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



Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Forum Statistics
» Members: 6
» Latest member: PeterSherri
» Forum threads: 1,759
» Forum posts: 5,600

Full Statistics

Online Users
There are currently 28 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 28 Guest(s)

Latest Threads
9 pg notes
Forum: Linda Wickman
Last Post: jameson245
06-18-2021, 05:31 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 477
Professor Matrix v steve ...
Forum: Nancy Krebs
Last Post: jameson245
06-18-2021, 04:50 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 346
Forum: December 26th
Last Post: jameson245
06-15-2021, 10:50 AM
» Replies: 2
» Views: 2,495
Jane Stobie interview
Forum: Names to remember
Last Post: jameson245
06-02-2021, 07:53 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 495
Jane Stobie interview
Forum: Names to remember
Last Post: jameson245
06-02-2021, 07:53 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 296
MOre on Don Foster
Forum: Discredited and discounted witnesses in this case
Last Post: jameson245
05-19-2021, 07:23 PM
» Replies: 13
» Views: 9,889
Barbara Reffner aka A Can...
Forum: Names to remember
Last Post: jameson245
05-16-2021, 02:43 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 477
from 2021 blog
Forum: Fleet and Priscilla White
Last Post: jameson245
05-02-2021, 05:19 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 731
I met Rol
Forum: Rol Hoverstock
Last Post: jameson245
05-02-2021, 05:15 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 2,236
Melody and Luther Stanton...
Forum: Neighbors
Last Post: jameson245
05-02-2021, 05:08 PM
» Replies: 4
» Views: 7,701

  Melody and the scream
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-24-2017, 07:28 PM - Forum: The Scream - Replies (4)

Melody Stanton
(738 Fifteenth Street)
(Boulder, Colorado)
On December26, 1996, between 12:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m. she woke from sleep, heard a child's scream that lasted 3 to 5 seconds. Her bedroom was on second floor facing the Ramsey house.  She said she woke her husband Luther, knew it was JonBenet but assumed her parents would take care of her.  Melody went back to sleep immediately.  Luther then heard the sound of metal hitting concrete. 

Melody told this to her neighbor, Diane Brumfitt and Diane reported the incident to the police. 

Information went quickly to the media and reporters started knocking on the Stanton door.  Eventually the Stantons denied knowing anything - - they clearly did not want to be witnesses any longer.  Melody suggested the scream may not have been an actual scream but "negative energy".  Or maybe she heard it another night.   But most believe her first report was the honest one.

In Schiller/Brennan book,  page 610 paperback, this was investigated by Officer Barry Hartkopp on 01-03-1997
but her interview wasn't signed or given under oath.

Print this item

  from Steve Thomas depo
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-24-2017, 07:09 PM - Forum: Stun Gun - Replies (1)

"Thomas depo 41 - Stun Gun"
Q. 154, right here, second blocked out, second paragraph, "Experts engaged by the police concluded
there was no stun gun involved at all, but the DA's team never relinquished their claim that such
weapon an exotic weapon was used to subdue JonBenet." Have I read that correctly?

A. Yes.
Q. Who were the experts engaged by the police that you're referring; would you identify those for
A. I know at least one was Dr. Werner Spitz, and Detective Trujillo would be able to identify
Q. Did any of those -- any police department consultants discuss at either of the presentations in
terms of what they thought about stun guns whether there was consistency. For example, Dr.
A. I'm sorry, run it back by me, Mr. Wood.
Q. Was Dr. Deters -- the Larimer County coroner involved in the investigation by the Boulder Police
A. No, I'm not familiar with that name.
Q. How about Sue Kitchens of the CBI?
A. I am familiar with her name, but I do not know what extent she may have been involved in the
Q. How about Dr. Doberson?
A. I believe Trujillo and Wickman initially visited Dobersen on behalf of the police. But that was
later followed up by investigators Smit and Ainsworth.
Q. Dr. Doberson who I think you have a great deal of respect for?
A. I don't know Dr. Doberson.
Q. Do you recognize him, though, to be respected in the law enforcement community in Colorado?
A. I have no opinion. I don't know anything about Dr. Doberson.
Q. Do you know that he has stated within reasonable medical certainty that the marks on JonBenet's
face and back were caused by a stun gun. Are you aware of that?
A. Well, if you're telling me that's true --
Q. I'm just asking if you're aware of it. You said --
A. I saw that on --
Q. -- you watched some of the stuff. I'm just asking if that's what he said there?
A. Right.
Q. Did you watch the Tracy Mills documentary, two?
A. The second one, two?
Q. Yeah.
A. Two, as in the number two?
Q. Yeah, the second, there was one back a couple years ago, it's one that came out in the last
several months, haven't seen --
A. No, I haven't seen that.
Q. So you don't know what Dr. Doberson said in that, do you?
A. No.
Q. But he wasn't employed by the Boulder Police Department, among other things, to look at the
stun gun issue, true?
A. I don't know that he was employed but they went to him. Trujillo and Wickman I know did.
Q. What did the Boulder Police Department conclude caused these marks found on JonBenet
Ramsey's back?
MR. DIAMOND: Do you want to identify what you're putting in front of him just for --
MR. WOOD: I'm going to mark it and I'll do it by copy. I don't want to mark on this color copy but
this will be Defendants' 4.
MR. DIAMOND: Will you identify what it is for the record?
MR. WOOD: It's an autopsy photograph of JonBenet Ramsey.
MR. DIAMOND: Does it have a number on it or something?
MR. WOOD: I just put a number on it, a 4 just so I can copy it and mark it later. If you'll just hang on
to it. I don't want you to be flipping through there. There is one picture I am going to ask him about in a
(Exhibit-4 and Exhibit-5 marked.)
Q. (BY MR. WOOD) What did the Boulder Police Department determine caused those marks on
JonBenet Ramsey's back as shown on Defendants' Exhibit 4?
A. I don't know that the Boulder Police Department as an entity formed a consensus opinion, but
relying on the experts in this case, and Detective Trujillo specifically who was assigned to the stun gun
investigation told us and I remember seeing it that Werner Spitz concluded, I believe, what was believed
to be stun gun marks may have been a patterned object, if I recall correctly, or I think another
explanation was on her back lying on some sort of object.
Q. That was Dr. Spitz only?
A. Well, Dr. Spitz completed a report on that. I think Dr. Lee had some opinion on it. Certainly
Trujillo filed information about that.
Q. I'm going to show you defense Exhibit Number 5, which two photos, one is obviously Number 4
and then 5 is a picture of JonBenet's side of her face. There were two marks on her face. The marks
on her face and the marks on her back were the same distance apart, right?
A. I don't know that those were identical. I have heard --
Q. Do you deny that?
A. I have heard Mr. Smit say that they were identical. I have heard Trujillo say they're not.
Q. That the marks were not -- shouldn't one just measure this, sir?
A. Unfortunately you would have to, I think, triangulate it off of a photo because they weren't
measured, my understanding, at autopsy.
Q. Do you choose to believe Dr. -- Mr. Smit or Mr. Trujillo in terms of that issue or do you just not
have a position one way or the other in terms of the distance part of the two set matched pairs?
A. I don't believe necessarily either of them. But I have heard Mr. Smit and Mr. Trujillo had
conflicting measurements on that picture.
Q. But one thing for sure, you believe, I think you would say and have said before, that if a stun gun
was used on JonBenet that that is significant evidence that would point away from a family member or
parent, right?
A. I don't know where I have said that.
Q. You have never said that?
A. I don't know where I have said that, Mr. Wood.
Q. Do you deny that?
A. Refresh my memory. Where do you think I have said that?
Q. Do you deny that or is that accurate?
A. I think, and for the record let me just say, one other expert that I know the Boulder Police
Department consulted were I think stun gun reps, manufacturers or people in the stun gun industry.
Q. Do you know their names?
A. I don't. I think somebody from Air Tazer.
Q. Were there reports filed?
A. There certainly should be. As far as do I deny -- well, let me put my answer this way. I would
agree to an extent that it may be or would be less likely that a parent would be involved in the stun
gunning of a child. Maybe I'm naive in that thinking, as the FBI agents told us they have seen children
murdered in the most horrendous of ways, but I won't dispute you on that point today.

Print this item

  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
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,
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,
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
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
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,

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
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

  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

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
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.

BURKE RAMSEY, Plaintiff,

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. 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
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)


Print this item