Welcome, Guest
You have to register before you can post on our site.

Username
  

Password
  





Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Forum Statistics
» Members: 31
» Latest member: SundanceIM
» Forum threads: 1,099
» Forum posts: 3,423

Full Statistics

Online Users
There are currently 17 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 17 Guest(s)

Latest Threads
From Brill's Content
Forum: Footprints in the snow
Last Post: SundanceIM
03-29-2018, 07:55 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 312
from Thomas deposition in...
Forum: Barbie nightgown
Last Post: jameson245
03-15-2018, 06:04 PM
» Replies: 5
» Views: 1,563
Dr. Oz - Nancy Grace - Ju...
Forum: What is in the news - staying up to date
Last Post: jameson245
03-15-2018, 05:56 PM
» Replies: 3
» Views: 550
Burke lawsuit
Forum: Burke sues Werner Spitz for $150,000,000.00
Last Post: jameson245
03-15-2018, 05:53 PM
» Replies: 4
» Views: 517
Obituary
Forum: Peter Hofstrom
Last Post: jameson245
02-20-2018, 12:34 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 171
John Phillips
Forum: Opinions
Last Post: jameson245
01-31-2018, 03:54 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 283
Lin Wood says CBS is goin...
Forum: Burke sues CBS for 750 million
Last Post: jameson245
01-18-2018, 07:22 AM
» Replies: 2
» Views: 360
news story
Forum: John and Barbara Fernie
Last Post: Dispatcher
01-09-2018, 11:08 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 581
What they should have kno...
Forum: The CBS suit
Last Post: CA4Now
01-09-2018, 12:01 PM
» Replies: 11
» Views: 3,341
Case to go forward - Janu...
Forum: Burke sues CBS for 750 million
Last Post: jameson245
01-06-2018, 03:26 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 214

 
  from Steve Thomas depo
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-24-2017, 07:02 PM - Forum: Handwriting - Replies (4)

"Thomas depo 17 - handwriting experts"
 
  
Q. (by Lin Wood) Have you ever had an opportunity to review any of Darnay Hoffman's handwriting
experts' reports, that would be a report from David Liedman, Cina Wong and another individual named
Tom Miller?

A. No.
Q. Do you know whether they were ever tendered to the prosecution or to the police department
and rejected as not credible?
A. It's my understanding and this may have been even after I left the police department, that Mr.
Hoffman made his experts available to the prosecution.
Q. And they declined saying that they were not credible or do you know?
A. I don't know.
Q. You don't know that. You do know that there were other experts that reviewed Patsy Ramsey's
handwriting and did not find evidence of authorship, true?
A. Who were those?
Q. Do you think there were not three other people that looked at this and did not find that there was
evidence to find that she wrote the note?
A. I don't know who you're referring to.
Q. Well, there was a Secret Service examiner, Mr. Dusak?
A. Right.
Q. Speckin Laboratories?
A. Mr. Speckin, yes.
Q. Right. And there is one other, help me. I can pull it if you want me to?
A. Alfred, Alford, Edwin Alford.
Q. Did you look at their conclusions and remember them?
A. I did.
Q. What was Mr. Dusak's conclusion?
A. Mr. Dusak, I believe, his official conclusion on his report for courtroom purposes was no
evidence to indicate.
Q. No evidence to indicate that Patsy Ramsey executed any of the questioned material appearing on
the ransom note, was that Mr. Dusak's conclusion?
A. Among other things.
Q. And he was a document analyst for the United States Secret Service, right?
A. Right.
Q. Then we have Mr. Edwin F. Alford, Jr., police expert, examination of the questioned
handwriting, comparison of the handwriting specimen submitted has failed to provide a basis for
identifying Patsy Ramsey as the writer of the letter. Is that his conclusion?
A. I remember Mr. Dusak. If you have a document that would help --
Q. This is Mr. Alford.
A. I know. I remember Mr. Dusak. If you have a document that would help me refresh my
memory on Mr. Alford, I don't recall --
Q. Not beyond what I have just told you, but if that helps you refresh you one way or the other what
I've just told you is I believe Mr. Alford concluded?
A. Will you repeat his --
Q. Sure.
A. -- what he concluded.
Q. The examination of the questioned handwriting comparison with the handwriting specimen
submitted has failed to provide a basis for identifying Patricia Ramsey as the writer of the letter?
A. If that's what the report says. I certainly don't disagree with --
MR. DIAMOND: He's asking you whether that refreshes your recollection.
Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Do you recall Mr. Alford coming to that conclusion?
A. To a -- yeah, I think that's the conclusion.
Q. And then Leonard A. Speckin, he said that he found no evidence that Patsy Ramsey disguised
her handwriting exemplars. Did you -- were you aware of that conclusion by Mr. Speckin, a police
expert?
A. Among other conclusions, yes.
Q. You understood enough about the handwriting analysis that a legitimate handwriting questioned
document examiner analyzes not just similarities, but also has to analyze and account for dissimilarities,
right?
A. If you say so, Mr. Wood, I'm not --
Q. I'm asking you, sir.
A. No, I'm not a handwriting expert and don't purport to be.
Q. So you can't --
A. If you're asking me about my layman's knowledge about handwriting science I would be happy to
answer your question.
Q. I'm asking you about your understanding of the science when you were the, quote, one of the lead
detectives. Did you not listen to what the experts were saying and what their bases were and did you
not grasp the fundamental idea when you were listening that they were saying we've got to analyze
both similarities and dissimilarities?
MR. DIAMOND: Objection. Compound. You may answer.
Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Did you understand that to be the case or not?
A. That was among many things that I understood them to look at.

Print this item

  offered services to Steve Thomas
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-24-2017, 07:00 PM - Forum: Darnay Hoffman - No Replies

from Steve Thomas deposition:

"Thomas depo 15 - Thomas and Darnay"
 
  
Q. You slipped once, maybe inadvertently, in referring to Darnay by Darnay as opposed to Mr.
Hoffman. When did Darnay Hoffman first contact you about his offer to represent you for free and to
absorb your legal cost in connection with the civil litigation filed against you by the Ramseys?

MR. DIAMOND: Can we just get a predicate that that fact occurred?
MR. WOOD: Yeah. I've got the New York lawyer, you know what I'm talking about, don't you,
Darnay?
MR. HOFFMAN: Yeah.
MR. WOOD: For the record, you stated that several months prior months ofApril of 2001, you offered
to represent Steve Thomas pro bono, for free and absorb all of his legal costs, right?
MR. HOFFMAN: Yeah, at one point I did, yes.
Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Right. Tell me about that. When did he contact you?
A. I don't know. What's the date on the document you're looking at?
Q. Maybe Darnay can tell us that if you don't know.
MR. HOFFMAN: I don't remember that either.
Q. (BY MR. WOOD) But you know he called you? I don't know that --
MR. HOFFMAN: No, I did not call him.
MR. WOOD: How did you contact him?
MR. HOFFMAN: I sent him an e-mail. I don't have a phone number for --
THE REPORTER: Wait. One at a time.
MR. WOOD: E -mail, whatever. I'm not trying to -- I mean, you e-mailed him.
Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Did you get the e-mail, Mr. Thomas?
A. This today is the first time that I have ever spoken, correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Hoffman, that I
have ever spoken personally to Mr. Darnay Hoffman.
Q. Thank you.
A. And yes, I do recall not only did he send me this e-mail but that on occasion I would be on an
e-mailing list that would receive e-mails from Mr. Hoffman.
Q. So it is true that Mr. Hoffman sent you, Steve Thomas, an e-mail in which he offered his legal
services to represent you for free, pro bono, and to absorb all of your legal costs in connection with any
litigation brought against you by the Ramsey family; is that true?
A. Very generously so, yes, he did.
Q. Why did you not accept it?
MR. DIAMOND: He had a better offer.
MR. HOFFMAN: Better lawyer, Lin. He got a better lawyer, trust me.
MR. WOOD: Why don't you all let Mr. Thomas figure out what to say about this, without being
disrespectful.
MR. DIAMOND: Where is your sense of humor, Mr. Wood?
A. In addition to that e-mail --
Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Why don't you answer my question, Mr. Thomas?
A. I'm trying to, Mr. Wood.
Q. My question is why did you not accept it?
MR. DIAMOND: And you can continue.
Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Yeah, but please, just answer my question and we can move on to something
else.
A. In another e-mail, Mr. Wood also e-mailed me the name and business address and telephone
number of a Mr. Daniel Petrocelli in Los Angeles who he also suggested as a fine attorney.
Q. Let me make sure we get that right. Mr. Wood didn't e-mail you Mr. Petrocelli's name. Are you
saying that Mr. Hoffman did?
A. Yes, my mistake, yes, that's what --
Q. But Mr. -- and was that close in time to his offer with respect to his offer to represent you?
A. I don't recall.
Q. Do you think it was a few days, a few weeks, a few months apart?
A. I don't recall the timing on either of these e-mails. Maybe Mr. Hoffman can help me out.
MR. WOOD: All I know, Darnay, is I've got your e-mail that you posted on April 1, 2001, where you
stated you made the offer to him several months before.
MR. HOFFMAN: Yeah, I don't remember exactly at what point after that I also suggested Daniel
Petrocelli who is, quite frankly, a better lawyer than I am in these areas, so.
MR. WOOD: Well, now we know how Dan Petrocelli gets some of his business. Let's go on to
something else.
MR. HOFFMAN: Through referrals, Lin, just like most lawyers.
MR. WOOD: Let's go on to something else.

Print this item

  do parents use garrotes?
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-24-2017, 06:56 PM - Forum: Cord ligature - Garrote - No Replies

from Steve Thomas depo:

"Thomas depo 25 - garrote"
 
  
Q. They just -- strike that. The FBI that you rely on also, though, told you that they have not any
reported incident of a parent garroting a child to death; that's what the FBI told you about the garrote,
true?

A. With a ransom note present and an apparent botched kidnapping where the body was found in the
victim's home, that is correct.
Q. Is it your testimony, then, that there are cases that the FBI has in their files where a parent has
garroted a child, has strangled to death a child by use of a garrote; is that your testimony?
A. No, my testimony is I don't know what the FBI has in their files concerning their investigation or
review of child homicides.
Q. Did you ever ask about whether there was any prior case that you could study where a parent
had used a garrote to strangle a child; did you ever ask the FBI that?
A. I don't recall personally asking them that.
Q. Do you know whether anybody in the Boulder Police Department investigation ever made that
inquiry to the FBI?
A. There were several trips and inquiries and phone calls and meetings with the FBI. And I don't
know, but it would sound reasonable that one would ask that.
Q. If one asked, no one ever gave you the answer and you didn't find out about it, right?
A. They did explain that they have seen cases in which parents have feloniously slain their own
children in any number of ways. If garroting was one of those, I'm unaware of that.
Q. Wouldn't that be something you would want to know since you have a garrote involved in this
case?
A. Let me answer it simply. Again, I don't know of the FBI, have any knowledge firsthand or
secondhand, denying or confirming the use of a garrote in a previous child homicide.

Print this item

  some from long ago
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-24-2017, 06:53 PM - Forum: Questions FOR Borg - Replies (1)

jameson[Image: team_icon.gif]
Charter Member
11546 posts

Jun-14-03, 05:51 PM (EST)
[Image: mesg_add_buddy.gif]  
2. "Be honest"
In response to message #1
 
  
You just did a terrible thing - - you ran over the kid next door - - I won't even make this hypothetical involve your own child. So you ran over the kid next door and in a panic you fled the scene - - and the child died becausehe didn't get help soon enough. His parents went looking for him and he died there in the yard in their arms. You knew the kid - - you like the family - - you are devastated.
You are so upset you know you have to take something to calm down - - valium or alcohol or something.
Oh, how guilty you feel - - this child is DEAD and you have never intentionally hurt a living thing.
But you MUST keep the secret - - you can't tell anyone - - you can't face charges, can't afford a lawyer - - you might lose your home, job, family.... what a terrible situation.
So answer this now....
Are you going to invite the cops to stay with you 24/7 while you are so upset and drinking or taking drugs to deal with the guilt?
I don't think so. I think you would just want to shut the door and avoid being with anyone who might sense your guilt or hear you say something that indicated guilt.
I don't think the Ramseys acted "guilty" at all.

Print this item

  from Thomas deposition in Wolf case
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-24-2017, 06:44 PM - Forum: Barbie nightgown - Replies (5)

"Thomas depo 23 - nightgown and panties"
 
  
Q. There was a Barbie nightgown found in the wine cellar where JonBenet Ramsey's body was
found, right?

A. Right.
Q. Was there any evidence obtained from that nightgown?
A. Not that I'm aware of prior to departing August of '98.
Q. There was no fiber evidence that you're aware of that was found on that nightgown?
A. Not that Detective Trujillo shared with me.
Q. Was there any blood evidence found on that nightgown?
A. Not that I'm aware of.
Q. Any hair evidence found on that nightgown, to your knowledge, firsthand or secondhand?
A. Not that I'm aware of.
Q. Was there any decision made or conclusion drawn, perhaps is the better way to say it, that you're
aware of, from any source, as to whether the panties that JonBenet Ramsey was found in had been
worn and washed in the past or were new, in effect, fresh out of the package?
A. I believe that was after my departure that that underwear investigation took place.
Q. So, again, the state of the evidence with respect to that issue, you do not know, true?
A. Right.
Q. So, again, the state of the evidence with respect to that issue, you do not know, true?
A. Right.
Q. Do you know whether there were any autopsy photos that showed JonBenet from the standpoint
of being able to look at it to see whether or not the panties, not the other articles of clothing, but the
panties, fit her or whether they were obviously not a correct fit?
A. It's my belief from detective briefings that they were referred to as oversized floral panties.
Q. Thank you. Were there any autopsy photos is my question?
A. Without the long-john over pants covering the underwear, I don't recall seeing any autopsy photos
of just the child in her underpants.

Print this item

  assault during murder
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-24-2017, 06:39 PM - Forum: Prior sexual abuse - Replies (2)

from Steve Thomas deposition

Q. Well, did all the experts agree that JonBenet Ramsey was alive at the time of the injury to her
vagina?

A. Again, I don't know what experts you're referring to but we had --
Q. The ones that you listened to.
A. Let me finish, Mr. Wood.
Q. The ones that your department hired?
A. At times there was, among experts, as was to be expected, there was conflict of opinion. But
regarding the prior vaginal trauma if that's what you're asking about, this blue ribbon panel of pediatric
medical experts they brought in seemed to me to be in agreement on some other conclusions.
Q. I'm talking about the acute vaginal trauma she suffered at the time of her murder. The
agreement was unanimous that she was alive at the time that that vaginal trauma was inflicted, true?
A. Yes, I believe that's correct.
Q. Now, tell me who the members were of what you call the blue ribbon panel of pediatric experts,
give me their names, please.
A. I think the FBI recommended --
Q. Just their names, not the recommendation?
A. -- and tried to -- and he participated, was a doctor from California, Dr. John McCann, from
Miami was Dr., I believe it's, Valerie Rau and the third gentleman from St. Louis, I think he was the
Dean of the Children's Hospital or the pediatrics at Glenn Cannon and I don't recall his name offhand.
Q. Anybody else on this panel?
A. On and off, we saw one of Hunter's advisors, which was Krugman.
Q. Was he on the blue ribbon panel that you keep referring to?
A. Krugman?
Q. Yeah, the blue ribbon panel of pediatric experts that I asked you about. Was Krugman on that
panel?
A. No.
Q. Okay.
A. I think that panel consisted of those three individuals.

Print this item

  DNA Test from CBS Special
Posted by: Dave - 03-24-2017, 10:58 AM - Forum: DNA found in panties - Replies (5)

On the CBS television show The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey, “pseudo-expert” Henry Lee [1] performed DNA tests on some brand new underwear fresh off the shelf.  The test consisted of:

1) Spraying the underwear with chemicals to locate regions that may contain DNA.

2) Cutting out the identified regions.

3) Submitting the cuttings for DNA testing.

It was reported that female DNA was found.


This is an incompetently designed test.

What should have been done:

1) Randomly drop colored solution or other easily identifiable markings on the crotches of the underwear --- no more than a few such drops per piece of underwear, similar in size and distribution as the blood spots found on JonBenét's underwear.

2) Cut out these randomly identified regions.

3) Submit the cuttings for testing for the presence of male DNA, not female DNA – that is, ignore findings of female DNA.


Spraying the underwear with chemicals to locate regions that contain organic material is a stupid mistake that shows the sloppiness that “pseudo-expert” Henry Lee brings to many of his cases.  The relevant question is not: “Can we find DNA somewhere on these panties?”  but rather: “How likely is it that a spot of blood would land on a region that contains male DNA?”

Claiming that finding female DNA somewhere on the panties is significant is just another erroneous conclusion of the error-prone “pseudo-expert” Henry Lee.  Throughout the history of the garment industry, females dominate production.  The likelihood of male DNA landing on garments compared to the likelihood of female DNA is and always has been far, far lower.  Again, the question isn't “Can we find DNA somewhere on these panties?”  but rather: “How likely is it that a spot of blood would land on a region that contains male DNA?”

Even though this test is incompetently designed, the approximate likelihood of finding male DNA in a region of 0.5 inches in diameter that is randomly chosen can be confidently stated as zero, based on the information provided in the show regarding this test.  The sample size would need to be vastly increased to distinguish, for example, “one in a million” from zero.  Because this incompetently designed test has been not only been performed, but publicized in the popular press, it should be replaced by a relevant test like the one that I have described above, performed by competent personnel at an independent laboratory.

[1] Description of Henry Lee quoted from: STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE 3RD CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF WAYNE
BURKE RAMSEY, Plaintiff,
v.
CBS CORPORATION, CRITICAL CONTENT, LLC, JIM CLEMENTE, LAURA RICHARDS, A. JAMES KOLAR, JAMES R. FITZGERALD, STANLEY B.BURKE, WERNER U. SPITZ, and HENRY C. LEE, Defendants.

Print this item

  Steve Thomas from depo
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-23-2017, 08:16 AM - Forum: Fiber and Hair Evidence - Replies (1)

Thomas depo 10 - fiber discussion starts"
 
  
Q. Mr. Thomas, would you mind, please, turning to page 302 of your book.
A. Okay.
Q. Do you have it in front of you?
A. Yes, I'm sorry, yes.
Q. Fine. Would you look at thethird paragraph from the top, which begins "Two days before we
were to go onstage." And would you read that whole paragraph, please.
A. Certainly. "Two days before we were to go onstage, we got some surprising big news when the
Colorado Bureau of Investigation lab told us that the acrylic fibers found on the duct tape that covered
JonBenet's mouth were a quote, likely match, for Patsy's blazer. We were ready."
Q. You've been asked earlier with respect to the forensic, you know, not importance, but the
forensic views that the ransom note was being made for. Did this become an important piece of
forensic evidence in the case?
MR. WOOD: You're talking about the ransom note now or the likely match of four fibers?
MR. HOFFMAN: I'm sorry, thank you, Lin.
Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Did the fibers that were found on the duct tape that were covering
JonBenet's mouth that were, quote, a likely match for Patsy's blazer, did that become an important
piece of forensic evidence in the investigation?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know when or at what point in the case the CBI made that report?
A. I think it was sometime before we were told -- I think that information may have been held by
Wickman and Trujillo and Beckner possibly.
Q. Do you know whether or not that information was actually part of anyone's presentation before
the district attorney that was made prior to the convening of a grand jury when you turned the case
over to the district attorney?
A. Mr. Hoffman, are you asking me -- I'm sorry, that's not clear to me.
Q. All right. That CBI report, did you receive it before you made your formal presentation to the
district attorney's office? That's a presentation that was made prior to the convening of the grand jury.
I believe it was in May or June of 1998 when you formally turned over the case to the district attorney.
I may have that date wrong.
MR. WOOD: Hey, Darnay, I'm just a little unclear if you don't mind.
MR. HOFFMAN: Yeah.
MR. WOOD: There were two presentations, one was made by Trip DeMuth I believe in May and
then there was what we call a VIP presentation that was made of a lot of people other than the DA's
office in June. Those are the two presentations. I'm not sure which one you are referring to.
MR. HOFFMAN: Well, thank you. It is confusing, there is no question about it.
Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) The presentation that most people, and myself included, think of is that
large presentation where you stood up and you gave evidence yourself. That's the one where you refer
to Alex Hunter is talking on a cell phone and it sort of -- it seems at the end of that you decided that
you had had enough of the case and you were going to move on. That's the presentation I'm talking
about.
MR. HOFFMAN: I'm assuming -- is that the VIP presentation, Lin?
MR. WOOD: I don't know. I mean, Steve Thomas would have to figure out whether that's an
accurate statement about whether he heard, saw, or thought or felt. I'm not sure.
Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Well, you know what, I'm just confusing the issue. I'm going to drop
that line of questioning and just ask you, did you have occasion to actually see the CBI report that
indicated that there was a likely match for Patsy's blazer with the acrylic fiber found on the duct tape?
A. Not that I recall. Detective Trujillo, who was in charge of all the evidence and forensic testing in
this case, he and Wickman verbally offered that to the rest of the detective team.
Q. All right. So you never personally saw a report with that result or that conclusion?
A. I'm relying on a fellow officer.
Q. Okay. Do you know whether or not there was ever any evidence that you saw or you heard
about in the course of the investigation while you were still with the Boulder police force showing
whether or not any fibers from either Patsy's clothing or from her boots or from any part of her was
found in JonBenet's panties?
MR. WOOD: That's about three or four questions, Darnay.
Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Do you know whether or not there was ever any evidence, forensic
evidence, showing that any article of clothing could be matched to a substance found in JonBenet's
diaper or panties?
MR. WOOD: I have to just comment that I don't believe there was any evidence that JonBenet was
wearing a diaper.
Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) All right. To her panties?
A. If I understand the question correctly, and now just rephrase it so I'm answering the right
question or --

Q. Yeah, when JonBenet Ramsey was found she was wearing I don't know what other word there
is for it but panties and there was a question as to whether or not there were substances found in that
panty area. What I'm asking you is do you know if there was ever any forensic evidence indicating that
any article of clothing that Patsy wore was found as a particle in that panty area of JonBenet?

A. No, I am unaware of any forensic or fiber evidence from Patsy Ramsey's clothing to the victim's
under clothing or underwear.

Q. Do you know if there was any forensic evidence of Patsy Ramsey's clothing at all besides the
duct tape area on JonBenet?

A. As we sit here now, no, I don't recollect any other fiber evidence, other than what we have
discussed linking the mother to JonBenet.

Print this item

  Thomas deposition on pineapple
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-23-2017, 07:59 AM - Forum: Pineapple or Fruit Cocktail? - Replies (1)

http://www.webbsleuths.com/dcf/DCForumID107/5.html

Print this item

  from DA Alex Hunter's
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-23-2017, 07:18 AM - Forum: Handwriting - Replies (1)

http://www.webbsleuths.com/dcf/jbr_evidence/107.html

Print this item