Q. You have been accused of trying to go out and shop experts to support the conclusion that you
had already come up with in May of 1997 that Patsy was the killer. Can you see why someone would
make that suggestion, Mr. Thomas --

MR. DIAMOND: May I have that read back, please.

MR. WOOD: I can read it.

Q. (BY MR. WOOD) You know you have, I think -- maybe I shouldn't make that assumption. Are
you aware that there has been accusations against you that you had early on made up your mind before
the investigation was complete and that you went out and shopped experts to try to find somebody on
handwriting, somebody on sexual, chronic sexual abuse, to try to support the conclusion that you had
already drawn? Are you aware of accusations made against you in that light?

A. I know that those accusations were made against the police team and they flew back and forth
with the DA's team.

Q. From the timing standpoint, it appears that one could certainly make that as a plausible argument
because you're out here, a lead detective, within the first few months having decided that Patsy is the
killer. A lot of the experts have not been hired at that point, true?

A. Again, those are your words. I think I have characterized it as trying to follow what I have called
an abundance of evidence leading in a particular direction.

Q. But at some point you concluded, and the record will speak very clearly about what you said, you
say you followed that evidence. But early in 1997, within the first few months, you had drawn your
conclusion, right?

A. That it appeared based on the evidence that she was not only a good suspect, but appeared to be
the offender.

Q. And there were a number of experts that at that point had not even been hired to review
evidence; isn't that true?

A. Yes.