Go back to previous page
Forum URL: http://www.webbsleuths.com/cgi-bin/dcf/dcboard.cgi
Forum Name: Ramsey evidence
Topic ID: 60
Message ID: 12
#12, RE: Mark Beckner's deposition
Posted by jameson on Apr-10-03 at 05:04 PM
In response to message #11

1 A Yes.

2 Q Okay. You have indicated to me earlier

3 that Chris Wolf does not have a confirmed alibi,

4 right?

5 A Correct.

6 Q In the case where you do not have a

7 confirmed alibi and specifically with Chris Wolf, as

8 I understand it, his claim was that he was with

9 Jackie Dilson. Her claim was that he was not, that

10 he came in the early morning hours of the 26th and

11 the clothes were dirty, he took a shower.

12 Why did you not ask Chris Wolf to submit

13 to a polygraph test on the issue of his alibi?

14 MR. MILLER: Object to the basis of the

15 question. I don't think it's been established he

16 didn't.

17 Q (BY MR. WOOD) Well, I apologize. Chris

18 Wolf has testified that he was never asked to take a

19 polygraph test. Let me see if the Chief agrees with

20 that. Was he asked or was he not asked?

21 A I don't know.

22 Q Well, would you have expected him to be

23 asked in proper investigative techniques and

24 procedures particularly where we've got an alibi

25 situation as I have just described it?


1 A Not necessarily.

2 Q Why not?

3 A Many people that we have investigated, you

4 wouldn't necessarily ask them to take polygraphs.

5 Q But if you've got someone who has given

6 you -- that can't confirm an alibi and it's just a

7 matter of you either having to accept that person's

8 statement as true or not, isn't that an ideal

9 situation for you to ask for a polygraph?

10 A Well, you're taking it out of the context

11 of the whole of what we knew about the evidence of

12 the case and the evidence that we have from Chris

13 Wolf.

14 Q What if he takes a polygraph on the issue

15 of his alibi and he shows deception. That may change

16 the whole picture of Chris Wolf, couldn't it, Chief?

17 A Possibly.

18 Q So why wouldn't you find that out?

19 A Well, you don't have any other evidence

20 linking him to the crime.

21 Q You've got knowledge that he had an

22 association with Bill McReynolds?

23 A No other evidence linking him to the

24 crime, though.

25 Q But you've got evidence that linked Chris


1 Wolf to the Ramseys. You've got an article that he

2 wrote and referenced Access Graphics prior in time in

3 the Boulder -- that local business newspaper, right?

4 A Um-hum, yes.

5 Q You've got writings that indicate some

6 admitted dislike for Lockheed and suppliers of arms

7 to Third World people. Chris Wolf, you found that

8 out, didn't you?

9 A Yes.

10 Q Did you know that you had a man that would

11 go and submit for money to go to parties where all of

12 the people there would be men and that he would strip

13 naked and allow them to fondle him and he would then

14 allow them to perform oral sex on him; did you ever

15 learn that about Chris Wolf?

16 A No.

17 Q Did you ever learn that Chris Wolf would

18 go to parties and allow women and men to touch him

19 and then have intercourse in front of other people

20 with women while the others watched; did you ever

21 learn that about Chris Wolf?

22 A Not to my knowledge.

23 Q Did you ever make any inquiries and

24 ascertain the use by Chris Wolf of illegal drugs?

25 A I don't know.


1 Q Did you ever follow up to find out about

2 Chris Wolf's subsequent employment history after

3 he -- the death of JonBent and whether he had any

4 jobs that might have put him into contact with young

5 females age four, five, six or seven?

6 A I don't know.

7 Q Did you ever learn that Chris Wolf would

8 take pictures of himself masturbating and display

9 them to other people?

10 A No.

11 Q Did you ever learn that Chris Wolf would

12 allow himself to be photographed nude and to have his

13 picture used in publications to sell erotic devices?

14 A No.

15 Q Don't you think that that is information

16 that you would want to know?

17 A Certainly.

18 Q Wouldn't a thorough investigation of Chris

19 Wolf have resulted in the Boulder Police Department

20 learning those facts about this man if you accept

21 that I'm telling you the truth about what he admitted

22 to when he was put under oath?

23 A I'm not sure.

24 Q There was some reference that there was a

25 police record that Chris Wolf had failed to notify


1 authorities about a change of his address. Are you

2 aware of that prior law enforcement matter as it

3 pertains to --

4 A That doesn't ring a bell.

5 Q Would you expect there to be a transcript

6 of the January 1997 attempts by Detective Thomas and

7 others to interview Chris Wolf?

8 A I don't know that they tape recorded that

9 or not.

10 Q If they did, and I think Detective Thomas

11 told me he thought he did, but would that tape still

12 exist, would -- it would be maintained?

13 A It should, yes.

14 Q No physical evidence of interviews or of

15 any type of matters relating to this case that are in

16 writing or otherwise physical items, tangible items

17 has been lost or destroyed? Maybe the question would

18 be destroyed --

19 A Not to my knowledge.

20 Q -- or discarded?

21 A Not to my knowledge.

22 Q Intentionally?

23 A Not to my knowledge.

24 Q What were the parameters that you were

25 working on in terms of the investigation as to when


1 you would ask individuals who were under suspicion to

2 submit to a polygraph test? The guidelines I guess

3 is what I'm asking for.

4 A Yeah, I think it was -- well, there's a

5 combination of things you look at. One would be to

6 what level they rose to be under suspicion, whether

7 you could answer some questions some other ways, the

8 level of cooperation, that sort of thing.

9 Q Well, where did Chris Wolf fit on that

10 scale if we had -- I'll put it on a one to ten, ten

11 being at the highest level of suspicion under the

12 umbrella, one being at the lowest level but still

13 under the umbrella of suspicion, where would you

14 place Chris Wolf on that scale at its highest point?

15 A Well, some of this involves my review of

16 '97 rather than just my knowledge of Chris Wolf. I

17 would say he was probably -- do you want me to give a

18 number, one to ten?

19 Q Yeah, on my one to ten scale, if you

20 would, to give me some idea of --

21 A Oh, probably six or seven.

22 Q Are you aware that after -- I mean there

23 comes a time where you exhaust your investigative

24 efforts with respect to a particular individual where

25 you just run out of things to do, true?


1 A Or you make a decision that this is not a

2 lead worth following anymore, so you may not totally

3 exhaust everything, but you get so much information

4 you've got to make some decisions on it, you have to.

5 You just don't have the resources to follow

6 everything up to final wherever it leads you. But

7 you have to make some decision at some point whether

8 this is panning out and getting stronger or this is

9 not, it's getting weaker and there is no evidence

10 right now that would lead us to believe we would get

11 any more evidence. So there are some decision points

12 that you have to make on different leads.

13 Q Did you ever ask Jackie Dilson to submit

14 to a polygraph examination?

15 A I don't know.

16 Q Was there ever a request to Chris Wolf to

17 do an opposite hand handwriting exemplar?

18 A I'm not aware of one but it would be

19 something that I would have to look at the file.

20 Q Are you aware of any requests made to

21 individuals under suspicion to give opposite hand

22 handwriting exemplars?

23 A Other than Patsy?

24 Q Yes, other than Patsy.

25 A No.


1 Q Why not?

2 A Well, that really is a decision made by

3 CBI and that would be a question that they would have

4 to answer as to why they would want a left-hand

5 exemplar.

6 Q From her and no one else?

7 A Yes.

8 Q Back in the early part of 1997?

9 A Correct.

10 Q When the investigation was still in its

11 early stages?

12 A Correct.

13 Q Who at CBI? Is Ubowski still there, is he

14 the one that --

15 A Chet Ubowski --

16 Q -- you believe would make that --

17 A Chet Ubowski is the one that I believe

18 would request that.

19 Q Are you aware from any source of any

20 information that either the Ramseys' attorneys or the

21 Ramseys' attorneys' investigators provided to the

22 Boulder Police Department that related to Chris Wolf?

23 A Yeah, I believe they provided some

24 information.

25 Q Tell me what you know about that.


1 A Boy, I haven't reviewed that for so long,

2 I don't know what the specific information is but I

3 know we received some.

4 Q You don't recall the date? Was it down

5 the road in the investigation?

6 A I think actually there were several times

7 where we received information on Chris Wolf.

8 Q Do you know who you received it from?

9 A I can't recall specifically.

10 Q Can you pin down the latest date you

11 believe you might have received any information about

12 Chris Wolf from a Ramsey investigator or attorney?

13 A I think in 2000.

14 Q What did you receive in 2000 about Chris

15 Wolf?

16 A I think we received a packet of

17 information that listed him in there as a possible

18 suspect.

19 Q Do you know who sent that to you? Was it

20 Ollie Gray?

21 A It may have been Ollie Gray.

22 Q Okay. And what was done in response to

23 that information?

24 A It was handed over to Tom Wickman to go

25 through that material and to look at it to see if


1 there were any loose ends that needed to be followed

2 up on or any leads in there that need to be looked

3 at.

4 Q I mean based on some things that I have

5 indicated to you today and because you're under the

6 confidentiality order that you're allowed to see,

7 would the Boulder Police Department be interested in

8 reviewing the deposition testimony of Chris Wolf?

9 A Yes.

10 MR. MILLER: Is that an offer?

11 MR. WOOD: Yeah, I think that within the

12 confines of the order I don't know that I can just

13 simply give it to you to say use it for purposes

14 unrelated to the investigative -- I'm not sure I have

15 the authority to give it to you when I know that it's

16 going to be looked at from an investigative

17 standpoint as opposed to limited to this litigation.

18 MR. MILLER: Now you have my problem.

19 MR. WOOD: But I'm going to solve my

20 problem because I --

21 MR. MILLER: All right. Well, then I --

22 MR. WOOD: I might -- I'm going to reserve

23 the right to make sure by reading the order that I

24 could do it. If I can, you will have it; if I can't,

25 I'll ask Judge Carnes for permission to do it or


1 Darnay Hoffman --

2 MR. MILLER: What other depositions might

3 you have that we would be interested in?

4 MR. WOOD: Steve Thomas.

5 MR. MILLER: We would love to have that

6 one as well.

7 MR. WOOD: I would think that Steve

8 Thomas's deposition would be of -- you know, you

9 would like to have that.

10 MR. MILLER: We would like to have them

11 both.

12 MR. WOOD: It's okay with me. Thomas has

13 filed -- let's go off the record for just a second.

14 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: We're off the record at

15 approximately 12:34 p.m.

16 (Recess taken from 12:34 p.m. to 12:35

17 p.m.)

18 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: We're on the record at

19 approximately 12:35 p.m.

20 Q (BY MR. WOOD) I was just pointing out

21 Chris Wolf did not claim confidentiality except three

22 or four specific portions of his deposition. Some of

23 that information I have talked about today because I

24 am allowed to do so under the protective order once

25 you sign on. So we'll get that to you and then I'll


1 find out if we can get the confidential portions to

2 you in light of the fact that you're part of the same

3 protective order where you would be obligated to not

4 disclose them without court order.

5 MR. MILLER: And without knowing who all's

6 depositions you have we would be interested in any

7 depositions of anybody that sheds any light on this

8 whole matter.

9 MR. WOOD: Okay. We're here. We're going

10 to try to get some more. I can tell you that Fleet

11 White is under subpoena from Darnay Hoffman. We

12 expect to depose him in December. His lawyer said

13 he's going to honor his subpoena.

14 MR. MILLER: Good luck.

15 MR. WOOD: Is he still in jail? Don't

16 answer that.

17 Q (BY MR. WOOD) If Chris Wolf has indicated

18 to us that he was told by members of the Boulder

19 Police Department that he had been cleared, he's

20 either -- he's mistaken or he's misunderstood what

21 somebody has said to him; is that fair?

22 A Oh, somebody may have used those words.

23 Q But that would not have been an accurate

24 description?

25 A Not in terms of officially, no.


1 Q Okay. Is there a difference between being

2 officially cleared and being unofficially cleared? I

3 thought earlier you told me that Wolf had not been

4 cleared. Are you telling me that he has been

5 unofficially cleared but not officially cleared?

6 A Well, I think the problem comes in

7 semantics and people use that term differently and

8 some detectives may use those words. If you're

9 asking me is he cleared, I would say -- tell you no.

10 I would tell anybody no. We haven't cleared anybody

11 in this case until we solve it. Then everybody

12 except the person responsible is cleared at that

13 point.

14 Q Tom Wickman contacted Wolf we're told in

15 1999 when he was living down in New Orleans and asked

16 him to come by the Boulder Police Department on his

17 next visit to Boulder. Do you have any information

18 about that in terms of, if true, why he would have

19 made that contact?

20 A When was that?

21 Q I think Jane Harmer may have been involved

22 in it, also. It was in, I want to say July of 1999,

23 Chief, but I would have to go back to my notes. I

24 clearly know it was 1999.

25 A I think that was in relation to the grand


1 jury investigation.

2 Q What role would Chris Wolf --

3 A See, I'm not sure I can talk about that.

4 I'm under order not to talk about grand jury stuff.

5 Q Did Tom Wickman work with the grand jury?

6 A Yes.

7 Q Jane Harmer?

8 A Yes.

9 Q As I understand it, the Boulder Police

10 Department does not have a polygraph polygrapher on

11 its staff?

12 A That's correct.

13 Q And were all of the polygraph examinations

14 performed in the Ramsey investigation done by FBI

15 examiners?

16 A I believe so.

17 Q Was there any input given to the Boulder

18 Police Department by the FBI as to who should or

19 should not be polygraphed?

20 A Not to me. I'm not aware of that during

21 my time on the investigation. I don't know if that

22 occurred prior to that.

23 Q You said the FBI had been involved since

24 early in the case?

25 A Yes.


1 Q How would you describe the FBI's level of

2 involvement? Minimal, moderate, significant, heavy?

3 A I think they were moderately involved.

4 Q Would that be consistent throughout?

5 A Yeah, that was pretty consistent.

6 Q What was the basis of their jurisdiction

7 to be involved in what was a state homicide case?

8 A I think just as a consultant to us in the

9 case. It's pretty typical that the FBI will help

10 local jurisdictions on major cases.

11 Q Would you believe that three FBI agents

12 prior to April the 30th of 1997 would have stated

13 that the intruder theory in this case was baloney?

14 A Would that surprise me?

15 Q Yeah.

16 A No.

17 Q Why would that not surprise you?

18 A I think there is a lot of evidence that

19 would point to it not being an intruder.

20 Q Right. But this is in the first few

21 months of 1997 --

22 A Um-hum.

23 Q -- prior to John and Patsy even being

24 formally interviewed on April the 30th --

25 A Um-hum.