CM: Let's talk about a thing that's bothering you and it bothered me, probably, too. One of your detectives out there, Steve Thomas, who was
working on the case, has written a book recently on the investigation and why he says it hasn't been solved: "When the police botched the
crime scene, they damaged the Ramsey case. When the DA's office started making deals, they lost it. It was institutional idiocy, and in my
opinion, there are several people in Boulder who are going to have to beg their way into heaven after this one." We can skip the heaven and
hell part there, but let's go back to the world we live on. What do you think of that guy's book?

AH: Well, I think it stinks. I guess he'll have a bag of gold to buy his way into heaven. You know, he's put a butcher knife into this
investigation. You're a former police officer.

CM: (Laughing) Well, briefly, at least.

AH: Well, briefly. But you know, you gained some insights like we all do, little pieces here and there. I mean, he's peddling the case file. The
citizens of Boulder have spent $2 million plus on this case. It's not his case.

CM: If he had written an adulatory book saying you're the best thing since sliced bread, would you have a problem with this book?

AH: No, because he wouldn't be divulging confidential information. You know, when you start talking about what a witness said, you know
there's one place in the book - I don't even want to get into it in detail - where a witness, a critical witness in the case, begs him not to make a
disclosure of some very personal information. He lays it out in the book. He criticizes his colleagues about the fact that they botched the early
hours which I think, you know, I can make another argument. You know, you don't change evidence. There may be a technical contamination
when the body's brought upstairs but, you know, first of all, you pick up in this book his investigative techniques, because the way he writes
the book reflects that technique. This is a homicide detective who'd never had a homicide case, and his supervisor had never had a homicide
case. Fortunately, believe it or not, there are some excellent officers - he was not the lead detective - that have worked this case, have busted
their gut, have put in the sweat, have dropped the tears, who he puts the knife to in the book. And you can see this man sitting down with this
guy Davis, who's the writer, and I can hear Davis saying to him, you have to add color here, you have to add color there.

CM: This has . . . I know this hurts your feelings and it hurts your image. Certainly, I would fight it too. But how has it hurt the investigation?

AH: Yeah, but let me say something. I'm on this show not because my butt feels raw or my feelings are hurt. I'm on this show because this
detective is getting, you know, kissed by ABC. He goes on four mornings. They have a little chat with him.

CM: On GMA.

AH: And the fact is that what has happened here - I mean it's one, the book is done, and he'll make a million dollars. I'm hoping that the
orphans and widows of slain police officers at the Boulder Police Department are not going to be out on the front stoop with a cup waiting for
his contribution. But I'm here because I want us to learn another lesson from this case. There are some wonderful lessons, some hard lessons
in this case, and one of them is, we cannot have a detective breach the public trust that I think he or she has when they are compiling
confidential information, interviewing witnesses, you know, building the file on behalf of the people. That's why I'm here. I'm not here to say
he's a bad guy because he doesn't like me. You know, this guy is not relevant to this case. He's been gone for 18 months, he had nothing to do
with the grand jury investigation. He's a cop that, you know, was basically a patrol officer and did a little narcotics work.

CM: Yeah, but you know, he exploited a ready market out there. The reason he will make any money he makes is that there are a lot of people
in this country - I won't buy the book because I wouldn't know if it's true or not, and you make it sound like it probably isn't - but let me tell
you there're are a lot of people who've watched this case for four years who've seen this wealthy couple who seem to be treated with kid gloves
and they wonder, "How long can this case go on?" You, on the other hand, have been in the DA's job for all these years and you probably know
that some cases aren't going to be solved, that the law isn't perfect. What should we know from your point of view, without giving away the
case, that we should know about this case that makes us wrong when we say, "Where the hell's this thing going?"

AH: You know it really is interesting - in the early days of this case, 30 days out, 60, 90 days out, the public and the media were crying about,
"How come this case isn't solved?" And you know, we would all shake our heads, and you know as a former police officer that cases don't get
solved in an hour like they do in some of the shows people watch. And I don't mean to talk down because I like those shows, and I'm always
amazed how they can pack it in in an hour.