainly one of the large number of cops, as
12 noted on page 14.
13 Q. You said there are two police
14 chiefs. Now, I believe that Commander
15 Beckner replaced Commander Koby; is that
16 correct?
17 A. Commander Beckner did indeed
18 replace Chief Koby.
19 Q. All right. Now, was Chief Koby
20 one of the police chiefs you're referring to?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Did Chief Koby ever express an
23 opinion as to whether or not probable cause
24 existed for someone to be arrested for the
25 murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
140
1 A. He did; he's one of the two
2 police chiefs I'm referring to in this
3 paragraph.
4 Q. Do you know the substance of his
5 statement; did he ever make a statement like
6 that in your presence?
7 A. He may have but it was certainly
8 relayed down through the chain of command
9 through Wickman to the rest of us that Koby
10 concurred and Koby may have very well told me
11 that himself as well.
12 Q. But you presently don't have any
13 memory of him saying it to you personally; is
14 that correct?
15 A. Koby?
16 Q. Yes.
17 A. Koby was present in briefings when
18 probable cause was discussed and Koby was in
19 total agreement. So, yeah, I do have a
20 recollection of Koby being present and
21 agreeing with that concept.
22 Q. Did commander or Chief Koby ever
23 indicate who it was that he believed there
24 was sufficient probable cause to arrest for
25 the murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
141
1 A. Yes, the discussion was concerning
2 Patricia Ramsey.
3 Q. And did he express a belief that
4 Patricia Ramsey should be arrested for the
5 murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
6 A. I don't know if Koby ever went so
7 far as allowing for an arrest to be made but
8 certainly concurring on probable cause.
9 Q. Actually what I'm trying to
10 determine is whether or not he ever actually
11 expressed the belief that Patsy Ramsey should
12 be arrested based on probable cause for the
13 murder of her daughter?
14 A. My distinction would be not should
15 be but could be. Koby was not entirely an
16 over-aggressive individual that was willing to
17 take that next step.
18 Q. But Commander Koby, based on the
19 evidence that you believe existed in the
20 case, felt that there was sufficient basis by
21 which Patsy Ramsey could be arrested for the
22 murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
23 A. Correct.
24 Q. Thank you. All right. Now, you
25 also -- I also asked about John Eller, who I
142
1 know is technically not a police chief, he
2 was in charge of the investigation. Did John
3 Eller ever express a belief or an opinion
4 that probable cause existed for the arrest of
5 someone for the murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Can you tell me who that person
8 was that he thought should or could be
9 arrested -- actually I am going to rephrase
10 that. Withdraw the question.
11 Did he ever name an individual
12 that he thought could be arrested for
13 probable cause in the murder of JonBenet
14 Ramsey?
15 A. Patricia Ramsey.
16 Q. Did he ever express that to you
17 personally?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. On more than one occasion?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Did he ever discuss why he thought
22 probable cause existed for the arrest of
23 Patricia Ramsey for the murder of JonBenet
24 Ramsey?
25 A. My belief that he, too, was
143
1 sufficiently familiar with the facts and
2 circumstances that were sufficient to meet a
3 threshold of probable cause and said that on
4 occasion in the detective briefings that
5 spring of '97.
6 Q. Now, with respect to the district
7 attorney, again I'm referring you back to
8 page 14, you begin by saying "The district
9 attorney and his top prosecutor." Who was
10 the top prosecutor you were referring to?
11 A. Pete Hofstrom.
12 Q. Is it your testimony that Pete
13 Hofstrom believed that probable cause existed
14 for an arrest?
15 A. Yeah, absolutely. He conceded
16 that there was probable cause but there were
17 some sticking points beyond that. But as to
18 the issue of probable cause, yeah, that was
19 his express conversation with me that we had
20 met that burden.
21 Q. So you actually had a conversation
22 with Pete Hofstrom with respect to the issue
23 of whether probable cause existed?
24 A. Several times.
25 Q. And did he identify the person who
144
1 he thought could be arrested for probable
2 cause for the murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
3 A. We were talking about it in
4 connection with Patricia Ramsey. So I'm
5 assuming he was -- it was just a two-person
6 conversation at times. So yes.
7 Q. Do you know whether or not the
8 district attorney, Alex Hunter, ever expressed
9 an opinion as to whether or not probable
10 cause existed for the arrest of someone in
11 the murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
12 A. I'm told he did.
13 Q. So you, in fact, never heard Alex
14 Hunter express an opinion with respect to
15 that?
16 A. Only through, for example, Mark
17 Beckner and Tom Wickman.
18 Q. Exactly what did Mark Beckner say
19 with respect to his understanding of what
20 Alex Hunter said regarding the issue of
21 probable cause?
22 A. Very simply relaying to the
23 detective team that Hunter was aware and knew
24 and conceded that fact.
25 Q. Conceded what fact?
145
1 A. The fact that probable cause
2 existed for an arrest in this case.
3 Q. Did -- do you know if Alex Hunter
4 ever identified the person as being the
5 person for which sufficient probable cause
6 existed for an arrest in the murder of
7 JonBenet Ramsey?
8 A. In the context of which it was
9 being presented that's what we were talking
10 about was the possible arrest of Patsy
11 Ramsey.
12 Q. I would like you to look at page
13 327 of your book, if you don't mind, please.
14 And I refer you, when you found that page,
15 to the very last paragraph at the end of the
16 page, beginning "Alex Hunter." If you would
17 just read that sentence, that one sentence.
18 A. "Alex Hunter said he thought Patsy
19 Ramsey was involved."
20 Q. Okay. Did he actually -- did you
21 actually hear him say that?
22 MR. WOOD: Hey, Darnay?
23 MR. HOFFMAN: I'm sorry, yes?
24 MR. WOOD: Can I ask you to put
25 that sentence in context by having him
146
1 complete the reading of the next couple
2 sentences.
3 MR. HOFFMAN: Sure, I'm sorry.
4 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Yes, would you,
5 please, just --
6 MR. HOFFMAN: How many more
7 sentences do you want him to read, Lin?
8 MR. WOOD: Just the next one.
9 The next two.
10 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) All right.
11 Read the next one, please, Mr. Thomas.
12 MR. WOOD: Start from "Alex
13 Hunter" and read down, if you would, through
14 "demeanor."
15 A. "Alex Hunter said that he thought
16 Patsy Ramsey was involved. That was more
17 than offset by comments from his staff."
18 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) All right.
19 Were you present when Alex Hunter said that?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. You were. So you actually had an
22 occasion to hear Alex Hunter express a belief
23 with respect to Patsy Ramsey's involvement in
24 the case?
25 A. Yes.
147
1 Q. Do you know when that event was,
2 when this statement was made?
3 A. May I look at the book for a
4 moment and maybe it will --
5 Q. I have no problem with that.
6 A. Okay.
7 MR. HOFFMAN: I would just like
8 the record to reflect that Mr. Thomas is, in
9 fact, refreshing his memory with respect to
10 my question by looking at the book.
11 MR. WOOD: If I can help, it
12 looks to me in context that would have been
13 on one of the evenings in June of 1998
14 following the interrogations. I don't know
15 if Mr. Thomas agrees with that or not.
16 MR. DIAMOND: Who is testifying
17 here?
18 MR. WOOD: I was trying to move
19 it along. I would be glad to testify if you
20 want to examine me on another occasion,
21 Mr. Diamond.
22 MR. DIAMOND: All right.
23 A. Mr. Hoffman, this was June of
24 1998.
25 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) June of 1998.
148
1 So you were actually present and heard him
2 make a statement to that effect; is that
3 correct?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Now, do you have any knowledge as
6 to whether or not the FBI ever had an
7 opinion with respect to whether probable cause
8 existed for the arrest of someone for the
9 murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
10 A. It was my impression and they were
11 very professional in our dealings with them,
12 but I don't think they ever countered or
13 challenged the fact that the police department
14 had this sufficient probable cause.
15 Q. Do you know whether or not the
16 FBI actually saw the evidence that the police
17 had with respect to whether or not there was
18 probable cause to charge someone for the
19 murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
20 A. Well, certainly a lot of the facts
21 and the evidence, the factual evidence, from
22 this case was shared with members of the FBI.
23 Q. Did you ever have occasion to
24 speak with any of the members of the FBI
25 that were looking at the evidence?
149
1 A. Yeah, on several occasions. And
2 again, I think they always tempered comments
3 and were most professional. But, again, I,
4 Mr. Hoffman, don't have that specific
5 recollection of an exchange but it was always
6 my impression that they supported us fully on
7 that.
8 Q. Do you know whether or not the
9 FBI had occasion to examine the ransom note
10 and handwriting exemplars of either John or
11 Patsy Ramsey?
12 A. I don't know whether or not the
13 FBI conducted any examinations of handwriting
14 exemplars, but they certainly reviewed and
15 studied and discussed with us the ransom note
16 itself.
17 Q. Did they offer any insight or any
18 analysis of the ransom note?
19 A. They did.
20 Q. Do you remember what that analysis
21 consisted of?
22 A. We had a meeting in Quantico,
23 Virginia and I'm trying to recollect the
24 date. It doesn't come to me right now. But
25 nonetheless, the ransom note was dissected and
150
1 profiled and so forth. And certainly I would
2 suggest that you ask any of them. But it's
3 my recollection of that meeting, of which
4 reports were written and, you know, there is
5 a lot of information about what went on in
6 those meetings, but how patently bogus and
7 crafted and stilted and just non authentic
8 this ransom note was.
9 Q. I would like you to turn, if you
10 will, please, to page 312 of your book.
11 A. Okay.
12 Q. And I would like you to look at
13 what looks like to be the third sentence.
14 It begins "'What's going on in that DA's
15 office.'" If you would read that paragraph
16 -- to the end of that paragraph and then
17 read the next paragraph.
18 A. Okay. "'What's going on in that
19 DA's office is a disgrace' one of the FBI
20 agents observed during our last supper. This
21 case has become an embarrassment to law
22 enforcement. We were all in agreement. 'It
23 is terribly discouraging how the DA is
24 handling this,' said one Dream Team attorney,
25 'Hunter is going to outsmart himself on this
151
1 one.'"
2 Q. Did you actually hear that
3 statement made.
4 A. Which statement is that?
5 Q. The quote from the FBI agent,
6 what's going on is a disgrace?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Just everything that you read
9 there you have in quotations --
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. -- were you actually present at
12 that?
13 A. I was.
14 Q. Yes. And is that an accurate
15 recollection of what was said?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Do you know what they were
18 referring to when they said that what was
19 going on in the DA's office is a disgrace?
20 A. They were certainly familiar with
21 a lot of the history and the animosity and,
22 you know, the ugly politics involved in this
23 thing and I don't know to what disgrace
24 they're specifically referring to but I think
25 it can cover a number of things.
152
1 Q. Do you know what they were
2 referring to when they say, quote, Hunter is
3 going to outsmart himself on this one,
4 unquote?
5 MR. DIAMOND: That was a Dream
6 Team attorney, not the FBI.
7 MR. WOOD: Hey, Darnay, why --
8 MR. HOFFMAN: You're right, that's
9 correct, okay, I'm sorry.
10 MR. WOOD: Darnay, would it be --
11 MR. HOFFMAN: I admit that and
12 I'm just going to double back a little bit.
13 Lin, what were you going to say?
14 MR. WOOD: I was going to say
15 maybe it would be helpful to figure out which
16 is which if we -- if you want to ask him
17 who the FBI agent was and who the Dream Team
18 attorney was.
19 MR. HOFFMAN: Yeah, Lin, I was
20 about to get to that.
21 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) In fact why
22 don't I just do that, ask you who the FBI
23 agent was, if you remember?
24 A. There were at least three agents
25 at that dinner and it may have been Mike
153
1 Morrow.
2 Q. Do you know what, is it Mike
3 Morrow?
4 A. Um-hum.
5 Q. What his function was with the
6 FBI? I mean what exactly was his involvement
7 in the case?
8 A. He was or is a special agent with
9 the Federal Bureau based out of, I think
10 they're based out of Quantico or that
11 Virginia-DC area and he was assigned to that
12 child abduction and serial killer unit.
13 Q. Did he ever express an opinion as
14 to who he thought committed this crime?
15 A. Again, I think they were very
16 diplomatic in their response, but I don't
17 recall that specific conversation with
18 Mr. Morrow. But it certainly wouldn't
19 surprise me for him to say he was consistent
20 with everyone else.
21 Q. Okay. So but you have no
22 personal knowledge of that?
23 A. Right.
24 Q. Okay. Now, to the second
25 paragraph and, please, excuse me, I'm sorry
154
1 for having you read that in a way that could
2 confuse people. That second paragraph says
3 "'It is terribly discouraging how the D A is
4 handling this,' said one Dream Team attorney.
5 Hunter is going to outsmart himself on this
6 one.'" Who was the Dream Team attorney who
7 made that statement, if you remember?
8 A. I believe that was Bob Miller.
9 Q. Was Bob Miller at this meeting
10 where the prior statement by the FBI agent
11 was made which we have just referred to?
12 A. There were several people in this
13 restaurant this particular evening. So I
14 don't know whether or not he heard, overheard
15 that conversation.
16 Q. Right. So his statement then may
17 not have been in reaction to the FBI
18 statement; is that correct?
19 A. Right.
20 Q. And do you know what he meant
21 when he said that Hunter is going to outsmart
22 himself on this one?
23 A. No. I think there are a number
24 of ways to interpret it but it sort of
25 stands alone in my mind.
155
1 Q. Mr. Thomas, would you mind,
2 please, turning to page 302 of your book.
3 A. Okay.
4 Q. Do you have it in front of you?
5 A. Yes, I'm sorry, yes.
6 Q. Fine. Would you look at the
7 third paragraph from the top, which begins
8 "Two days before we were to go onstage."
9 And would you read that whole paragraph,
10 please.
11 A. Certainly. "Two days before we
12 were to go onstage, we got some surprising
13 big news when the Colorado Bureau of
14 Investigation lab told us that the acrylic
15 fibers found on the duct tape that covered
16 JonBenet's mouth were a quote, likely match,
17 for Patsy's blazer. We were ready."
18 Q. You've been asked earlier with
19 respect to the forensic, you know, not
20 importance, but the forensic views that the
21 ransom note was being made for. Did this
22 become an important piece of forensic evidence
23 in the case?
24 MR. WOOD: You're talking about
25 the ransom note now or the likely match of
156
1 four fibers?
2 MR. HOFFMAN: I'm sorry, thank
3 you, Lin.
4 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Did the fibers
5 that were found on the duct tape that were
6 covering JonBenet's mouth that were, quote, a
7 likely match for Patsy's blazer, did that
8 become an important piece of forensic evidence
9 in the investigation?
10 A. Yes, sir.
11 Q. Do you know when or at what point
12 in the case the CBI made that report?
13 A. I think it was sometime before we
14 were told -- I think that information may
15 have been held by Wickman and Trujillo and
16 Beckner possibly.
17 Q. Do you know whether or not that
18 information was actually part of anyone's
19 presentation before the district attorney that
20 was made prior to the convening of a grand
21 jury when you turned the case over to the
22 district attorney?
23 A. Mr. Hoffman, are you asking me --
24 I'm sorry, that's not clear to me.
25 Q. All right. That CBI report, did
157
1 you receive it before you made your formal
2 presentation to the district attorney's
3 office? That's a presentation that was made
4 prior to the convening of the grand jury. I
5 believe it was in May or June of 1998 when
6 you formally turned over the case to the
7 district attorney. I may have that date
8 wrong.
9 MR. WOOD: Hey, Darnay, I'm just
10 a little unclear if you don't mind.
11 MR. HOFFMAN: Yeah.
12 MR. WOOD: There were two
13 presentations, one was made by Trip DeMuth I
14 believe in May and then there was what we
15 call a VIP presentation that was made of a
16 lot of people other than the DA's office in
17 June. Those are the two presentations. I'm
18 not sure which one you are referring to.
19 MR. HOFFMAN: Well, thank you.
20 It is confusing, there is no question about
21 it.
22 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) The presentation
23 that most people, and myself included, think
24 of is that large presentation where you stood
25 up and you gave evidence yourself. That's
158
1 the one where you refer to Alex Hunter is
2 talking on a cell phone and it sort of -- it
3 seems at the end of that you decided that
4 you had had enough of the case and you were
5 going to move on. That's the presentation
6 I'm talking about.
7 MR. HOFFMAN: I'm assuming -- is
8 that the VIP presentation, Lin?
9 MR. WOOD: I don't know. I mean,
10 Steve Thomas would have to figure out whether
11 that's an accurate statement about whether he
12 heard, saw, or thought or felt. I'm not
13 sure.
14 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Well, you know
15 what, I'm just confusing the issue. I'm
16 going to drop that line of questioning and
17 just ask you, did you have occasion to
18 actually see the CBI report that indicated
19 that there was a likely match for Patsy's
20 blazer with the acrylic fiber found on the
21 duct tape?
22 A. Not that I recall. Detective
23 Trujillo, who was in charge of all the
24 evidence and forensic testing in this case,
25 he and Wickman verbally offered that to the
159
1 rest of the detective team.
2 Q. All right. So you never
3 personally saw a report with that result or
4 that conclusion?
5 A. I'm relying on a fellow officer.
6 Q. Okay. Do you know whether or not
7 there was ever any evidence that you saw or
8 you heard about in the course of the
9 investigation while you were still with the
10 Boulder police force showing whether or not
11 any fibers from either Patsy's clothing or
12 from her boots or from any part of her was
13 found in JonBenet's panties?
14 MR. WOOD: That's about three or
15 four questions, Darnay.
16 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Do you know
17 whether or not there was ever any evidence,
18 forensic evidence, showing that any article of
19 clothing could be matched to a substance
20 found in JonBenet's diaper or panties?
21 MR. WOOD: I have to just comment
22 that I don't believe there was any evidence
23 that JonBenet was wearing a diaper.
24 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) All right. To
25 her panties?
160
1 A. If I understand the question
2 correctly, and now just rephrase it so I'm
3 answering the right question or --
4 Q. Yeah, when JonBenet Ramsey was
5 found she was wearing I don't know what other
6 word there is for it but panties and there
7 was a question as to whether or not there
8 were substances found in that panty area.
9 What I'm asking you is do you know if there
10 was ever any forensic evidence indicating that
11 any article of clothing that Patsy wore was
12 found as a particle in that panty area of
13 JonBenet?
14 A. No, I am unaware of any forensic
15 or fiber evidence from Patsy Ramsey's clothing
16 to the victim's under clothing or underwear.
17 Q. Do you know if there was any
18 forensic evidence of Patsy Ramsey's clothing
19 at all besides the duct tape area on
20 JonBenet?
21 A. As we sit here now, no, I don't
22 recollect any other fiber evidence, other than
23 what we have discussed linking the mother to
24 JonBenet.
25 Q. With respect to what you have
161
1 referred to as a master affidavit, could you
2 please describe what a master affidavit is?
3 A. Certainly. At some point in, I
4 believe it was 1997, the police department
5 asked me to be the affiant on a master
6 affidavit and basically the case was reaching
7 a proportion that it needed to be condensed
8 into affidavit form in the event a search
9 and/or arrest warrant were necessary to carry
10 out on this case.
11 And given that assignment I tried
12 then over the course of the next several,
13 many months to keep that affidavit current.
14 Q. When you say keep the affidavit
15 current, how was the affidavit prepared or
16 being prepared?
17 A. It was being prepared as new
18 information became available that was relevant
19 to include inside this affidavit, that
20 information would be shared with me and I
21 would include that in the narrative.
22 Q. Now, when you say include that in
23 the narrative, were you preparing an ongoing
24 written narrative at the time?
25 A. Yes.
162
1 Q. And where did you keep a copy of
2 this ongoing written narrative?
3 A. Either in my briefcase or in my
4 desk inside the Boulder Police Department
5 situation room were typically the only two
6 places that the -- that the affidavit would
7 be left.
8 Q. Could you describe what form it
9 was being kept in? By example, was it kept
10 in a notebook? Was it kept on separate
11 sheets of paper? How was it kept physically?
12 A. Eight and a half by 11 white,
13 unbound paper, typically stapled with a
14 heavy-duty stapler in the upper left-hand
15 corner.
16 Q. And where were those pages being
17 kept physically, in a file folder? In a
18 book? What?
19 A. In my briefcase or my desk. But
20 if you're saying how were those stored?
21 Yeah, inside a manila-type folder.
22 Q. Was the folder labeled master
23 affidavit?
24 A. I don't recall.
25 Q. Was there any marking on the
163
1 folder as to what it was that was being
2 contained there?
3 A. No, but it's very apparent what it
4 is if you go looking for it.
5 Q. Do you know how long you kept
6 that master affidavit before it was
7 discontinued?
8 A. If memory serves, in the spring of
9 1998 when Beckner said that we weren't going
10 to make a physical custodial arrest and that
11 the case was headed for the DA's office and
12 possibly a grand jury, that was ceased.
13 Q. Did Mark Beckner or anyone else
14 tell you what you should do with the master
15 affidavit that you had in your possession?
16 A. Not that I recall. That would
17 have been -- no, not that I recall; I don't
18 recall any instruction like that. It would
19 have and likely and probably did just simply
20 wind up in the at the time 80-plus case file
21 notebooks in that room.
22 Q. So you turned the affidavit over
23 at some point to the police --
24 A. Yeah.
25 Q. -- to the other people in the
164
1 police department?
2 A. Right, that's in -- that's inside
3 the police department.
4 Q. Okay. Do you know if you made a
5 copy of that for your own use?
6 A. I don't know that I did.
7 Q. Okay. Do you know how many pages
8 the master affidavit was when you were told
9 to discontinue making it?
10 A. Well, it was continually being
11 updated and drafted and pencil marked and
12 everything else but I would put it at the
13 time that I last saw it I don't know if
14 anybody ever continued it after I left the
15 police department, but 50, 60, 70, 80-plus
16 pages maybe.
17 Q. Do you know who made the decision
18 as to what to include in the master
19 affidavit?
20 A. Well, I did partly, as did Tom
21 Wickman, Mark Beckner. On occasion, you
22 know, we would run ideas and thoughts by the
23 in-house legal advisor, Bob Keatley. Kim
24 Stewart had it for a period of time and I
25 think she did some updating or amending or
165
1 suggesting to it. It was sort of a
2 continuing work in progress. And when a
3 detective in the room had information that
4 was relevant to the affidavit, it would
5 typically be included.
6 Q. Were you the only person that
7 physically included the information or did
8 other people have access to it?
9 A. Well, two questions. Did other
10 people have access to it. Yes. And was I
11 the only one that physically made inclusions
12 to it? Mr. Hoffman, do you mean by way of
13 typewriting?
14 Q. Yes, by way of actual handwritten
15 notations or typewritten?
16 A. Yes, that's my recollection.
17 Q. All right. So nobody that you
18 remember made any physical notations or
19 changes in the master affidavit beside
20 yourself?
21 A. No. I'm saying others did in the
22 room make physical changes to it, line
23 throughs, additions, deletions, et cetera, as
24 information, you know, became available or got
25 stale or whatever the case might be.
166
1 Q. Mr. Thomas, directing your
2 attention now to the handwriting reports from
3 the Colorado Bureau of Investigation, did you
4 ever have occasion to see any of the
5 handwriting reports that were done at all in
6 the case by CBI?
7 A. Yeah. What they called a report
8 typically was more of a lab finding. It
9 wasn't in a narrative form, as I recall, but
10 those were in the possession of Trujillo, the
11 forensic evidence detective, but I did have
12 at least one occasion to look at those.
13 Q. Can you describe what one
14 typically looked like? Like how many pages
15 was one of these reports?
16 A. Fairly short, if I recall. The
17 one that I have in mind probably ran less
18 than four pages. On the front page was like
19 a CBI logo or letterhead, whatever they
20 typically manufacture their printed report on
21 and just simply black typewritten or
22 computer-generated ink on white paper.
23 Q. Do you know what sort of analysis
24 was actually done in the report of the
25 handwriting?
167
1 A. Yeah, they -- I remember the
2 language concerning Patsy Ramsey, which was
3 included in that report. And then many other
4 people's or people whose handwriting had been
5 looked at were also reported in this
6 document.
7 Q. Now, you say this document.
8 Weren't there more than -- did they do
9 separate reports for each individual's
10 handwriting that they examined, to the best
11 of your knowledge?
12 A. Not that I saw.
13 Q. So basically what was it that you
14 saw, a single report?
15 A. Well, as I described this report
16 probably less than four pages in length that
17 was very compacted with a lot of information
18 and not typically what you think of as a --
19 or what I think of as a police report with a
20 narrative, but more exhibit number such and
21 such corresponding to this, et cetera. Not
22 -- it wasn't free-flowing narrative of any
23 sort.
24 Q. The report that you actually were
25 able to physically examine, do you know how
168
1 many subjects or persons were actually being
2 discussed in that report?
3 A. Yeah, many. Many, many, many, you
4 know, 20, 30, 40 maybe.
5 Q. Do you know whether or not the
6 report drew any conclusions with respect to
7 the authorship of the ransom note?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Could you tell me what you
10 remember the conclusion to be?
11 A. As I sit here today without that
12 document in front of me, I recall language in
13 that document that along the lines, and I'm
14 certainly paraphrasing, that there was
15 evidence to suggest that Patsy Ramsey was the
16 author of the ransom note.
17 Q. Is that the language that you
18 remember "evidence to suggest"?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Now, with respect to your book,
21 you make a statement in your book, I'm trying
22 to find the page, but I'll just ask you
23 generally, yeah, it's on page 282, in the
24 next to the last paragraph on page 282, the
25 paragraph that begins "Not only did certain
169
1 letters change." Do you have that?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Could you read that paragraph out
4 loud, please?
5 A. Certainly. "Not only did certain
6 letters change, but her entire writing style
7 seemed to have been transformed after the
8 homicide. There were new ways of indenting,
9 spelling, and writing out long numbers that
10 contrasted with her earlier examples, and she
11 was the only suspect who altered her usual
12 preferences when supplying writing samples to
13 the police."
14 Q. Now, the she in this paragraph,
15 who is the she?
16 A. This is referring to Patsy Ramsey.
17 Q. All right. Now, may I ask you
18 how you acquired the knowledge that you have
19 in this paragraph? How do you know that in
20 fact is what was going on in her handwriting?
21 MR. WOOD: Let me say something I
22 don't think that he stated that he knows that
23 as a fact I think he's describing what Don
24 Foster said, but I may be wrong.
25 MR. HOFFMAN: Okay. I'm just
170
1 asking him how he acquired that information.
2 MR. WOOD: Okay.
3 A. Mr. Hoffman, surrounding or
4 preceding this paragraph it's in relation to
5 Mr. Foster's presentation in Boulder, if I'm
6 not mistaken and his presentation overheads,
7 examples, et cetera.
8 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) All right. Do
9 you know if anyone other than Don Foster
10 shared that belief who was involved in the
11 investigation?
12 A. What belief?
13 Q. The belief that there was an
14 attempt by Patsy Ramsey to alter her
15 handwriting when asked for exemplars?
16 MR. DIAMOND: Do you mean among
17 the expert community?
18 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Among anybody
19 that was investigating the case that you know
20 of?
21 A. I don't know if Don Foster shared
22 any of his findings or investigation with any
23 of the FBI people that he sometimes works
24 with, but as far as those people in the room
25 that day for this presentation in trying to
171
1 recall what Foster presented and said and
2 demonstrated, that was certainly where I came
3 away with this impression.
4 Q. Mr. Thomas, are you aware of the
5 fact that Patsy Ramsey was asked to give what
6 is known as request samplers to the police on
7 more than one occasion during the
8 investigation?
9 A. Yes, sir.
10 Q. Do you know how many times she
11 was -- on how many different occasions she
12 was asked to give request samples of her
13 handwriting to the police?
14 A. If my understanding is correct, I
15 think it was five.
16 Q. Do you know why she was asked to
17 give five separate handwriting samples on five
18 separate occasions?
19 A. That was not my assignment, but
20 given what I knew through the briefings and
21 the detectives who were handling that
22 assignment I could speculate as to why it
23 became known to me.
24 Q. Did anybody through hearsay or any
25 other way communicate with you why they were
172
1 asking Patsy Ramsey to appear on more than
2 one occasion to give exemplars?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Could you tell me why?
5 A. Yes. Because apparently the CBI
6 examiner, analyst, expert, had questions or
7 concerns about her handwriting and
8 similarities with the note.
9 Q. Did anybody ever express the
10 belief that she was attempting to alter her
11 handwriting?
12 A. Yes, Don Foster.
13 Q. Any other person in the
14 investigation?
15 A. And, again, as I sit here, from
16 memory and without the QD examiner's reports
17 in front of me, Mr. Hoffman, let me think
18 for a moment. No, not that I can recall.
19 MR. HOFFMAN: Since I'm drawing
20 near, how is my time doing, does anybody
21 know?
22 MR. RAWLS: You've got 17 more
23 minutes.
24 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Mr. Thomas, I
25 would just like to direct you to page 286 of
173
1 your book.
2 A. Okay.
3 Q. All right. Now, this is a rather
4 lengthy series of paragraphs and it runs to
5 289 and it's basically from what I can
6 understand your theory of how this crime was
7 committed, who was involved in it; is that
8 correct?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And have you had a chance to
11 review pages 286, 87, 88 and 89 since the
12 book was written?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Are these statements still
15 accurate?
16 A. Well, I don't know the current
17 state of the evidence of what may or may not
18 have changed or come to be known by Mike
19 Kane and the cops. But at the time I left,
20 this was certainly a hypothesis that I felt
21 was consistent with the evidence that I felt
22 was certainly reasonable.
23 Q. Have you had any occasion to
24 change your mind with respect to your
25 analysis and the conclusions that you draw in
174
1 these pages?
2 A. Well, will you give me just a
3 moment to reread quickly these three pages?
4 MR. HOFFMAN: In fact, would
5 anyone object if he read this out loud into
6 the record?
7 MR. WOOD: If you want to spend
8 your time having him do that, Darnay, I have
9 no objection whatsoever.
10 MR. HOFFMAN: Well, yes, would you
11 mind? Let's do it this way. Why don't you
12 silently read this to yourself and then I'll
13 ask you that question again.
14 MR. WOOD: He might as well read
15 it out loud because it's on the clock.
16 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Okay. Then why
17 don't you read it out loud. Begin with
18 "There was no doubt in my mind that Patsy
19 wrote the note."
20 A. "'I believe she committed the
21 murder' I told Smit and proceeded to lay out
22 what I thought had happened ...
23 "In my hypothesis, and approaching
24 fortieth birthday, the busy holiday season, an
25 exhausting Christmas Day, and an argument with
175
1 JonBenet had left Patsy frazzled. Her
2 beautiful daughter, whom she frequently
3 dressed almost as a twin, had rebelled
4 against wearing the same outfit as her
5 mother.
6 "When they came home, John Ramsey
7 helped Burke put together a Christmas toy.
8 JonBenet, who had not eaten much at the
9 Whites' party, was hungry. Her mother let
10 her have some pineapple, and then the kids
11 were put to bed. John Ramsey read to his
12 little girl. Then he went to bed. Patsy
13 stayed up to prepare for the trip to Michigan
14 the next morning, a trip she admittedly did
15 not particularly want to make.
16 "Later JonBenet awakened after
17 wetting her bed, as indicated by the plastic
18 sheets, the urine stains, the pull-up diaper
19 package hanging halfway out of a cabinet, and
20 the balled-up turtleneck found in the
21 bathroom. I concluded that the little girl
22 had worn the red turtleneck to bed, as her
23 mother originally said, and that it was
24 stripped off when it got wet.
25 "As I told Smith, I never believed
176
1 the child was sexually abused for the
2 gratification of the offender but that the
3 vaginal trauma was some sort of corporal
4 punishment. The dark fibers found in her
5 pubic region could have come from the violent
6 wiping of a wet child. Patsy probably yanked
7 out the diaper package in cleaning up
8 JonBenet.
9 "Patsy would not be the first
10 mother to lose control in such a situation.
11 One of the doctors we consulted cited
12 toileting issues as a textbook example of
13 causing a parental rage. So, in my
14 hypothesis, there was some sort of explosive
15 encounter in the child's bathroom sometime
16 prior to one o'clock in the morning, the time
17 suggested by the digestion rate of the
18 pineapple found in the child's stomach. I
19 believed JonBenet was slammed against a hard
20 surface, such as the edge of a tub,
21 inflicting a mortal head wound. She was
22 unconscious, but her heart was still beating.
23 Patsy would not have known that JonBenet was
24 still alive, because the child already
25 appeared to be dead. The massive head trauma
177
1 would have eventually killed her.
2 "It was the critical moment in
3 which she either had to call for help or
4 find an alternative explanation for her
5 daughter's death. It was accidental in the
6 sense that the situation had developed without
7 motive or premeditation. She could have
8 called for help but chose not to. An
9 emergency room doctor probably would have
10 questioned the 'accident' and called the
11 police. Still, little would have happened to
12 Patsy in Boulder. But I believe panic
13 overtook her.
14 "John and Burke continued to sleep
15 while Patsy moved the body of JonBenet down
16 to the basement and hid her in the little
17 room.
18 "As I pictured the scene, her
19 dilemma was that the police would assume the
20 obvious if a six- year old child was found
21 dead in a private home without any
22 satisfactory explanation. Patsy needed a
23 diversion and planned the way she thought a
24 kidnapping should look.
25 "She returned upstairs to the
178
1 kitchen and grabbed her tablet and a
2 felt-tipped pen," and flipping "to the middle
3 of the tablet, and started a ransom note,
4 drafting one that ended on page 25. For
5 some reason she discarded that one and ripped
6 pages 17-25 from the tablet. Police never
7 found those pages.
8 "On page 26, she began the
9 'Mr. and Mrs. I,' then also abandoned that
10 false start. At some point she drafted the
11 long ransom note. By doing so, she created
12 the government's best piece of evidence.
13 "She then faced the major problem
14 of what to do with the body. Leaving the
15 house carried the risk of John or Burke
16 awakening at the sounds and possibly being
17 seen by a passerby or a neighbor. Leaving
18 the body in the distant, almost inaccessible,
19 basement room was the best option.
20 "As I envisioned it, Patsy
21 returned to the basement, a woman caught up
22 in panic, where she could have seen--perhaps
23 by detecting a faint heartbeat or a sound or
24 a slight movement--that although completely
25 unconscious, JonBenet was not dead. Others
179
1 might argue that Patsy did not know the child
2 was still alive. In my hypothesis, she took
3 the next step, looking for the closest
4 available items in ... desperation. Only
5 feet away was her paint tote. She grabbed a
6 paint brush and broke it to fashion the
7 garrote with some cord." She then -- "then
8 she looped the cord around the girl's neck.
9 "In my scenario, she choked
10 JonBenet from behind, with a grip on her
11 broken paintbrush handle, pulling the
12 ligature. JonBenet, still unconscious, would
13 never have felt it. There are only four
14 ways to die: suicide, natural, accidental,
15 or homicide. This accident, in my opinion,
16 had just become a murder.
17 "Then the staging continued to
18 make it look like a kidnapping. Patsy tied
19 the girl's wrists in front, not in" the
20 "back, for otherwise the arms would not have
21 been in" the "overhead position. But with a
22 fifteen-inch length of cord between the wrists
23 and the knot tied loosely over the clothing,
24 there was no way such a binding would have
25 restrained a live child. It was a symbolic
180
1 act to make it appear the child had been
2 bound.
3 "Patsy took considerable time with
4 her daughter, wrapping her carefully in the
5 blanket and leaving her with a favorite pink
6 nightgown." As "the FBI had told us ... a
7 stranger would not have taken such care.
8 "As I told Lou, I thought that
9 throughout the coming hours, Patsy worked on
10 her staging, such as placing the ransom note
11 where she would be sure to 'find' it the
12 next morning. She placed the tablet on the
13 countertop right beside the stairs and" put
14 "the pen in the cup.
15 "While going through the drawers"
16 and "under the countertop" -- "While going
17 through the drawers under the countertop where
18 the tablet had been, she found rolls of tape.
19 She placed a strip from a roll of duct tape
20 across JonBenet's mouth. There was bloody
21 mucous under the tape, and a perfect set of
22 the child's lip prints, which did not
23 indicate a tongue impression or resistance.
24 "I theorized that Patsy, trying to
25 cover her tracks, took the remaining cord,
181
1 tape, and the first ransom note out of the
2 house that night, perhaps dropping them into
3 a nearby storm sewer or among the Christmas
4 debris in wrappings in a neighbor's trash
5 can.
6 "She was running out of time.
7 The household was scheduled to wake up early
8 to fly to Michigan, and in her haste, Patsy
9 Ramsey did not change clothes, a vital
10 mistake. With the clock ticking, and hearing
11 her husband moving around upstairs, she
12 stepped over the edge.
13 "The way I envisioned it, Patsy
14 screamed, and John Ramsey, coming out of the
15 shower, responded, totally unaware of what had
16 occurred. Burke, awakened by the noise
17 shortly before six o'clock in the morning,
18 came down to find out what had happened and
19 was sent back to bed as his mother talked to
20 the 911 emergency dispatcher.
21 "Patsy Ramsey opened the door to
22 Officer Rick French at about 5:55 a.m. on the
23 morning of December 26, 1996, wearing a red
24 turtleneck sweater and black pants, the same
25 things she had worn to a party the night
182
1 before. Her hair was done, and her makeup
2 was on. In my opinion, she had never been
3 to bed.
4 "The diversion worked for seven
5 hours as the Boulder police thought they were
6 dealing with a kidnapping.
7 "John Ramsey, in my hypothetical
8 scenario, probably first grew suspicious while
9 reading the ransom note that morning, which
10 was why he was unusually quiet. He must
11 have seen his wife's writing mannerisms all
12 over it, everything but her signature. But
13 where was his daughter?
14 "He said in his police interview
15 that he went down to the basement when
16 Detective Arndt noticed him missing. I
17 suggested that Ramsey found JonBenet at that
18 time and was faced with the dilemma of his
19 life. During the next few hours, his
20 behavior changed markedly as he desperately
21 considered his few options--submit to the
22 authorities or try to control the situation.
23 He had already lost one child, Beth, and now
24 JonBenet was gone too. Now Patsy was
25 possibly in jeopardy.
183
1 "The stress increased steadily
2 during the morning, for Patsy, in my theory,
3 knew that no kidnapper was going to call by
4 ten o'clock, and after John found the body,
5 he knew that too. So when Detective Linda
6 Arndt told him to search the house, he used
7 the opportunity and made a beeline for the
8 basement.
9 "Then tormented as he might be, he
10 chose to protect his wife. Within a few
11 hours, the first of his many lawyers was in
12 motion, the private investigators a day later.
13 "That's the way I see it, I said
14 to Lou Smit." That's how evidence -- "That's
15 how the evidence fits to me. She made
16 mistakes, and that's how we solve crimes,
17 right? I reminded him of his own favorite
18 saying: 'Murders are usually what they
19 seem.'".
20 Q. All right. Thank you, Mr. Thomas.
21 Now, I want to ask you, do you still agree
22 with this analysis of the murder of JonBenet
23 Ramsey?
24 MR. WOOD: Are you asking him as
25 to the state of the evidence in August of
184
1 1998?
2 MR. HOFFMAN: No, I'm asking him
3 whether now he still agrees based on his own
4 personal knowledge of the case whether or not
5 he still stands by these statements.
6 MR. WOOD: I want to make sure
7 that we understand, Darnay, because he, as I
8 understood it, testified that short of media
9 reports and public statements he doesn't know
10 anything about the state of the evidence from
11 August of 1998 through September of 2001.
12 And I think in fairness, we ought to make
13 sure that we are asking him what he is
14 standing by.
15 MR. HOFFMAN: All right.
16 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Do you regard
17 the statements that you make on page 286,
18 287, 288, 289 as being true to the best of
19 your knowledge?
20 MR. WOOD: We've got a conference
21 again.
22 THE DEPONENT: Just a second,
23 Darnay.
24 MR. HOFFMAN: Yeah, um-hum.
25 (Discussion off the record between
185
1 the deponent and Mr. Diamond.)
2 A. I'm sorry, Mr. Hoffman. Yeah, as
3 I said, given what I knew when I resigned in
4 the summer of '98, I don't know the status
5 of the evidence now but this was a
6 hypothetical scenario that I purported that I
7 felt was consistent with the evidence at the
8 time. And unless something is changed
9 drastically or markedly, that I'm unaware of,
10 yeah, it's still my belief that something --
11 or let me state it this way: It's still my
12 belief -- or I still stand behind this
13 hypothetical scenario in that regard.
14 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) All right.
15 That's really all I need to know.
16 Now, I want to ask you about the
17 911 tape which was -- became controversial
18 because of alleged background noise and voice,
19 possible voice identifications. Did you ever
20 have occasion to listen to the 911 tape
21 analysis that was done by a lab in Los
22 Angeles or somewhere in California purportedly
23 to show that Burke's voice was on the back
24 of that tape?
25 A. Yes.
186
1 MR. WOOD: He listened to the
2 analysis?
3 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Did you ever
4 have occasion to hear the tape and actually
5 hear what the people were reporting as being
6 Burke's voice in the background?
7 A. Not on the aerospace engineering
8 equipment but on lesser equipment inside the
9 Boulder Police Department, yes.
10 Q. So it was actually audible on that
11 equipment at the Boulder Police Department?
12 A. No, Mr. Hoffman, let me make sure
13 I understand you. What are you -- what was
14 audible?
15 Q. Burke's or the voice of someone
16 who could have been Burke Ramsey talking in
17 the background at the very end of Patsy
18 Ramsey's, you know, conversation with 911.
19 A. Well, you're cutting right to the
20 punch line. There is a long story behind it
21 but, yes, myself and others listened to that
22 tape and heard this third voice.
23 Q. So do you -- were you able to
24 identify that third voice, you personally?
25 A. Well, I don't have any training in
187
1 voice identification, but certainly it sounded
2 to me to be a young male voice.
3 MR. WOOD: Are you asking him,
4 Darnay --
5 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Were you able
6 to draw based on your own personal experience
7 of hearing this tape that there was a voice
8 of somebody who sounded like a young boy?
9 A. Yes, that was my personal
10 observation coming away from that.
11 Q. Do you have any reason to believe
12 that that voice could have been the voice of
13 Burke Ramsey?
14 A. That's what I believe.
15 Q. Is it based on ever having heard
16 Burke Ramsey speak?
17 MR. WOOD: You're talking about
18 just listening to the child speak, whether or
19 not he has done a -- that's a sufficient
20 voice exemplar for testing purposes?
21 MR. HOFFMAN: No, no. I just
22 want to know in the same way that you can
23 look at handwriting for, you know, purposes
24 of article 9 -- article 900 in the Rules of
25 Evidence, that whether or not based on his
188
1 own personal experience if he's ever heard
2 Burke Ramsey and whether or not he thought
3 that was Burke Ramsey based on his own
4 knowledge of what Burke Ramsey sounded like.
5 MR. WOOD: I understand. I'm not
6 -- he can answer. But I'm certainly not
7 acceding to your interpretation of rule,
8 whatever you're talking about, article 900.
9 MR. HOFFMAN: Okay. Well, I'm
10 not asking you to accede. Actually, Lin, you
11 don't really even have to be involved in
12 this, so quite frankly it's my question --
13 MR. WOOD: I will because I
14 represent --
15 MR. HOFFMAN: And I don't know if
16 it's appropriate for you to always to be
17 trying to clarify it and put your spin on
18 it. I'm asking Mr. Thomas whether or not --
19 MR. WOOD: Why don't you ask him
20 a question --
21 MR. HOFFMAN: -- he could identify
22 the voice as being that --
23 MR. WOOD: -- that makes some
24 sense and I might not have to try to clarify
25 it.
189
1 MR. HOFFMAN: -- of Burke Ramsey.
2 MR. WOOD: Why don't you just ask
3 him a straight-up question. I want to make
4 sure and I have a right to make sure that
5 the record is understandable. You may not
6 like that and I'm not trying to spin it.
7 I'm trying to make sure we understand because
8 candidly and respectfully some of your
9 questions are difficult to follow which
10 apparently --
11 MR. HOFFMAN: Okay. Well, you
12 know, you have that problem yourself, Lin.
13 So and I've --
14 MR. WOOD: I agree.
15 MR. HOFFMAN: -- heard Mr. Diamond
16 have to go in and ask for clarification;
17 lawyers sometimes have that problem --
18 MR. WOOD: I agree.
19 MR. HOFFMAN: -- not personal to
20 you or to me.
21 MR. WOOD: I don't disagree with
22 you.
23 MR. HOFFMAN: The fact is --
24 THE REPORTER: One at a time,
25 please.
190
1 MR. HOFFMAN: I would like to be
2 able to ask Steve Thomas this question
3 without your helping with the clarification of
4 it.
5 MR. WOOD: Well, just as long as
6 the record -- go ahead and ask him the
7 question. I just want to make sure that I
8 have the right to understand what you're
9 asking, too. But go ahead and ask him and
10 let's get an answer.
11 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Okay. Do you
12 have any reason to believe that the voice was
13 Burke Ramsey that you heard on the tape?
14 A. Yes, that's my belief and, absent
15 there being other parties of whom or which
16 I'm unaware in the house that morning, this
17 third party to me is believed to have been
18 Burke Ramsey.
19 Q. What do you base that belief
20 on --
21 MR. WOOD: I think your time is
22 up, Darnay.
23 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) -- that that
24 voice is Burke Ramsey?
25 MR. WOOD: Darnay, I think your
191
1 time is up. Is it up?
2 MR. RAWLS: Yes.
3 MR. WOOD: Go ahead and ask your
4 last question. I didn't mean to cut you
5 off.
6 MR. HOFFMAN: Given the fact, Lin,
7 that you've interjected and eaten a little of
8 my time up, I think you should allow me
9 that. Thank you.
10 MR. WOOD: As long as it doesn't
11 cut into my time of what I know today to be
12 3 hours and 50 minutes.
13 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Mr. Thomas, can
14 you answer that?
15 MR. DIAMOND: It cuts into my
16 time, Darnay.
17 MR. WOOD: I don't think you have
18 time today.
19 MR. DIAMOND: I've got time to go
20 home. Go ahead, ask your question.
21 Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Yes.
22 Mr. Thomas, is there any -- what is the
23 basis for your concluding that the voice that
24 you heard on the 911 tape was the voice of
25 Burke Ramsey?
192
1 A. The basis of that and very --
2 having to synopsize this for you,
3 Mr. Hoffman --
4 Q. Um-hum.
5 A. -- was Detective Hickman's travel
6 to the Aerospace Corp. in Southern California,
7 their enhancement of that garbled noise at
8 the end of that 911 call, those engineers
9 preparing a report and making findings I
10 think identical to the detective who was
11 there with the tape, her returning to the
12 Boulder Police Department with this
13 information and then each of the detectives
14 listening on admittedly lesser equipment
15 inside the Boulder Police Department to these
16 findings, I concurred with others that there
17 was a third voice on that tape that I
18 believed to be Burke.
19 MR. HOFFMAN: Thank you very much,
20 Mr. Thomas.
21 THE DEPONENT: Thank you,
22 Mr. Hoffman.
23 MR. WOOD: If we can go for about
24 five or a few minutes I want to just kind of
25 touch on a few things that you brought up,
193
1 Darnay, and then we will break for lunch.
2 Is that okay guys?
3 MR. DIAMOND: That's fine.
4 MR. HOFFMAN: Fine.
5 FURTHER EXAMINATION
6 BY-MR.WOOD:
7 Q. The FBI analyzed the 911 tape and
8 they did not find any such language, true?
9 A. I don't know what the FBI and
10 Secret Service did because it was my
11 understanding there may have been equipment
12 that was incompatible to conduct this testing
13 or for whatever reason but bottom line is the
14 Secret Service and --
15 Q. The FBI?
16 A. Federal Bureau -- yeah, were
17 unable to --
18 Q. They didn't hear the voice that
19 Aerospace heard, right?
20 A. I don't know what they did or
21 didn't hear or what they did or didn't test.
22 I don't -- I think one of those agencies
23 didn't even have equipment to test the tape.
24 Q. So you think the FBI didn't reach
25 a conclusion with respect to the 911 tape; is
194
1 that your testimony?
2 A. I don't know what the FBI or
3 Secret Service concluded, I know what
4 Aerospace did.
5 Q. And you also know that the tape
6 was taken to a fourth group and they came up
7 with different words from the tape than what
8 Aerospace had come up with, true?
9 A. I know that Mr. Hofstrom took the
10 tape to his brother-in-law for enhancement.
11 Q. Are you suggesting that his
12 brother-in-law somehow falsified a report?
13 A. Did I say anything like that?
14 Q. No, sir, I'm just asking you're
15 not suggesting that, are you?
16 A. No, you mentioned a fourth testing
17 facility and I simply replied that
18 Mr. Hofstrom took the tape to his
19 brother-in-law.
20 Q. So for whatever reason the FBI
21 doesn't hear the third party, the Secret
22 Service doesn't hear the third party,
23 Aerospace claims to hear it and then the
24 fourth group hears something different; is
25 that a fair generalization of the 911 tape?
195
1 A. I'm not sure that the first two
2 agencies ever heard anything because I'm not
3 sure they ever listened to the tape. I'm
4 just --
5 Q. Did you not bother to ask the
6 FBI, I mean, you -- please, Mr. Thomas?
7 MR. DIAMOND: Two questions.
8 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Did you ever
9 bother to call the FBI and say, gentlemen,
10 what did you find about the 911 tape?
11 A. I'm sure Detective Hickman, whose
12 assignment this was, may have done that.
13 Q. Well, what, did you ask Hickman
14 what did the FBI say? You know, we've spent
15 a lot of time with the FBI, Tom, what did
16 they say? Did you ask him?
17 MR. DIAMOND: Did he ask him
18 what?
19 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) What the FBI had
20 to say about the 911 tape?
21 A. Again, as I've said it's my
22 understanding, Mr. Wood, that I don't know
23 whether or not the FBI or Secret Service even
24 tested the tape. The first testing that was
25 done on it, to my knowledge, was through the
196
1 Aerospace Corporation.
2 Q. And did you -- have you ever
3 tried at any time as you sit here today to
4 make any efforts to find out about whether
5 the FBI or the Secret Service even tested the
6 tape and if so, what their results were?
7 A. I don't know that.
8 Q. Have you made any efforts is my
9 question?
10 A. No.
11 Q. As we sit here today, you've never
12 made any effort to find that out --
13 A. No.
14 Q. -- right? Am I right? Sometimes
15 the no comes out differently. The question
16 is you've never made any such efforts to find
17 out about the FBI or the Secret Service
18 testing of the tape?
19 A. I have not made calls or efforts
20 trying to determine that to the FBI or Secret
21 Service.
22 Q. As we sit here today you have not
23 done that?
24 A. That's right.
25 Q. You slipped once, maybe
197
1 inadvertently, in referring to Darnay by
2 Darnay as opposed to Mr. Hoffman. When did
3 Darnay Hoffman first contact you about his
4 offer to represent you for free and to absorb
5 your legal cost in connection with the civil
6 litigation filed against you by the Ramseys?
7 MR. DIAMOND: Can we just get a
8 predicate that that fact occurred?
9 MR. WOOD: Yeah. I've got the
10 New York lawyer, you know what I'm talking
11 about, don't you, Darnay?
12 MR. HOFFMAN: Yeah.
13 MR. WOOD: For the record, you
14 stated that several months prior months of
15 April of 2001, you offered to represent Steve
16 Thomas pro bono, for free and absorb all of
17 his legal costs, right?
18 MR. HOFFMAN: Yeah, at one point
19 I did, yes.
20 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Right. Tell me
21 about that. When did he contact you?
22 A. I don't know. What's the date on
23 the document you're looking at?
24 Q. Maybe Darnay can tell us that if
25 you don't know.
198
1 MR. HOFFMAN: I don't remember
2 that either.
3 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) But you know he
4 called you? I don't know that --
5 MR. HOFFMAN: No, I did not call
6 him.
7 MR. WOOD: How did you contact
8 him?
9 MR. HOFFMAN: I sent him an
10 e-mail. I don't have a phone number for --
11 THE REPORTER: Wait. One at a
12 time.
13 MR. WOOD: E -mail, whatever.
14 I'm not trying to -- I mean, you e-mailed
15 him.
16 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Did you get the
17 e-mail, Mr. Thomas?
18 A. This today is the first time that
19 I have ever spoken, correct me if I'm wrong,
20 Mr. Hoffman, that I have ever spoken
21 personally to Mr. Darnay Hoffman.
22 Q. Thank you.
23 A. And yes, I do recall not only did
24 he send me this e-mail but that on occasion
25 I would be on an e-mailing list that would
199
1 receive e-mails from Mr. Hoffman.
2 Q. So it is true that Mr. Hoffman
3 sent you, Steve Thomas, an e-mail in which he
4 offered his legal services to represent you
5 for free, pro bono, and to absorb all of
6 your legal costs in connection with any
7 litigation brought against you by the Ramsey
8 family; is that true?
9 A. Very generously so, yes, he did.
10 Q. Why did you not accept it?
11 MR. DIAMOND: He had a better
12 offer.
13 MR. HOFFMAN: Better lawyer, Lin.
14 He got a better lawyer, trust me.
15 MR. WOOD: Why don't you all let
16 Mr. Thomas figure out what to say about this,
17 without being disrespectful.
18 MR. DIAMOND: Where is your sense
19 of humor, Mr. Wood?
20 A. In addition to that e-mail --
21 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Why don't you
22 answer my question, Mr. Thomas?
23 A. I'm trying to, Mr. Wood.
24 Q. My question is why did you not
25 accept it?
200
1 MR. DIAMOND: And you can
2 continue.
3 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Yeah, but please,
4 just answer my question and we can move on
5 to something else.
6 A. In another e-mail, Mr. Wood also
7 e-mailed me the name and business address and
8 telephone number of a Mr. Daniel Petrocelli
9 in Los Angeles who he also suggested as a
10 fine attorney.
11 Q. Let me make sure we get that
12 right. Mr. Wood didn't e-mail you
13 Mr. Petrocelli's name. Are you saying that
14 Mr. Hoffman did?
15 A. Yes, my mistake, yes, that's
16 what --
17 Q. But Mr. -- and was that close in
18 time to his offer with respect to his offer
19 to represent you?
20 A. I don't recall.
21 Q. Do you think it was a few days, a
22 few weeks, a few months apart?
23 A. I don't recall the timing on
24 either of these e-mails. Maybe Mr. Hoffman
25 can help me out.
201
1 MR. WOOD: All I know, Darnay, is
2 I've got your e-mail that you posted on April
3 1, 2001, where you stated you made the offer
4 to him several months before.
5 MR. HOFFMAN: Yeah, I don't
6 remember exactly at what point after that I
7 also suggested Daniel Petrocelli who is, quite
8 frankly, a better lawyer than I am in these
9 areas, so.
10 MR. WOOD: Well, now we know how
11 Dan Petrocelli gets some of his business.
12 Let's go on to something else.
13 MR. HOFFMAN: Through referrals,
14 Lin, just like most lawyers.
15 MR. WOOD: Let's go on to
16 something else.
17 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) I want to make
18 sure you very clearly have stated to
19 Mr. Hoffman you don't know the state of the
20 evidence as of the present date with respect
21 to this investigation, true?
22 MR. DIAMOND: State of the
23 evidence? What do you mean by that?
24 MR. WOOD: That's his term, state
25 of the evidence.
202
1 MR. DIAMOND: That's his term?
2 MR. WOOD: Yeah, it's why I'm
3 asking.
4 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) You said very
5 clearly to Mr. Hoffman you do not know the
6 state of the evidence with respect to the
7 JonBenet Ramsey investigation, as you sit here
8 today, the state of the evidence as of
9 September 2001, true?
10 A. After leaving the police
11 department, yes, that concluded my official
12 participation. I have followed the case
13 through the media, but as far as being privy
14 to anything that occurred in the grand jury
15 or continued evidence testing, I'm unaware of
16 that.
17 Q. You knew the state of the evidence
18 as it existed in the case as of March 2001,
19 true?
20 A. That was during the period which
21 -- no, the grand jury had concluded -- no, I
22 -- no, I wasn't inside the police department
23 reviewing evidence at that time either.
24 Q. But what you did know and you had
25 actual knowledge of was that a grand jury had
203
1 met for some 13 months and had not issued an
2 indictment against John and Patsy Ramsey,
3 right?
4 A. I don't know that. Do you know
5 that?
6 Q. Sir, was an indictment issued? Do
7 you have information there was an indictment
8 of my clients that nobody has bothered
9 telling them or me about?
10 MR. HOFFMAN: Actually, Lin,
11 Patrick Burke has information that he should
12 have told you about which he announced to the
13 media that according to him the grand jury
14 actually took a straw poll. Why don't you
15 ask Patrick Burke.
16 MR. WOOD: Let me tell you,
17 Darnay, that won't count against my time.
18 MR. HOFFMAN: Okay.
19 MR. WOOD: But you're right, it
20 was a straw poll; it was a vote not to
21 indict. Thank you for bringing something to
22 my attention that I already knew.
23 MR. HOFFMAN: Okay.
24 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Would you answer
25 my question, sir? It's pretty simple. You
204
1 know that no indictment was issued by the
2 grand jury, true?
3 A. I don't know what the grand jury
4 did.
5 Q. I'm not asking you what they did
6 in terms of whether they voted or not, sir.
7 MR. DIAMOND: I think he's asking
8 you --
9 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) I'm asking you
10 whether they issued an indictment to indict
11 John and/or Patsy Ramsey?
12 MR. DIAMOND: -- are you aware of
13 any public report of such an indictment.
14 A. No.
15 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) You also know that
16 after the grand jury was dismissed that Alex
17 Hunter stated publicly that all seven of the
18 prosecutors in the case unanimously agreed
19 that this was not a case where they felt
20 that evidence was sufficient to justify at
21 that time a prosecution. You know that, too,
22 don't you, sir?
23 A. That Hunter --
24 Q. Made that statement publicly?
25 A. Made the statement that his
205
1 advisors supported that decision?
2 Q. Seven prosecutors, not his
3 advisors, seven prosecutors, you know that,
4 don't you, sir?
5 A. I know that statement was made.
6 Q. Do you have any knowledge to
7 contradict the accuracy of that statement,
8 that is to say that some of those seven did
9 not so agree as Mr. Hunter stated? Do you
10 have anything to contradict that factually?
11 A. You would have to poll them,
12 Mr. Wood.
13 Q. I'm polling you. Do you have any
14 information to contradict that, Mr. Thomas?
15 A. No.
16 Q. Now, you understand, I trust, the
17 difference between probable cause to arrest
18 someone and sufficient evidence to justify a
19 criminal prosecution to prove guilt beyond a
20 reasonable doubt. Do you know the
21 difference?
22 A. You say you do. You're asking me
23 if I know the difference --
24 Q. I'm asking --
25 A. -- between probable cause and
206
1 beyond a reasonable doubt?
2 Q. Listen to my question. Do you
3 understand the difference between probable
4 cause to arrest an individual and sufficient
5 evidence to justify a criminal prosecution of
6 that individual to prove guilt beyond a
7 reasonable doubt; do you know the difference?
8 A. I believe I do.
9 Q. Can we agree that police officers
10 who are investigating a crime may form a
11 belief that there is probable cause to arrest
12 but the question of who makes the decision of
13 whether there is sufficient evidence to
14 justify a criminal prosecution is within the
15 domain and province of a prosecutor, isn't
16 that the way it works, sir?
17 A. Typically, yes, sir.
18 Q. And there's a third category
19 because you know the difference between
20 probable cause to arrest and sufficient
21 evidence to justify a prosecution to prove
22 guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and the
23 difference between a finding of guilt, you
24 know that difference, too, don't you, sir?
25 A. I believe I do, yes, sir.
207
1 Q. You know the difference between
2 saying somebody is arrested for a crime and
3 somebody has been found guilty of a crime?
4 You know that difference, don't you, sir?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. It's a big difference, isn't it?
7 A. Sometimes is and sometimes isn't.
8 Q. You don't think there is a big
9 difference between someone being arrested for
10 a crime and someone being found guilty of a
11 crime?
12 MR. DIAMOND: Are you talking
13 about the quantum of proof, sir?
14 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Answer my question.
15 MR. DIAMOND: Otherwise your
16 question is gibberish.
17 MR. WOOD: If that's a
18 statement --
19 MR. DIAMOND: Yeah, I object on
20 the grounds that --
21 MR. WOOD: -- it's an asinine
22 statement.
23 MR. DIAMOND: I object --
24 MR. WOOD: It's not gibberish it
25 is very clear.
208
1 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Do you know the
2 difference, sir, between someone being
3 arrested for a crime and someone being found
4 guilty of a crime; do you understand that?
5 A. I've often arrested people who
6 were guilty of a crime and were subsequently
7 convicted of a crime.
8 Q. And you've probably arrested a lot
9 of people who were not found guilty of a
10 crime, didn't you?
11 A. I doubt it.
12 Q. You don't think that happens on a
13 frequent basis?
14 A. That police officers, or are you
15 talking about me, Mr. Wood?
16 Q. Police officers in general. I
17 won't go back into your background at the
18 moment on that?
19 A. That innocent people are sometimes
20 arrested?
21 Q. That people are arrested for a
22 crime and ultimately not found guilty of that
23 crime?
24 A. I don't -- I don't have those
25 statistics in front of me; I don't know.
209
1 Q. But you don't fight the idea that
2 that happens, sir, do you?
3 A. I think --
4 Q. Surely you don't think anybody
5 that is arrested is actually found guilty, I
6 hope?
7 MR. DIAMOND: I think his first
8 question is withdrawn. Can we hear the
9 second question again?
10 MR. WOOD: Yeah. Listen
11 carefully. It may be gibberish again to you.
12 MR. DIAMOND: Maybe.
13 MR. WOOD: It's not gibberish in
14 Atlanta. Maybe it is out in LA on the left
15 side.
16 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) You don't fight
17 the general concept, sir, an idea that people
18 are arrested for crimes that ultimately they
19 are found not guilty of committing?
20 A. There is a difference between
21 being found not guilty at trial and being
22 innocent, Mr. Wood.
23 Q. It's the difference between being
24 not found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt
25 even where there may be probable cause to
210
1 arrest, there is a difference, isn't there,
2 sir?
3 A. I don't understand your question.
4 Q. You don't understand, then, the
5 difference between there being probable cause
6 to arrest compared to proof of guilt beyond a
7 reasonable doubt?
8 A. Yes, I have already answered that.
9 Q. You do understand it?
10 A. For the third time.
11 Q. Is the answer yes for the third
12 time?
13 A. Yes, for the fourth time.
14 Q. Thank you. Four times is a rule
15 of thumb. I like to get it at least three,
16 four is even better. Thank you.
17 Have you ever had an opportunity
18 to review any of Darnay Hoffman's handwriting
19 experts' reports, that would be a report from
20 David Liedman, Cina Wong and another
21 individual named Tom Miller?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Do you know whether they were ever
24 tendered to the prosecution or to the police
25 department and rejected as not credible?
211
1 A. It's my understanding and this may
2 have been even after I left the police
3 department, that Mr. Hoffman made his experts
4 available to the prosecution.
5 Q. And they declined saying that they
6 were not credible or do you know?
7 A. I don't know.
8 Q. You don't know that. You do know
9 that there were other experts that reviewed
10 Patsy Ramsey's handwriting and did not find
11 evidence of authorship, true?
12 A. Who were those?
13 Q. Do you think there were not three
14 other people that looked at this and did not
15 find that there was evidence to find that she
16 wrote the note?
17 A. I don't know who you're referring
18 to.
19 Q. Well, there was a Secret Service
20 examiner, Mr. Dusak?
21 A. Right.
22 Q. Speckin Laboratories?
23 A. Mr. Speckin, yes.
24 Q. Right. And there is one other,
25 help me. I can pull it if you want me to?
212
1 A. Alfred, Alford, Edwin Alford.
2 Q. Did you look at their conclusions
3 and remember them?
4 A. I did.
5 Q. What was Mr. Dusak's conclusion?
6 A. Mr. Dusak, I believe, his official
7 conclusion on his report for courtroom
8 purposes was no evidence to indicate.
9 Q. No evidence to indicate that Patsy
10 Ramsey executed any of the questioned material
11 appearing on the ransom note, was that
12 Mr. Dusak's conclusion?
13 A. Among other things.
14 Q. And he was a document analyst for
15 the United States Secret Service, right?
16 A. Right.
17 Q. Then we have Mr. Edwin F. Alford,
18 Jr., police expert, examination of the
19 questioned handwriting, comparison of the
20 handwriting specimen submitted has failed to
21 provide a basis for identifying Patsy Ramsey
22 as the writer of the letter. Is that his
23 conclusion?
24 A. I remember Mr. Dusak. If you
25 have a document that would help --
213
1 Q. This is Mr. Alford.
2 A. I know. I remember Mr. Dusak.
3 If you have a document that would help me
4 refresh my memory on Mr. Alford, I don't
5 recall --
6 Q. Not beyond what I have just told
7 you, but if that helps you refresh you one
8 way or the other what I've just told you is
9 I believe Mr. Alford concluded?
10 A. Will you repeat his --
11 Q. Sure.
12 A. -- what he concluded.
13 Q. The examination of the questioned
14 handwriting comparison with the handwriting
15 specimen submitted has failed to provide a
16 basis for identifying Patricia Ramsey as the
17 writer of the letter?
18 A. If that's what the report says.
19 I certainly don't disagree with --
20 MR. DIAMOND: He's asking you
21 whether that refreshes your recollection.
22 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Do you recall
23 Mr. Alford coming to that conclusion?
24 A. To a -- yeah, I think that's the
25 conclusion.
214
1 Q. And then Leonard A. Speckin, he
2 said that he found no evidence that Patsy
3 Ramsey disguised her handwriting exemplars.
4 Did you -- were you aware of that conclusion
5 by Mr. Speckin, a police expert?
6 A. Among other conclusions, yes.
7 Q. You understood enough about the
8 handwriting analysis that a legitimate
9 handwriting questioned document examiner
10 analyzes not just similarities, but also has
11 to analyze and account for dissimilarities,
12 right?
13 A. If you say so, Mr. Wood, I'm
14 not --
15 Q. I'm asking you, sir.
16 A. No, I'm not a handwriting expert
17 and don't purport to be.
18 Q. So you can't --
19 A. If you're asking me about my
20 layman's knowledge about handwriting science I
21 would be happy to answer your question.
22 Q. I'm asking you about your
23 understanding of the science when you were
24 the, quote, one of the lead detectives. Did
25 you not listen to what the experts were
215
1 saying and what their bases were and did you
2 not grasp the fundamental idea when you were
3 listening that they were saying we've got to
4 analyze both similarities and dissimilarities?
5 MR. DIAMOND: Objection.
6 Compound. You may answer.
7 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Did you understand
8 that to be the case or not?
9 A. That was among many things that I
10 understood them to look at.
11 Q. Thank you. Do you know the
12 names? You gave me a couple but for the
13 record I would like to make sure I've got
14 them. I would like to get the names of the
15 Boulder police officers who took over in
16 effect the Chris Wolf case. You gave me a
17 couple; let's make sure we've got them all.
18 Could you give them to me now on the record?
19 A. I think Commander Beckner assigned
20 Detective Carey Weinheimer to complete the
21 Chris Wolf investigation in early to spring
22 of '98.
23 Q. Anyone else?
24 A. I don't know if he was working
25 with a partner or not.
216
1 Q. That's the only name you know?
2 A. Right.
3 Q. And I take it you don't know
4 firsthand or secondhand what caused the
5 Boulder Police Department to go back and
6 choose to investigate Wolf and get his
7 non-testimonial evidence in February of 1998?
8 A. What prompted that?
9 Q. Yeah.
10 A. That he was still outstanding, if
11 you will.
12 Q. A suspect?
13 A. It's whatever you want to call
14 him.
15 Q. What did you call him?
16 A. There were several people who were
17 suspicious in this case to me and I'm not
18 going to quibble if we want to attach suspect
19 to Chris Wolf.
20 Q. It's the word you used in your
21 book you referred to him as a suspect, didn't
22 you?
23 A. As I said, I don't have a problem
24 with calling Chris Wolf a suspect.
25 Q. Any -- did Darnay Hoffman or Chris
217
1 Wolf ever make any demands on you to retract
2 the statement that he was a suspect in your
3 book or threaten to sue you for publishing a
4 book calling him a suspect?
5 A. Not that I'm aware of.
6 Q. Just a couple more, then we'll
7 break. Are you aware of Mr. Wolf's prior
8 employment history?
9 A. My encounter with Mr. Wolf, as you
10 said, yielded little information. Other than
11 what Jackie Dilson may have provided, I don't
12 know.
13 Q. Did you make a copy, I know you
14 said something about you weren't sure if you
15 had copied it. Do you know whether you
16 actually made a copy of your master affidavit
17 when you were copying these police files
18 after you left?
19 A. I don't know. My answer is I
20 don't know.
21 Q. Would it help to ask you whether
22 you know whether you relied on it in writing
23 your book?
24 A. No, I don't think so.
25 MR. WOOD: Darnay, are you there,
218
1 Darnay? Hello?
2 MR. DIAMOND: Probably a good time
3 to break.
4 MR. WOOD: I guess we're going to
5 take a break. Could we do this. I'm going
6 to ask him when we come back -- since we've
7 lost Darnay I'm going to ask him about five
8 questions or so that address some areas, two
9 or three of which were marked as confidential
10 in the Wolf deposition. And what I believe
11 the protective order says is that, before
12 doing that, I need to let him see it and you
13 all will agree that he will abide by it in
14 effect, sign on, and keep that information
15 confidential. Can we agree that you all can
16 do that while we're at lunch?
17 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: Did you want
18 this on the record?
19 MR. WOOD: Is that okay?
20 MR. DIAMOND: I'll talk to him at
21 lunch. He may not want to be subject to the
22 confidentiality order.
23 MR. WOOD: Only subject as to
24 Wolf's testimony.
25 MR. DIAMOND: We will talk over
219
1 lunch.
2 MR. WOOD: That he has designated
3 confidential.
4 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is
5 12:58. We're going off the record. This is
6 the end of tape two.
7 (Recess taken from 12:58 p.m. to
8 1:54 p.m.)
9 (Exhibit-2 was marked.)
10 (Videographer Intern present after
11 recess.)
12 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is
13 2:04. We're back on the record. This is
14 the beginning of tape three.
15 Q. (BY MR. WOOD)
16
17 A.
18 Q.
19
20 A.
21 Q.
22 MR. DIAMOND: He's doing well by
23 some standards.
24 MR. WOOD: He's doing well by my
25 standards. You don't need to put that on
220
1 the record in case my wife, present wife, and
2 last wife number four sees it.
3 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Mr. Thomas, I'm
4 going to go back and make sure I'm very
5 clear. The copies that you made of the
6 police file information before you turned it
7 back into the Boulder police, you knew you
8 were not authorized to copy that material and
9 keep it, didn't you?
10 A. Not necessarily. This was my work
11 and briefcase.
12 Q. So if it was the Boulder Police
13 Department report and your briefcase, you
14 thought you had a right to copy it and keep
15 it after you left the department; is that
16 your testimony?
17 A. If I later had to testify or if
18 there was a question about what I returned to
19 the department, that would satisfy that.
20 Q. Did you check with anyone within
21 the department to make sure that was the
22 department's policy and rules?
23 A. No, there was little conversation
24 with the administration after I left.
25 Q. As I understand it, you remember
221
1 last seeing these documents and the box that
2 had these documents in it, the ones that you
3 had been sent from the Boulder Police
4 Department people after they learned that you
5 were writing the book --
6 MR. DIAMOND: I'm sorry, after?
7 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) I thought that he
8 told me he started getting them in early
9 1999 after he announced he was writing the
10 book; isn't that true?
11 MR. DIAMOND: Okay. I misheard
12 you.
13 A. That's right.
14 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) The anonymous ones
15 from whom you clearly believe were Boulder
16 police officers?
17 A. That's right.
18 Q. I was confused and hopefully it
19 won't happen too often but it may not be the
20 last time, but as I understand your
21 testimony, you haven't looked for that box,
22 you just recall that you saw it sometime last
23 perhaps this March of 2000, right?
24 A. Yes, I had that box March of
25 2000.
222
1 Q. So you don't know because you
2 haven't looked today whether that box is
3 still in your possession, custody or control?
4 You don't know one way or the other because
5 you haven't looked for it, right?
6 A. Right.
7 Q. I'll give you a subpoena. I'll
8 get you to acknowledge as I hand it to you,
9 sir, would ask you to go now and look for
10 those documents that at some point are
11 consistent with the exhibit attached to the
12 subpoena. Do you acknowledge that I handed
13 you that subpoena?
14 MR. DIAMOND: I will. So
15 stipulated.
16 MR. WOOD: Thank you.
17 MR. DIAMOND: You asked us to
18 consider a request during the lunch hour with
19 respect to confidentiality.
20 MR. WOOD: Yeah, but I realized
21 you had already agreed to do the
22 confidentiality deal because of the social
23 security number.
24 MR. DIAMOND: But I've agreed that
25 I might designate portions of this deposition
223
1 subject to a confidentiality order. In terms
2 of subjecting my client to the terms of an
3 order that he is otherwise not subjected to,
4 we have decided we don't want to do that.
5 And so I would ask you simply just ask him
6 questions and don't -- refrain from
7 disclosing --
8 MR. WOOD: I'll ask him whatever
9 I feel is appropriate.
10 MR. DIAMOND: Sure.
11 MR. WOOD: You can decide or
12 Darnay can decide what you and he want to do
13 about it but, as I understand it, you don't
14 agree to be part of the protective order that
15 is available that Sean has reviewed prior to
16 the deposition today?
17 MR. DIAMOND: With respect to
18 third-party materials, that's correct.
19 MR. WOOD: Would you sign on in
20 any potential?
21 MR. DIAMOND: What's that?
22 MR. WOOD: You either accept the
23 order for Mr. Thomas or you go get a new
24 order that says that Mr. Thomas' deposition
25 in some part is confidential.
224
1 MR. DIAMOND: Mr. Thomas isn't
2 accepting the confidentiality order.
3 MR. WOOD: Fine.
4 MR. DIAMOND: I may well designate
5 portions of his deposition confidential.
6 MR. WOOD: Then when you do that,
7 you will have signed on to the protective
8 order.
9 MR. DIAMOND: I disagree, but
10 that's a matter for the --
11 MR. WOOD: Well, you will get a
12 new protective order.
13 MR. HOFFMAN: That is a matter
14 for the judge to decide.
15 MR. WOOD: Right, it is. We
16 won't count that part against my time, I
17 hope?
18 MR. DIAMOND: We'll count from
19 2:05 against your time.
20 MR. WOOD: That won't be part of
21 it.
22 MR. DIAMOND: Sir --
23 MR. WOOD: Let's go.
24 MR. DIAMOND: -- you're wasting
25 your time.
225
1 MR. WOOD: No, you're wasting my
2 time. Let's go forward.
3 MR. WOOD: Did I give you a copy,
4 too, Sean? I think I gave you --
5 MR. SMITH: I think so. I may
6 have the original.
7 MR. WOOD: -- two copies and the
8 original that I handed to the detective,
9 former detective, excuse me.
10 MR. SMITH: I may have the
11 original.
12 MR. WOOD: Yeah, I just wanted to
13 make sure I didn't give you all my copies.
14 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Mr. Thomas --
15 yeah, I've got it -- the 911 tape. Did you
16 ever hear any explanation as to why that tape
17 was garbled in part?
18 A. At some point during the
19 investigation I recall the tape coming to
20 Detective Sergeant Wickman's attention
21 initially because the 911 operator who took
22 that call thought there may have been
23 something at the end of the conversation that
24 was unintelligible.
25 Q. I appreciate that information.
226
1 But I would like to get to my question
2 because my time is limited today at least and
3 whether we finish or not is another issue.
4 But my question is, did you ever, sir, hear
5 any explanation as to why a portion of the
6 911 tape was garbled?
7 A. I'm not sure I understand your
8 question. Are you asking me why --
9 Q. Yeah, was anybody trying to figure
10 out why -- the 911 tape is a tape in
11 realtime, isn't it?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And one would think that you would
14 hear in realtime voices that are on the tape.
15 You say there is something garbled. Was
16 there ever any attempt to find out why this
17 portion of the tape might be garbled and not
18 discernible to the human ear without some
19 scientific analysis? That's my question.
20 A. I don't think that it was garbled
21 in the sense that there was a defect in the
22 tape or something, that's certainly not my
23 understanding. I think the description of
24 garbled was meant to include the fact that as
25 this phone was apparently being attempted
227
1 placed back into the cradle, there was some
2 conversation that was not as clear as Patsy
3 Ramsey speaking directly into the phone, to
4 the 911 operator.
5 Q. You knew the phone from your
6 investigation was a wall phone, didn't you?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Can you hear any effort on the
9 tape to try to hang the phone up, a banging
10 or a tapping or anything of that nature?
11 A. The call obviously concludes with
12 the line disconnecting but, no, not that I
13 recall today without listening to the tape of
14 the phone banging.
15 Q. Do you know whether the 911 tapes
16 that were being utilized at the time were
17 recycled in the sense that they might be
18 taped over after a period of time?
19 A. I don't know.
20 Q. Was any effort made by the Boulder
21 Police Department, to your knowledge, to try
22 to ascertain that information?
23 A. I would certainly think they did.
24 Q. But do you know the answer?
25 A. I don't have any knowledge of
228
1 that.
2 Q. Secondhand or otherwise?
3 A. No.
4 Q. Take a look at your book, if you
5 will, for me, page 15. Are you with me?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. "In preliminary examinations,
8 detectives thought they could hear some more
9 words being spoken between the time Patsy
10 Ramsey said 'Hurry, hurry, hurry' and when
11 the call was terminated." Have I read that
12 correctly?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Is that the truth, is that
15 accurate?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. "However, the FBI and the United
18 States Secret Service could not lift anything
19 from the background noise on the tape." Have
20 I read that correctly?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Is that the truth?
23 A. As we discussed earlier, yes.
24 Q. I thought you said you didn't know
25 what efforts, if any, they had made earlier?
229
1 A. I said in one case at least I
2 don't know that they had the proper or
3 necessary compatible equipment to try to
4 enhance this tape, nor did I know of them
5 ever submitting a report.
6 Q. All I would like to know is did
7 the FBI to your knowledge or the Secret
8 Service to your knowledge ever send the tape
9 back and say we don't have the proper
10 equipment to see if we can lift anything from
11 the background noise on this tape?
12 A. Again, we have discussed that and
13 that's my testimony, that not being my
14 assignment, it was my understanding that the
15 tape came back from the FBI and the Secret
16 Service without anything definitive, but I
17 recall there being an issue that somebody
18 didn't have proper equipment to do the
19 testing.
20 Q. Well, you don't say anything like
21 that here. This is definitive. The FBI and
22 the United States Secret Service could not
23 lift anything from the background noise on
24 the tape. Is that a true statement or not?
25 A. Whether, because they didn't have
230
1 the correct machine or because they didn't
2 lift anything if they did do some testing,
3 yes, that's a true statement.
4 Q. Why wouldn't you -- I mean with
5 all due respect I don't think you were trying
6 to do the Ramseys any favors in this book.
7 Why wouldn't you have said here that they
8 couldn't lift anything from the background
9 noise on the tape but that may have been the
10 result of inappropriate equipment. You didn't
11 say that or discuss that in your book, did
12 you?
13 A. If we're talking about the
14 production of the book, it was certainly
15 limited. I couldn't put everything in this
16 case into the content of the book.
17 Q. The bottom line is we're confident
18 that someone in the Boulder Police Department
19 can answer the question about the findings by
20 the United States Secret Service and the FBI
21 about this 911 tape. That's in the case
22 file, isn't it?
23 A. Undoubtedly.
24 Q. Good. And I don't believe I
25 asked you this; I wanted to. Are you aware
231
1 of any attempts to take a voice exemplar from
2 Burke Ramsey and have it analyzed against the
3 voice you think your human ear tells you or
4 because it's a third-party voice that it's
5 Burke Ramsey, any efforts to do a scientific
6 analysis by way of a voice exemplar between
7 Burke Ramsey's voice and the voice you think
8 might have been his on the 911 tape?
9 A. I certainly never received an
10 assignment like that, nor do I recall hearing
11 or knowing of anyone else who did.
12 Q. In December of 1996, who did you
13 consider to be the most experienced homicide
14 detective in the Boulder Police Department?
15 A. In the entire department?
16 Q. I think I'm pretty clear, sir, in
17 the Boulder Police Department, the detective
18 department of the Boulder police.
19 A. As I asked, that the detective --
20 there is a detective department and then
21 there is a uniform department where --
22 Q. I think my question said in the
23 detective department.
24 A. In the detective department I
25 think the most experienced homicide
232
1 investigator was likely Detective Sergeant Tom
2 Wickman.
3 Q. As I understand it initially Tom
4 Trujillo and Linda Ardnt were the two
5 designated co-lead detectives on the case,
6 JonBenet Ramsey case, true?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And then after Arndt was removed,
9 did Tom Wickman take that place, did he
10 become the lead detective?
11 A. Tom Wickman or Tom Trujillo?
12 Q. You tell me whether it was Wickman
13 or Trujillo.
14 A. No, because there was no real
15 designation at that point.
16 Q. Were you ever designated by the
17 department as the lead detective or co-lead
18 detective on the case?
19 A. There were four or five detectives
20 who were designated as primary detectives who
21 worked this case full time with no other
22 assignments.
23 Q. My question was were you ever
24 designated by the Boulder Police Department as
25 the lead detective or a co-lead detective on
233
1 the JonBenet Ramsey case?
2 A. No, after Ardnt left -- actually,
3 prior to Arndt leaving, that designation was
4 not being used in the manner you describe it.
5 Q. The two shootings that you were
6 involved in while you were with the Boulder
7 Police Department, do you know whether the
8 department itself investigated those two
9 shootings?
10 A. I don't know the inception of a
11 unit called the Boulder County Shoot Team,
12 when that came into being but it was either
13 investigated by the Boulder County Shoot Team
14 or the Boulder Police Department.
15 Q. Are you aware of any information
16 relating to Patsy Ramsey, Mr. Thomas, that
17 you consider to be incriminating with respect
18 to the death of her daughter that is not
19 included in your hardback or paperback book?
20 A. In a circumstantial case such as
21 this there are arguments that could be made
22 that there is a lot of other information
23 contained within the files of the Boulder
24 Police Department that didn't fit into -- in
25 this book.
234
1 Q. Thank you. But I want to know as
2 you sit here today whether you are prepared
3 to give me the benefit of any information
4 related to Patsy Ramsey that you, Steve
5 Thomas, consider to be incriminating with
6 respect to the death of her daughter that is
7 not included in either your hardback or
8 paperback book?
9 MR. DIAMOND: Can you do that
10 without reviewing --
11 A. Yeah, without reviewing --
12 MR. WOOD: Excuse me. Can I get
13 him to answer without you suggesting the
14 answer which would be totally inappropriate
15 and I don't think appreciated under the
16 Federal Rules or by the judge. Please answer
17 the question for me without being coached by
18 Mr. Diamond.
19 MR. DIAMOND: Mr. Thomas doesn't
20 need to be coached by me, sir.
21 MR. WOOD: Well, apparently then
22 you need to understand that, don't coach him.
23 Coach him during lunch, do it in the last
24 two days you had him.
25 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Answer my question,
235
1 sir. Is there any other information that as
2 you sit here today know that you consider
3 incriminating about Patsy Ramsey in terms of
4 her being involved in the death of her
5 daughter that you didn't include in your
6 book?
7 A. To answer that big question, I
8 would have to review my reports and the case
9 file to determine definitively if there are
10 items that were learned during the course of
11 the investigation that I didn't put in the
12 book.
13 Q. So you would be able to do that
14 if you can come up with this box of
15 materials when you go to look for it and you
16 find it, right?
17 A. Or if you can allow me inside the
18 Boulder Police Department, I'll do that for
19 you.
20 Q. I think -- while I might have a
21 better chance of getting the key to the
22 department than you might, I don't think
23 either one of us is going to get that short
24 of a court order but I'll certainly try and
25 if you would like to try maybe we can both
236
1 together do it; is that a deal?
2 A. Deal, Mr. Wood.
3 Q. Okay. We'll go in combined and
4 ask Beckner to open the door. I would love
5 to see it and I know you would, too. I'm
6 going to try and go through and ask you if
7 you would to take a look at your book --
8 well, before I do that, let me ask you a
9 couple of other things.
10 Who is Dr. Michael Graham?
11 A. The name Dr. Michael Graham
12 doesn't ring a bell with me right now.
13 Q. He was not a consultant hired by
14 the Boulder Police Department?
15 A. He may have been but I'm not
16 familiar with that person.
17 Q. You don't recall Dr. Michael
18 Graham taking the position that the pineapple
19 found in JonBenet's digestive system could
20 have been eaten the day before? Does that
21 refresh you in terms of Michael Graham's
22 involvement?
23 A. No, since you mentioned
24 pineapple --
25 Q. I didn't ask you -- I asked you
237
1 about Dr. Michael Graham.
2 A. I'm trying to answer the question.
3 Q. Well, my question is, does that
4 refresh you about Dr. Graham?
5 A. In that limited way, no.
6 Q. There was clearly an indication
7 from a member of the Boulder Police
8 Department that they found at least seven
9 doors and windows unlocked at the Ramsey home
10 on the morning of December 26, 1996. You
11 remember that, don't you?
12 A. I've heard that referred to. I
13 don't know -- what detective are you
14 referring to?
15 Q. Have you heard that, sir? Has
16 that not been part of a presentation made to
17 you?
18 A. By Lou Smit or Mr. DeMuth?
19 Q. Either one.
20 A. What presentation are you talking
21 about?
22 Q. There were two presentations, one
23 in May and one in June. You attended both,
24 true?
25 A. I did.
238
1 Q. You took notes, didn't you?
2 A. I may have.
3 Q. You paid careful attention to what
4 was being said, didn't you?
5 A. I believe so.
6 Q. Have you ever heard that there
7 were seven windows and doors found unlocked
8 in the Ramsey home on the morning of December
9 26, 1996?
10 A. I don't know who the source of
11 that is right now but I --
12 Q. I didn't ask you the source. I
13 asked you have you ever heard it, sir?
14 A. Yeah.
15 MR. DIAMOND: Have you heard that
16 from any source?
17 A. Yeah.
18 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) From someone
19 connected with the investigation, either in
20 the district attorney's office or the Boulder
21 Police Department?
22 A. Or courtesy of you and the media,
23 yeah, I believe I've heard that.
24 Q. Trust me, I wasn't there the
25 morning of the 26th and I didn't find the
239
1 status of the doors. I'm asking you
2 whether --
3 A. Nor was I, no.
4 Q. And I don't think I was around in
5 May or June when the presentations were made.
6 You heard that a Boulder police officer had
7 found as many as seven doors and windows
8 unlocked in that house on the morning of
9 December 26, 1996, hadn't you, sir?
10 A. You're sourcing that to a -- now
11 to a Boulder police officer detective and
12 that's not my recollection; DeMuth may have
13 said that.
14 Q. Do you think Trip DeMuth made it
15 up out of a whole cloth?
16 A. I don't know where Trip DeMuth
17 uncovered a lot of things in his
18 investigation.
19 Q. So you think that there was --
20 you feel like you can competently say that's
21 not true, that there were no doors found
22 unlocked or windows found unlocked that
23 morning?
24 A. I wasn't there that morning.
25 Q. Well, sir, you were not but you
240
1 have to rely, as you say earlier in your
2 testimony, on your fellow officers, right?
3 A. That's right.
4 Q. All right. Well, did you go back
5 and ever look to see if there were ever any
6 reports that would have indicated that there
7 were as many as seven windows and doors found
8 unlocked in that house that morning?
9 A. I'm not familiar with the
10 detective or the report you're speaking about.
11 Q. How about Officer Reichenbach, how
12 do you pronounce his name?
13 A. Reichenbach.
14 Q. Do you ever recall hearing about
15 what he said when he met with Dr. Henry Lee
16 in terms of whether there was snow on the
17 sidewalk of the house when he arrived that
18 morning?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. What did he say?
21 A. He said, and he also said this to
22 me, that although there was due to what I
23 think was an 11 degree temperature outside,
24 there was a fresh frost and maybe a light
25 dusting of snow on some of the lawn areas,
241
1 but on the sidewalks and walkways around the
2 house, as he put in his report, as I may
3 have put in one of my reports, as we
4 presented to the VIP conference, that you
5 could not tell whether or not somebody may
6 have walked on those walkways in question.
7 Q. Or the wood chips?
8 A. I don't recall specifically him
9 talking about the wood chips.
10 Q. Did you also get some information
11 from NOAA about whether or not there might
12 have been snow expected to be found on the
13 north and west sidewalks of the Ramsey home
14 on the morning of December 26th?
15 A. I think one detective may have
16 gotten that assignment.
17 Q. And that NOAA indicated they would
18 not have expected snow there; is that right?
19 A. I don't know the results of that
20 NOAA report.
21 Q. You would have had the ability to
22 look at them when you were there and
23 investigating the case, wouldn't you?
24 A. Yes, I don't -- as I said, I
25 don't recall seeing that NOAA report.
242
1 Q. What did the FBI tell you, the
2 Boulder Police Department, about the
3 credibility of Dr. Werner Spitz?
4 A. Dr. Spitz I believe was the
5 assignment of Detectives Trujillo, Wickman and
6 possibly Weinheimer.
7 Q. They didn't tell you that, did
8 they?
9 A. No, but I'm trying to answer the
10 question.
11 Q. I know but we have a limited
12 amount of time today but if we don't finish,
13 we can come back and finish another day. It
14 would be helpful I think if you try to focus
15 and stay on task with my question. I don't
16 mean to cut you off. You have the right to
17 explain the answer but we can move quicker if
18 we go directly to answering my question.
19 My question is, sir, did the FBI
20 to your knowledge make any statement to the
21 Boulder police about the credibility of Dr.
22 Werner Spitz?
23 A. No, to the contrary. I'm not
24 aware of any such statement. And to the
25 contrary, the detectives assigned to Dr. Spitz
243
1 thought the world of him and thought he was
2 entirely professional and credible and I never
3 heard anything attacking the credibility of
4 Spitz.
5 Q. At either presentation, it wasn't
6 said?
7 A. No, DeMuth's presentation, other
8 than attacking virtually everything, the VIP
9 presentation, I took that Spitz was an
10 esteemed forensic pathologist.
11 Q. Relying on your fellow officers
12 again, right?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. There was a Barbie nightgown found
15 in the wine cellar where JonBenet Ramsey's
16 body was found, right?
17 A. Right.
18 Q. Was there any evidence obtained
19 from that nightgown?
20 A. Not that I'm aware of prior to
21 departing August of '98.
22 Q. There was no fiber evidence that
23 you're aware of that was found on that
24 nightgown?
25 A. Not that Detective Trujillo shared
244
1 with me.
2 Q. Was there any blood evidence found
3 on that nightgown?
4 A. Not that I'm aware of.
5 Q. Any hair evidence found on that
6 nightgown, to your knowledge, firsthand or
7 secondhand?
8 A. Not that I'm aware of.
9 Q. Was there any decision made or
10 conclusion drawn, perhaps is the better way
11 to say it, that you're aware of, from any
12 source, as to whether the panties that
13 JonBenet Ramsey was found in had been worn
14 and washed in the past or were new, in
15 effect, fresh out of the package?
16 A. I believe that was after my
17 departure that that underwear investigation
18 took place.
19 Q. So, again, the state of the
20 evidence with respect to that issue, you do
21 not know, true?
22 A. Right.
23 Q. Do you know whether there were any
24 autopsy photos that showed JonBenet from the
25 standpoint of being able to look at it to
245
1 see whether or not the panties, not the other
2 articles of clothing, but the panties, fit
3 her or whether they were obviously not a
4 correct fit?
5 A. It's my belief from detective
6 briefings that they were referred to as
7 oversized floral panties.
8 Q. Thank you. Were there any autopsy
9 photos is my question?
10 A. Without the long-john over pants
11 covering the underwear, I don't recall seeing
12 any autopsy photos of just the child in her
13 underpants.
14 Q. Was there any other fibers found
15 on the duct tape, other than the fibers that
16 Mr. Hoffman had referred you to with respect
17 to Patsy Ramsey's sweater or jacket?
18 A. I believe so, yes.
19 Q. And it's also true that those
20 fibers were not capable or there was no
21 identification made, no source found in the
22 investigation, true?
23 A. When I left, I don't believe those
24 other fibers had been sourced.
25 Q. And, you know, without going and I
246
1 guess we could do it if we need to, maybe
2 we'll do it later but let's just for a
3 moment see if we can't generally agree, that
4 there were a considerable number of fibers
5 found on JonBenet Ramsey's body and articles
6 of clothing that were not in fact sourced by
7 the investigation, true?
8 A. Whether artifact or evidence, yeah,
9 there were a number of hair and fiber pieces
10 in this case that I know they, Trujillo and
11 CBI, were trying to source.
12 Q. And as of August of '98 had not
13 been able to do so, true?
14 A. That's my understanding.
15 Q. And CBI had at one point come up
16 with a conclusion that there was a
17 consistency between fibers found on a blanket
18 in the suitcase that matched fibers on
19 JonBenet's body or were consistent with, is
20 that the right term?
21 A. I heard Mr. Smit and Mr. DeMuth
22 refer to that but I didn't hear Trujillo ever
23 offer a report or an explanation concerning
24 that.
25 Q. But the FBI disagreed with the
247
1 CBI, didn't they?
2 A. On what point?
3 Q. On the question of whether there
4 were fibers inside materials found in the
5 suitcase found under the window in the
6 basement consistent with fibers found on
7 JonBenet?
8 A. No, I'm aware of Smit and DeMuth's
9 position or stating this consistency of these
10 fibers, but I'm not aware of a disagreement
11 between the FBI and that finding.
12 Q. In your entire law enforcement
13 career, Mr. Thomas, how many cases have you
14 been involved in where the law enforcement
15 authorities concluded that there was staging
16 with respect to a murder?
17 A. How many cases am I aware of?
18 Q. Let me ask you and if you would
19 please help us move along. Again, if we
20 don't finish today --
21 MR. DIAMOND: Your questions are
22 not easy. If he asks for you to repeat it
23 that is his right.
24 MR. WOOD: Judge Carnes can -- if
25 I'm not being clear let me read it back.
248
1 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) In your entire law
2 enforcement career, Mr. Thomas, how many cases
3 have you been involved in where law
4 enforcement authorities concluded that there
5 was staging with respect to a murder?
6 A. None that I can think of.
7 Q. And is it your term that the
8 ransom note found in the Ramsey home, have
9 you been one to describe it as the War and
10 Peace of all ransom notes?
11 A. I did not originate that term, but
12 I've heard that and used it, yes.
13 Q. This would be the War and Peace
14 of all staging with respect to JonBenet
15 Ramsey, wouldn't it, sir, if it's a staged
16 crime scene?
17 A. Well, I'm relying on the FBI
18 experts who analyze these cases every day for
19 a living and it was their conclusion that
20 there was staging in this crime scene.
21 Q. They just -- strike that.
22 The FBI that you rely on also,
23 though, told you that they have not any
24 reported incident of a parent garroting a
25 child to death; that's what the FBI told you
249
1 about the garrote, true?
2 A. With a ransom note present and an
3 apparent botched kidnapping where the body was
4 found in the victim's home, that is correct.
5 Q. Is it your testimony, then, that
6 there are cases that the FBI has in their
7 files where a parent has garroted a child,
8 has strangled to death a child by use of a
9 garrote; is that your testimony?
10 A. No, my testimony is I don't know
11 what the FBI has in their files concerning
12 their investigation or review of child
13 homicides.
14 Q. Did you ever ask about whether
15 there was any prior case that you could study
16 where a parent had used a garrote to strangle
17 a child; did you ever ask the FBI that?
18 A. I don't recall personally asking
19 them that.
20 Q. Do you know whether anybody in the
21 Boulder Police Department investigation ever
22 made that inquiry to the FBI?
23 A. There were several trips and
24 inquiries and phone calls and meetings with
25 the FBI. And I don't know, but it would
250
1 sound reasonable that one would ask that.
2 Q. If one asked, no one ever gave
3 you the answer and you didn't find out about
4 it, right?
5 A. They did explain that they have
6 seen cases in which parents have feloniously
7 slain their own children in any number of
8 ways. If garroting was one of those, I'm
9 unaware of that.
10 Q. Wouldn't that be something you
11 would want to know since you have a garrote
12 involved in this case?
13 A. Let me answer it simply. Again,
14 I don't know of the FBI, have any knowledge
15 firsthand or secondhand, denying or confirming
16 the use of a garrote in a previous child
17 homicide.
18 Q. I think I understand you. The
19 red fibers, we're talking about the red
20 fibers off the duct tape, right, the ones
21 that Mr. Hoffman asked you about?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. That were consistent or a likely
24 match with Patsy Ramsey's jacket?
25 A. Yes.
251
1 Q. That was the red and black and
2 gray jacket that she was wearing?
3 A. I've always heard it referred to
4 as a red and black jacket, yes.
5 Q. It's the one in the photograph,
6 though, that was produced where they went
7 back a year afterwards and tried to find what
8 they were wearing, right?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Were you aware of the fact that
11 Priscilla White owned an identical jacket,
12 that in fact Patsy Ramsey bought her jacket
13 because she liked Priscilla White's so much?
14 A. Until you told me that right now,
15 no.
16 Q. So I assume that no request, that
17 you're aware of, was ever made for the Whites
18 to give articles of clothing with respect to
19 this investigation?
20 A. They may have been asked to give
21 clothing; I'm unaware of that.
22 Q. There were no black fibers that
23 were found on the duct tape that were said
24 to be consistent with the fibers on Patsy
25 Ramsey's red and black jacket, were there?
252
1 A. It's my understanding that the
2 four fibers were red in color.
3 Q. Did you find Melody Stanton to be
4 a credible witness in terms of hearing a
5 scream of a child sometime around midnight?
6 A. I wish I could have talked to
7 her. I never talked to Melody Stanton.
8 Q. Did the Boulder Police Department
9 consider her to be credible?
10 A. This collective Boulder Police
11 Department, I don't know what their opinion
12 was of her, but certainly Detective Hartkopp
13 interviewed her and whether or not he found
14 her to be credible, you would have to ask
15 him. But apparently so, he never said
16 anything to the contrary.
17 Q. In your scenario that Mr. Hoffman
18 had you read into the record, your
19 description of the death of JonBenet Ramsey,
20 do you include in that description as
21 accurate that there was a scream as described
22 by Melody Stanton?
23 A. According to an ear witness,
24 Melody Stanton.
25 Q. So the answer is yes?
253
1 A. If the question is, was there a
2 scream and do I believe there was a scream
3 that this witness heard, yes.
4 Q. All right. In your description of
5 how JonBenet Ramsey died, you have made it
6 clear both in your book and in your national
7 television appearances that John Ramsey was
8 not involved, right?
9 A. It's my belief that John Ramsey
10 was not involved in this crime, you're right.
11 Q. Right. And that it was sometime,
12 as I understand your description of the
13 events, the next morning when he was studying
14 the ransom note that he became suspicious and
15 perhaps concluded, you say, that his wife was
16 involved, right?
17 A. That's what I purport in my
18 hypothesis.
19 Q. What did John Ramsey tell you
20 about who went to bed first on the evening
21 of December 25, 1996?
22 A. It's a big transcript. I would
23 have to review it.
24 Q. You don't know that?
25 A. Who went to bed first?
254
1 Q. Yeah.
2 A. In the Ramsey family?
3 Q. Yeah, between John and Patsy.
4 A. I would have to review my report
5 or I would have to review the transcript of
6 that Q and A.
7 Q. How about do you know as you sit
8 here today who got up first that morning?
9 MR. DIAMOND: According to John
10 Ramsey?
11 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) What the Boulder
12 Police Department concluded. In your -- let
13 me tell you in your description of how
14 JonBenet Ramsey was killed, what was your
15 position about whether Patsy Ramsey was in
16 bed or out of bed that morning when John
17 Ramsey got up?
18 A. Well, without reviewing multiple
19 transcripts and reports, I don't recall the
20 -- the Ramseys made several inconsistent
21 statements --
22 Q. About who got up first?
23 A. If I could finish my answer.
24 Q. Well, if you could stay on track,
25 it would be helpful.
255
1 MR. DIAMOND: Finish your answer.
2 MR. WOOD: Please make it
3 responsive to my question about the issue
4 about who got out of bed first that morning.
5 MR. DIAMOND: If you find his
6 answer to be non responsive, your remedy, I
7 believe, under the Federal Rules is to move
8 to strike it and I believe that --
9 MR. WOOD: I appreciate you
10 informing me of the Federal Rules. Now I
11 know that you do know that some of things
12 you're doing is not in accordance with the
13 Federal Rules in terms of your statements on
14 the record.
15 MR. DIAMOND: I'm only trying to
16 do you a favor.
17 MR. WOOD: Thank you. I don't
18 need your favors, but I appreciate them
19 anyway.
20 MR. DIAMOND: Is the question
21 withdrawn or can he finish his answer?
22 MR. WOOD: I want to go back and
23 make sure we're on task by restating it. So
24 I'll withdraw it and restate it.
25 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) I'm asking you,
256
1 Mr. Thomas, what was your position in your
2 description of this child's murder as to
3 whether Patsy Ramsey was in bed or out of
4 bed when John Ramsey woke the morning of
5 December 26, 1996?
6 A. From John Ramsey's account?
7 Q. I'm asking you, sir, what was your
8 position in your description of this child's
9 murder as to whether Patsy Ramsey was in bed
10 or out of bed when John Ramsey woke the
11 morning of December 26th?
12 A. I believe I write in my hypothesis
13 that she was out of bed.
14 Q. She would have to be, wouldn't
15 she? If you believe that John Ramsey, as
16 you say you do, is not in any way involved,
17 you would have to believe a couple of things,
18 that she had not gone to bed when John went
19 to bed, and that when John woke up, she was
20 already -- she was not in bed.
21 And you would have to believe one
22 other thing, wouldn't you, detective, former
23 detective, that John Ramsey didn't hear the
24 scream at midnight, right?
25 A. You have a series of five phrases
257
1 and questions --
2 Q. Let me break them down one at a
3 time. Listen carefully to me. Under your
4 position of the description of this child's
5 murder, John Ramsey did not hear the screams
6 described by Melody Stanton, right?
7 A. He never indicated, as far as I
8 know, that he heard the scream of a child.
9 Q. If he was as you say he was,
10 totally uninvolved in the murder of his
11 daughter, he didn't hear the scream, did he,
12 because if he had heard the scream, you would
13 have expected that he would have reacted to
14 it or been certainly willing to tell you
15 about it?
16 MR. DIAMOND: Objection.
17 Argumentative. You may answer.
18 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) If he's innocent
19 as you say he is?
20 MR. DIAMOND: Objection.
21 Argumentative. You may answer.
22 A. One could speculate that he would
23 have heard a scream from within the house.
24 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) You will concede
25 that in fact Melody Stanton may be right that
258
1 the scream occurred and that John Ramsey did
2 not hear it, you would concede that as a
3 possibility supported by your description of
4 the events, right?
5 A. It is a possibility, yes.
6 Q. And it is more consistent with
7 your statements about John Ramsey's
8 uninvolvement than it would be consistent with
9 the idea that he was involved; can we agree
10 on that?
11 A. I don't understand your question.
12 MR. DIAMOND: I don't either.
13 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Do you understand
14 it, just so we make sure?
15 MR. RAWLS: Got it, I'm on it.
16 MR. WOOD: Thank you. I kind of
17 figured that nobody on that side of the table
18 would understand it but everybody on this
19 side would.
20 MR. DIAMOND: Can we ask Sean?
21 MR. SMITH: I think Sean has
22 already taken his position that he doesn't
23 understand any of my questions. I've dealt
24 with him too long. He's never going to
25 acknowledge that any of them are
259
1 understandable.
2 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) When was Steven
3 Pitt hired?
4 A. I don't know if Pitt came to the
5 investigation through the district attorney's
6 office or through Sergeant Wickman but I
7 recall Mr. -- or Dr. Pitt being on scene or
8 being in Boulder, being involved with the
9 investigation was it summer of 1997 maybe. I
10 don't know for sure.
11 Q. Was there any plan or strategy on
12 the part of Boulder Police Department or any
13 other law enforcement agencies to try to put
14 pressure on the Ramseys through the public?
15 A. I think so.
16 Q. And wasn't that part of what
17 Steven Pitt was there to do?
18 A. I don't know what his employment
19 agreement or what his motivations were for
20 being there, but he certainly offered advice.
21 Q. On that issue?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And isn't it true that Lou Smit's
24 approach to build a bridge with the Ramseys
25 really was in conflict with the Boulder
260
1 Police Department's strategy of putting public
2 pressure on them?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And the FBI was involved, Bill
5 Hagmaier, who I happened to know from Richard
6 Jewell's case?
7 A. Great guy.
8 Q. Yeah, wrong on Richard Jewell,
9 wrong on Ramsey, that's consistent.
10 Mr. Hagmaier was involved in the formulation
11 of this plan of public pressure on the
12 Ramseys, wasn't he?
13 A. I believe there were discussions
14 with the FBI, yes, about how to exert some
15 public pressure on people who are not
16 cooperating, yes.
17 Q. Part of that was to try to
18 portray them clearly to the public as being
19 uncooperative and therefor appearing to be
20 possibly involved in the death of their
21 daughter, right?
22 A. I think it was two different
23 things. I don't think they were necessarily
24 trying to further paint them as uncooperative.
25 I think they were using the media to get
261
1 them back in to help us with the case.
2 Q. Were they also thinking that they
3 might use the media to apply pressure so that
4 there might be a possibility that one of the
5 parents might confess involvement in the
6 crime? Was that ever discussed?
7 A. That may have been -- that may
8 have been some motivations.
9 Q. Do you believe from your
10 recollections that that was discussed?
11 A. I wouldn't disagree with it. I
12 don't have any concise, clear recollection of
13 a conversation like that.
14 Q. Did you ever review reports of the
15 officers that were with John and Patsy Ramsey
16 on a 24-seven basis from the time of the
17 discovery of JonBenet's murder up until the
18 time they left to go to Atlanta for her
19 burial? Did those officers provide the
20 department with reports?
21 A. At least some did, yes.
22 Q. Did those reports contain
23 discussions of the Ramseys' actions, conduct,
24 and just conversations?
25 A. Yes.
262
1 Q. Those officers were there not only
2 to possibly protect the Ramseys; they were
3 there clearly also to have the Ramseys under
4 24-seven surveillance to ascertain what they
5 might say that might be incriminatory, right?
6 A. Some of that; most of it was
7 prior to my involvement in the case so I
8 don't know what their instruction was.
9 Q. What do you believe from your
10 review of the records in terms of the reports
11 that these officers compiled?
12 A. Certainly 24-seven security but
13 these officers weren't going to ignore any
14 statements or comments by anyone that may be
15 incriminating.
16 Q. These officers weren't sitting
17 outside the door guarding the house. They
18 were literally, as you know from the reports,
19 they were right there in the room with the
20 Ramseys, right next to them 24-seven, weren't
21 they?
22 A. I believe so.
23 Q. Which points a little bit more
24 towards surveillance than guarding them,
25 doesn't it, sir?
263
1 A. In your mind maybe; I don't know,
2 I wasn't there.
3 Q. What about in your mind when you
4 reviewed the reports particularly since you
5 had the benefit of the substance of what
6 these officers were saying?
7 A. As I said, it's my belief that
8 they were there 24-seven as security but also
9 they certainly weren't going to ignore any
10 statements. You might ask John Eller about
11 that.
12 Q. Well, if I have the opportunity he
13 and a lot of others I would ask. You don't
14 know who ordered the guards 24-seven, do you,
15 or the surveillance 24-seven, whichever the
16 case may be, or some combination of it?
17 A. I think John Eller.
18 Q. And from your review of the
19 reports, do you have a recollection of seeing
20 anything unusual about the family's comments
21 or conduct from these 24-seven police officers
22 who were filing reports about them?
23 A. Yes, I remember they included in
24 their narrative verbatim quotes made by the
25 Ramseys and others.
264
1 Q. Do you recall any of those quotes?
2 A. I remember, I think it was in
3 Chromiak's report about Patsy and her sisters
4 praying, in another report Patsy making a
5 comment that she didn't want to live anymore,
6 didn't have a reason to live anymore. The
7 comings and goings of the Ramseys, just a
8 general recollection along those lines.
9 Q. Nothing in that that I'm hearing
10 that sounds incriminatory, wouldn't you agree?
11 A. Again, without reviewing the
12 reports, that's what comes to me off the top
13 of my mind.
14 Q. Let me ask you about that. How
15 many cases have you been involved in where
16 you were analyzing the demeanor and conduct
17 of parents who had a child found murdered in
18 their home; what was your experience in that
19 type of a case?
20 A. None.
21 Q. Do you have any experience, formal
22 training, in how psychologically or otherwise
23 one expects a parent to grieve when a child
24 has been murdered?
25 A. No.
265
1 Q. You met many times with Fleet
2 White, didn't you?
3 A. I did.
4 Q. And it was your responsibility and
5 I'm sure you carried it out in terms of
6 reporting because I think you get the record
7 so far at least as of August of 1998 you had
8 filed more reports than anybody on this case,
9 did you know that?
10 A. I believe so.
11 Q. And every time you met with Fleet
12 White either because he was and he was a
13 suspect himself, was he not?
14 A. Again, that ambiguous suspect
15 label, yes.
16 Q. And either because he was a
17 suspect as that term is used by the Boulder
18 Police Department or because he was a
19 witness, each and every time you met with him
20 and had discussions with him it was your duty
21 and responsibility to prepare a report about
22 it, true?
23 A. Not necessarily.
24 Q. Why not?
25 A. Well, initially he wasn't my
266
1 assignment. I think Linda Ardnt shouldered a
2 lot of that. And then after she was removed
3 from the case, Detective Jane Harmer --
4 Q. I'm not asking about Harmer. I'm
5 asking about you, Mr. Thomas. I don't need
6 to know about Harmer and Arndt. They can
7 answer themselves. I want to know if you
8 made reports on each of your meetings with
9 Mr. White. That's my question. Maybe you
10 didn't understand that one.
11 MR. WOOD: Despite that
12 interruption, you may continue with your
13 answer.
14 THE DEPONENT: Thank you.
15 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Yeah, answer about
16 your contacts with Mr. White and whether you
17 made reports on each of those or not?
18 MR. DIAMOND: You asked him why.
19 He was explain' -- answering the why
20 question.
21 MR. WOOD: I asked him why --
22 you're right. I asked him why he did not
23 make a report, why he did not make a report.
24 MR. DIAMOND: Thank you. And
25 he's about to tell you that if you just let
267
1 him finish.
2 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) I assume what
3 you're telling me is because of Arndt and
4 Harmer somehow what they did, that's why you
5 didn't do reports?
6 MR. DIAMOND: Why don't you listen
7 to the answer, then you won't have to assume.
8 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Why don't you
9 answer my question about why you didn't
10 prepare reports when you had contacts with
11 Mr. White and then we can move to another
12 question.
13 MR. DIAMOND: You can now finish
14 your answer, if you haven't completed it.
15 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Maybe now you can
16 answer.
17 A. Detective Harmer inherited I think
18 the Fleet and Priscilla White assignment, if
19 you will, and was friends with them,
20 compassionate to them trying to do her job as
21 a police detective. When she introduced me
22 then at some later date to the Whites, I
23 completed and prepared reports on contacts,
24 meetings, interviews that I felt were relevant
25 at the time certainly and did so concerning
268
1 the Whites. But every time I either spoke
2 or met with these people, no, I did not
3 complete a written report.
4 Q. Give me your best recollection
5 percentage-wise of how many times
6 percentage-wise you think you may have
7 prepared reports with meetings with Fleet
8 White or Priscilla White, half the time, 75
9 percent of the time, 90 percent of the time,
10 what is your best estimate?
11 A. I don't know how many reports I
12 completed and I don't know how many times I
13 met with them, but completed several reports
14 I'm sure concerning the Whites and met with
15 them a number of more times in which I
16 didn't. So half, a quarter, I don't know.
17 Q. So there may be as many as half
18 to 75 percent or 25 to 50 percent of the
19 times you met with them where we couldn't
20 find a report and find out what you all
21 discussed or what they said to you?
22 A. As I said, I don't know. I'm
23 trying to answer your question as far as a
24 percentage goes.
25 Q. I take it if they gave you any
269
1 significant information as it would apply to
2 the investigation of JonBenet's murder you
3 would have prepared a report, true?
4 A. And I did at times.
5 Q. So we can at least know that any
6 meeting you had with Priscilla White or Fleet
7 White by phone, in person or otherwise, if
8 there was any significant information about
9 the case, you would have prepared a report,
10 true?
11 A. Most likely, yes.
12 Q. Why would you not, if they had
13 given you significant information about the
14 case, why would you not prepare a report?
15 A. Well, again at the time and
16 standing in those shoes, you know, three,
17 four years ago, if it was significant at the
18 time and I brought it back to the police
19 department and it was significant, yes,
20 absolutely I think I would prepare a report.
21 Q. Fleet White tell you that when he
22 was downstairs in the basement with John
23 Ramsey that John Ramsey went into the wine
24 cellar room and turned on what he called a
25 neon light and then cried out, my baby; did
270
1 Fleet White tell you that?
2 A. As to the matter of flipping on
3 the light --
4 Q. Yes, sir.
5 A. -- yeah, I don't recall that.
6 Q. Do you have any knowledge as you
7 sit here today to deny it?
8 A. I would look at my report before
9 I gave you a definitive answer.
10 Q. Whose idea was it to go down to
11 the basement first after Linda Arndt suggested
12 to Fleet White that she ought to keep John
13 busy and they could go search the house.
14 And as I recall, Fleet White didn't really
15 want to go tell John that himself and asked
16 Linda Arndt to suggest it to him. Does that
17 scenario sound familiar to you and accurate?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Not at all?
20 A. No, sir.
21 Q. How is it inaccurate?
22 A. Detective Arndt's description of
23 that was that she gathered Fleet White to
24 occupy a distracted John Ramsey to keep his
25 mind busy and instructed him to search the
271
1 house in her words from top to bottom. Upon
2 which time Arndt's recollection to me was
3 that it was Ramsey who led the two men
4 downstairs.
5 Q. What was Fleet White's recollection
6 to you about who made the decision to start
7 down in the basement?
8 A. I don't know that -- again,
9 without reviewing my reports and my interview
10 with Fleet, but that's not today, consistent
11 -- no, Fleet White hasn't indicated to me
12 that he was the leader going downstairs.
13 Q. Are you telling me if Linda Arndt
14 says, listen, I want you two guys to go over
15 here and I want you to search this house
16 from top to bottom, you think that was -- is
17 to be interpreted as saying I want you to
18 start at the top and go to the bottom or
19 does that really say I want you to search
20 this entire place? What do you think is the
21 more reasonable way to interpret that
22 statement search the house top to bottom?
23 A. You would have to ask Linda
24 Arndt --
25 Q. You said you did?
272
1 A. -- but her -- I did and her
2 comment to me was, quote, From top to bottom
3 and the indication I took away from it was
4 that her instruction was to search the house
5 from top to bottom.
6 THE DEPONENT: Chuck, can we take
7 a break?
8 MR. DIAMOND: When you get to a
9 convenient stopping point.
10 MR. WOOD: If he wants it take a
11 break I'm fine. We will take it right now.
12 THE DEPONENT: Thank you.
13 MR. WOOD: Any time you want to
14 do that, Mr. Thomas, don't hesitate to ask.
15 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is
16 2:57. We're going off the record.
17 (Recess taken from 2:57 p.m. to
18 3:05 p.m.)
19 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is
20 3:05. We're back on the record.
21 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Mr. Thomas, were
22 the sheets on JonBenet's bed collected on the
23 26th of December for forensic testing?
24 A. I was told they were.
25 Q. And what tests were performed on
273
1 them?
2 A. I don't know. Detective Trujillo
3 had that assignment.
4 Q. Was there any test that you're
5 aware of that indicated the presence of urine
6 on those sheets?
7 A. Detective Trujillo imparted to me
8 that he had learned or believed that there
9 was not a presumptive test for urine
10 according to the CBI.
11 Q. Were they wet?
12 A. When?
13 Q. That morning. Did --
14 A. Unknown.
15 Q. -- you ask? Did you ask any of
16 the officers there, hey, by the way, were the
17 sheets on JonBenet's bed wet? Did you ask
18 that question of anybody?
19 A. I did not.
20 Q. Do you know if anybody else did?
21 A. I don't know.
22 Q. You don't know the answer to
23 whether they were wet or not?
24 A. I have been told that they were
25 urine stained.
274
1 Q. Who told you they were urine
2 stained?
3 A. Detective Trujillo, Detective
4 Wickman.
5 Q. Have you seen the photographs of
6 the sheets?
7 A. It depends on which photographs
8 you're talking about.
9 Q. Of her sheets, of the bed.
10 MR. DIAMOND: Have you seen any.
11 A. Crime scene photographs, yes.
12 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Did they say they
13 could smell urine?
14 A. I have been told that CBI says,
15 yes, those sheets which are still in evidence
16 smell urine stained.
17 Q. And did they stain because --
18 well, you don't have kids, but I don't know
19 if you've ever had a bed-wetting accident but
20 when you have children one day you'll
21 probably know this to be true, urine stained
22 sheets, were these stained, have you seen
23 them?
24 A. I have not seen the sheets.
25 Q. I mean, you write -- you have
275
1 written in your book that JonBenet wet the
2 bed. What I want to know is what evidence
3 supports that statement that you are aware of
4 and that you found out about?
5 A. Urine stained sheets, the plastic
6 bed fitting and the diapers halfway out of
7 the cabinet.
8 Q. The diapers had urine on them?
9 A. That's not what I said.
10 Q. Well, I'm -- diaper halfway out of
11 the cabinet shows that the sheets were wet or
12 that she wet the bed?
13 A. No, I think you asked me what led
14 me to believe that she may have wet the bed.
15 Q. Well, I mean it seems to me that
16 the answer is pretty simple. Did you ever
17 go look at the sheets? They were there for
18 your viewing if you wanted to, weren't they?
19 A. No, they were at CBI.
20 Q. You could have picked up the phone
21 and asked somebody at CBI about the test on
22 them, couldn't you?
23 A. No, Detective Trujillo told us.
24 Q. Did you ever see the written
25 report on that finding by CBI?
276
1 A. I don't know that CBI did a
2 report on whether or not the sheets were
3 urine stained.
4 Q. Surely you're not telling me that
5 the CBI's forensic testers performed, the only
6 test was to smell and look at the sheets?
7 A. As I said, I have been told that
8 there is not a presumptive test for urine.
9 Q. How about for the substances that
10 make up or are found in urine?
11 A. I have no training or knowledge of
12 that.
13 Q. How big was the area of the
14 sheets where they were urine stained or wet?
15 A. I don't know.
16 Q. Isn't there something that
17 describes that, a report?
18 A. Urine stained sheets according to
19 Trujillo.
20 Q. Take a look at page 146 of your
21 book, please. Down at the paragraph that
22 starts "John Meyer." Do you follow me?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. "John Meyer, the Boulder County
25 coroner, had barely begun his autopsy findings
277
1 before Lee questioned the urine stains found
2 on the crotch of the long-john pants and the
3 panties beneath them." Have I read that
4 correctly?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. To put this into context, this
7 would have been during the VIP explanation or
8 conference, right?
9 A. No, I don't believe so.
10 Q. I'm sorry, when do you believe
11 this event took place where Meyer was going
12 through the autopsy findings where Henry Lee
13 was present?
14 A. I believe this was in 1997 at the
15 Boulder Police Department.
16 Q. Do you know when in 1997?
17 A. My best guess would be maybe
18 March, February.
19 Q. Reading on. "Were there
20 corresponding stains on the bed sheets? We
21 didn't know, although when the crime became a
22 murder instead of a kidnapping, those sheets
23 should have been promptly collected for
24 testing." Have I read that correctly?
25 A. Yes.
278
1 Q. Well, you didn't know in February,
2 are you telling me that you found out
3 subsequent in time that the sheets were wet?
4 When did you find out,
5 Mr. Thomas --
6 MR. DIAMOND: Go ahead.
7 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Let me -- why
8 don't you just tell me, when did you first
9 find out that the sheets were wet?
10 A. I do not think the sheets were
11 collected promptly. I think it was after the
12 fact. And one of the questions of this
13 investigation was that no one had checked the
14 bed on the morning of the 26th prior to a
15 wet bed possibly drying whether or not the
16 bed was wet. But the sheets nonetheless were
17 collected and described to me as being urine
18 stained and just recently saw something
19 corroborating that when Mr. Smit appeared on
20 the Today Show and there was a comment from
21 the CBI about that.
22 Q. Traces of creatinine were found;
23 is that what you're talking about?
24 A. I don't think that is what they
25 said on the NBC show.
279
1 Q. What did they say?
2 A. I think it said a CBI source said
3 the sheets were or appeared to be urine
4 stained.
5 Q. Let's go back and find out not so
6 much what NBC was talking about. Let's find
7 out what the police knew. Were the sheets
8 collected on December 26th, 1996 or not?
9 A. They were -- I don't know. I
10 wasn't there.
11 Q. What did you find out about it?
12 A. That at some point during the ten
13 days subsequent to December 26, 1996, when
14 the house was a crime scene, those sheets
15 were collected.
16 Q. At such time as they would have,
17 if wet, been dry; is that what you're telling
18 me?
19 A. Possibly.
20 Q. What was your understanding as to
21 Chris Wolf's employment at the time you first
22 began to investigate him in January of 1997?
23 A. Again, as I said, just what Jackie
24 Dilson had supplied verbally.
25 Q. What was that?
280
1 A. And that was, I think she
2 described him as either a current or a
3 one-time exotic dancer.
4 Q. What did she say that meant? Did
5 you say what does an exotic dancer do, Ms.
6 Dilson; did you ask her that?
7 A. No; I assumed it was a stripper.
8 Q. Did you ever to your knowledge
9 with the Boulder Police Department while
10 thoroughly investigating Mr. Wolf ever obtain
11 any indication that he might have been
12 involved in illegal sexual acts for money?
13 A. Again, he wasn't cooperative with
14 me and Gosage in our attempt, so I don't
15 know that.
16 Q. But you stayed on him for a year
17 according to your book?
18 A. He remained on this list, if you
19 will, for approximately a year.
20 Q. And you stayed on him because you
21 put up with Jackie Dilson for a year you
22 said in your book, didn't you?
23 A. Two parts, yes, I put up with
24 Jackie Dilson for a year, but Chris Wolf was
25 -- that assignment was reassigned.
281
1 Q. Well, but again relying on your
2 other police officers, did you ever learn
3 anything about any information compiled by the
4 thorough investigation efforts on Chris Wolf
5 that would in any way indicate that Mr. Wolf
6 might have performed such acts as, let's say,
7 go into an all-male strip party and allowing
8 members at the party, men, to perform oral
9 sex on him?
10 A. No, if you're suggesting if I was
11 aware that there were allegations that
12 Mr. Wolf was engaged in male prostitution or
13 hustling, I was unaware of that until now.
14 Q. I'm not making an allegation. I'm
15 asking you what your investigation found. I
16 am asking you if there was any indication of
17 any such conduct by Mr. Wolf. Any indication
18 that Mr. Wolf ever worked at a photography
19 company where he took pictures of children,
20 team sports ages as young as four to 15, 14,
21 15 years of age; did you get any information
22 about that?
23 A. Again, I was not successful with
24 my attempts at interviewing Mr. Wolf, so, no,
25 I did not know that.
282
1 Q. Did you ever ask -- in the
2 thorough investigation, though, that your
3 officers that you rely on conducted, did you
4 ever find out whether there was any
5 indication that Mr. Wolf might be a user of
6 illegal drugs at the time frame of '94, '95,
7 '96?
8 A. Again, I have told you, I don't
9 know the breadth or depth of Weinheimer's
10 investigation prior to clearing him.
11 Q. But relying on Weinheimer in this
12 case and others as you did, right --
13 A. (Deponent nods head.)
14 Q. -- you would have fully expected
15 Detective Weinheimer in a thorough
16 investigation to get those kinds of
17 information, or at least to get details about
18 Mr. Wolf's lifestyle and prior employment and
19 questions about whether he used drugs. Those
20 would be part of a thorough investigation
21 into this man's background, wouldn't they,
22 sir?
23 A. He may have.
24 Q. Isn't that what you expected him
25 to do?
283
1 A. Possibly unless he had other
2 reasons to discount Mr. Wolf.
3 Q. Well, sir, if you had been in
4 charge of Mr. Wolf's investigation that you
5 say you were not, if he had been assigned to
6 you, you would have gone back and done that
7 type of a thorough background investigation,
8 wouldn't you?
9 A. Not necessarily, Mr. Wood. If,
10 for example, in the first day, a detective
11 was able to corroborate an alibi for
12 Mr. Wolf, then you likely would not have gone
13 to all this extra trouble.
14 Q. Except here you know that would be
15 impossible since the only alibi he could have
16 offered would be to have been in the house
17 with a woman who thought he was involved in
18 the murder?
19 A. No. Because Ms. Dilson made that
20 allegation. I did not have his side of the
21 story. He may very well have put himself at
22 a different location with an independent
23 witness.
24 Q. Apparently that hadn't happened
25 here because you know that into 1998 Mr. Wolf
284
1 was still being investigated by the Boulder
2 Police Department as a suspect in this case
3 giving non-testimonial evidence, hair, fiber,
4 handwriting, right?
5 A. Correct.
6 Q. That would indicate the alibi
7 didn't get him off the hook in terms of
8 investigation for over a year, wouldn't it,
9 sir?
10 A. Correct.
11 MR. DIAMOND: You're assuming
12 there was an alibi. I don't know if there
13 is any mention of that --
14 MR. WOOD: Yeah, I'm just
15 following up on the question of whether he
16 speculated there might be an alibi. Listen,
17 we don't need to waste time, you know.
18 You've got somewhere to be at 6:30 in terms
19 of some friends picking you up. Let's go
20 ahead.
21 MR. DIAMOND: Thank you.
22 MR. WOOD: I'm trying to make
23 that time frame.
24 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Did you interview
25 Linda Arndt at any time subsequent to the
285
1 murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
2 A. Successfully and at times
3 unsuccessfully, yes.
4 Q. In the successful interviews, did
5 you prepare reports?
6 A. No.
7 Q. Would that be because there was
8 nothing significant said to you during those
9 interviews by her?
10 A. Typically police don't prepare, at
11 least it's been my experience, prepare reports
12 when simply speaking to or asking for a
13 clarification from a fellow officer.
14 Q. I was talking about an interview
15 more than a clarification.
16 A. No, did I ever sit down with her
17 for a formal interview? No.
18 Q. Did you ever try to?
19 A. No, when I had questions, it was
20 fairly routine just to go to the detective in
21 question and make your inquiry.
22 Q. Has Fleet White ever made any
23 statement to you about his opinion on who
24 killed JonBenet Ramsey?
25 A. Mr. White has always been very
286
1 careful with his language around me, as is
2 his wife and I don't know that I could sit
3 here and say today that he has come out and
4 made a declaration as to who he believes
5 killed JonBenet Ramsey. But the tone and
6 inferences of some of these conversations made
7 it fairly clear to me.
8 Q. You think you understood from the
9 tone and inferences what he was trying to say
10 but not saying directly; is that your
11 testimony?
12 A. I think I believe that I know who
13 Fleet has in mind as the offender in this
14 case.
15 Q. Why don't you just ask him?
16 A. I did not, that I recall, ask him
17 outright who he thought did it.
18 Q. I mean, you've talked to him since
19 you left the Boulder Police Department,
20 haven't you?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. When is the last time you talked
23 with Fleet White?
24 A. I think I last saw them in
25 probably July or August of 2000 and then
287
1 again had a pleasant hallway conversation in
2 Jefferson County, Colorado, outside a
3 courtroom in the last couple months.
4 Q. What was the nature of your seeing
5 him in July of 2000?
6 A. A personal visit.
7 Q. Personal, but tell me, please, if
8 you would, the nature of the visit?
9 A. I think I had finished a carpentry
10 job up on -- in that part of the world and
11 in the late afternoon or early evening, drove
12 by their house to say hello and they invited
13 me to stay for dinner.
14 Q. Drinks?
15 A. I don't really drink.
16 Q. Whether you really drink or not --
17 most people either drink or they don't drink.
18 I don't know about I don't really drink.
19 That sounds like you might occasionally take
20 a glass of wine or drink, I don't know. Do
21 you?
22 A. I won't drink three beers in a
23 year's time.
24 Q. Did you have a glass of wine with
25 the Whites that night you had dinner?
288
1 A. No.
2 Q. Did they?
3 A. I don't know whether or not they
4 had alcohol.
5 Q. How many times do you think you've
6 seen them on a social basis since you left
7 the department in August of 1998?
8 A. Two or three maybe.
9 Q. And one was the dinner in July of
10 2000. What were the other two occasions?
11 A. Post resignation in August of '98,
12 maybe a time or two in 1999, I'm not sure.
13 Q. What were the occasions? You had
14 dinner one time. What were the other social
15 occasions; do you recall what they were?
16 A. That was the only time I ever ate
17 with the people.
18 Q. What were the other social
19 occasions, sir, what did you do with them?
20 A. Probably just stopped by their
21 house and said hello. I didn't meet them at
22 other locations.
23 Q. Do you consider Fleet and
24 Priscilla White personal friends of yours?
25 A. I don't know how I would
289
1 characterize these people who I have a lot of
2 compassion for.
3 Q. Do you know what you consider
4 someone -- do you know what it is to
5 consider someone a personal friend of yours?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Do they fall in that category or
8 not?
9 A. It's an unusual characterization.
10 I have never had a relationship with somebody
11 that I met wearing one hat and continued that
12 in this context. So if you're asking me am
13 I friendly and would I consider myself
14 friends with these people, yes.
15 Q. Look at page 25 of your book for
16 me if you would, please, Mr. Thomas. Right
17 here (indicating) kind of give you a visual.
18 MR. DIAMOND: Do you see that,
19 Darnay?
20 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) "In the sun room
21 Patsy Ramsey examined a second-generation
22 photocopy of the ransom note, a smeary
23 version that showed little more than the dark
24 printed words. Rather than commenting on the
25 words and contents, she told one of her
290
1 friends that the note was written on the same
2 kind of paper she had in her kitchen."
3 Have I read that correctly?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Who was the friend that she told
6 that to?
7 A. This was from Barb Fernie.
8 Q. And then "Police would wonder how
9 she could tell since they saw no
10 similarities." Have I read that correctly?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. You're talking about police saw no
13 similarities between the second-generation
14 photocopy and the actual ransom note itself?
15 A. No, trying to source a Xerox copy
16 back to a particular note pad in the kitchen.
17 Q. The police couldn't tell the --
18 couldn't see the similarity of the Xerox copy
19 and the note pad, right?
20 A. Right.
21 Q. They would wonder how Patsy could
22 tell there was a similarity, right?
23 A. How one would make that
24 suggestion, how a Xerox photocopy of a rather
25 bland, generic piece of paper on which the
291
1 ransom note was written may have had its
2 genesis from a tablet in the kitchen.
3 Q. Not that it had its genesis, but
4 that it was similar, right? It was written
5 on the same kind of paper?
6 A. The Xerox copy did not leave me
7 with that impression, that it did not strike
8 me that way.
9 Q. Did that seem suspicious to you of
10 Patsy Ramsey?
11 A. A bit.
12 Q. Did you ever stop and consider
13 that she might have made the comment about
14 the similarity because she, sir, had seen the
15 original of the ransom note prior in time?
16 A. But I think in this context she
17 was looking at a photocopy.
18 Q. So you're telling me that she was
19 trying to say that from the photocopy she
20 thought that it was similar. You don't think
21 that she might have had the benefit of
22 knowing what the actual note looked like in
23 terms of the paper? Would you concede that
24 maybe that might be an inaccurate assumption
25 on your part, sir, you know, what you thought
292
1 was suspicious wasn't suspicious at all?
2 A. No, I'm simply stating what struck
3 the detectives in wonder is we thought that
4 Barb Fernie's statement was unusual, given
5 this context.
6 Q. On pages 26 and 27 of your book,
7 starting with Detective Arndt -- well,
8 actually it starts at page 25 "Time was
9 passing swiftly." For the next couple of
10 pages, and the content is not so much what
11 I'm focusing on. I just want to know, you
12 talk a lot about Arndt and observations that
13 she made. Was the basis for those comments
14 that you made about her reports?
15 A. Primarily, because at one point
16 she discontinued talking to some of us.
17 Q. She actually did more than that.
18 She told you that she didn't have any
19 recollection anymore about what she saw that
20 day, didn't she?
21 A. She made that statement or
22 something very close to that.
23 Q. Page 35, Linda Hoffmann-Pugh, do
24 you know who -- did you ever interview Linda
25 Hoffmann-Pugh?
293
1 A. No, sir.
2 Q. You never had the opportunity to
3 judge her credibility yourself to see whether
4 she might, in your opinion, like Jackie
5 Dilson might be somewhat unstable or not
6 credible?
7 A. I don't know that I've ever met
8 Linda Hoffmann-Pugh, no.
9 Q. Do you know how many days a week
10 Linda Hoffmann-Pugh worked for the Ramsey
11 family?
12 A. Without reviewing reports, no, I
13 don't.
14 Q. Do you know what time of the
15 morning she would get there and how long she
16 would stay?
17 A. Again, without reviewing reports
18 concerning Ms. Hoffmann-Pugh, I do not.
19 Q. Do you think you had some of
20 those reports about Ms. Hoffmann-Pugh in your
21 materials that you copied and after you left
22 the department or received from the Boulder
23 Police Department after you left the
24 department?
25 A. I don't know.
294
1 Q. We can only tell when we find
2 them, right, that would tell us more
3 information about what you know about Linda
4 Hoffmann-Pugh, true?
5 A. Or again if we can work our way
6 into the police department.
7 Q. Did you ever interview Shirley
8 Brady, who had been a housekeeper for the
9 Ramseys for almost four years?
10 A. The name sounds familiar and if
11 it's the person I'm thinking of who resided
12 in Georgia I think Harmer or Gosage conducted
13 that interview.
14 Q. They would have prepared a report?
15 A. I would think so.
16 Q. Shirley Brady tells me that she
17 got a phone call and about a five-minute
18 interview and when she said she made it
19 pretty clear that the Ramseys weren't in any
20 way the type of people that could be involved
21 in this, that the interview ended and she
22 never heard from anybody again. Does that
23 sound like a thorough investigation if that's
24 true?
25 A. It depends on what the detectives
295
1 were doing. I don't know what they were
2 doing.
3 Q. Well, you know if you have got to
4 -- if you're spending a lot of time with
5 Linda Hoffmann-Pugh who had worked for them
6 less than two years and only worked part time
7 and you want to know all about this family's
8 background, a thorough investigation, wouldn't
9 you believe, sir, from your experience as a
10 police officer that you're going to spend
11 more than five minutes on the phone with
12 someone who was a housekeeper for three
13 years?
14 A. For some reason in my mind, and I
15 may be wrong, I don't think Mrs. Brady was
16 ever in Colorado with the family. There was
17 apparently nothing that the detective who
18 interviewed her felt was worth more than
19 their five minutes. You would have to ask
20 them.
21 Q. So you had to be in Colorado with
22 the family in order to be a significant
23 witness as to their background?
24 A. No, not to their background.
25 Q. That doesn't make any sense, does
296
1 it?
2 A. No.
3 Q. I didn't think it did. I mean,
4 you know you all were looking to see if
5 there was any pathology in this family on
6 either John Ramsey's part or Patsy Ramsey's
7 part, right?
8 A. We did.
9 Q. And you didn't find any, did you?
10 A. What do you mean by pathology,
11 Mr. Wood?
12 Q. Mr. Thomas, please, you know what
13 pathology means.
14 MR. DIAMOND: Don't give him that
![[Amber Alert]](amber125x125.gif)
![[ACandyRose]](acandyrose-logo.gif){kind=logo}
![[Never forget September 11, 2001]](USflag.gif)
![[JonBenet Ramsey]](jonbenet-left.gif)