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: 4
#4, RE: Mark Beckner's deposition
Posted by jameson on Apr-10-03 at 04:57 PM
In response to message #3

10 Q If, as you recall, Mr. Ubowski said I

11 don't believe Chris Wolf wrote the note?

12 A Um-hum.

13 Q But you don't know whether --

14 MR. MILLER: You've got to say yes, Mark.

15 A Yes.

16 Q (BY MR. WOOD) But you don't recall

17 whether it was a situation where he found any

18 similarities but nonetheless did not feel that he

19 wrote it. You don't know whether he found

20 similarities or not?

21 A Again you're asking me detailed

22 questions --

23 Q Yeah, I want to make sure that --

24 A -- I didn't have conversations with

25 Mr. Ubowski.


1 Q Who did?

2 A I'm telling you secondhand information

3 that --

4 Q Okay. Who would have had those

5 conversations?

6 A I don't know for sure, probably Tom

7 Trujillo.

8 Q Okay. Any reason why Trujillo as opposed

9 to, say, Wickman?

10 A Tom Trujillo being the primary

11 investigator was responsible for getting samples sent

12 to CBI and getting those reports back.

13 Q Okay. I'm still, and I don't want to get

14 beyond where Mr. Miller doesn't want me to go, but

15 I'm trying to figure out, I mean, I know from

16 information that there were varying opinions on Patsy

17 Ramsey's handwriting. And I'm trying to find out

18 what the police department's policy was because it

19 seems that it would apply to all individuals perhaps

20 why you wouldn't have a second person look at Chris

21 Wolf since you had four people on board and you know

22 that in other instances you had conflicting opinions.

23 Does that make sense? I may not be asking

24 the question.

25 A No, it doesn't make sense.


1 Q In other words, Chet Ubowski may have said

2 one thing but Richard Dusak may have disagreed,

3 right? I mean, that happened I take it?

4 A I'm not aware of that happening.

5 Q Do you think they were always in

6 agreement?

7 A In relation to who? Who are you talking

8 about now?

9 Q Anyone. I don't want to try to get into

10 specific names; I want to know if they were always in

11 agreement. Because if they're not and I understand,

12 at least my understanding is on one particular person

13 they were not in agreement. Why you would decide to

14 stop at Ubowski and not have one of the other

15 examiners look at Chris Wolf.

16 MR. MILLER: I'm going to object because I

17 think it's been asked and answered. I think he

18 already answered your question.

19 Q (BY MR. WOOD) Was Ubowski the end-all of

20 the situation in terms of handwriting? Once you got

21 Ubowski's opinion, that was good?

22 A In some cases.

23 Q What would make the difference between the

24 cases where it was good and the cases where you would

25 take it to someone else?


1 A Well, I think you have to look at it in --

2 you're looking at it in a vacuum. When you're

3 looking at handwriting, we're looking at the whole

4 case and all the evidence combined.

5 And we're looking for things that

6 corroborate other evidence. And if you have

7 somebody, for instance, whether it's this case or

8 another case, that you have got some evidence that

9 you can put them at the scene and now you have a

10 handwriting expert that says, yeah, there's some

11 similarities there, that's corroborating evidence.

12 That's building that person up as a stronger suspect

13 in the case.

14 If you have -- if you run down these leads

15 and you have no evidence that pans out in any of

16 these other areas, fingerprints, hair, DNA, whatever.

17 Q Witnesses, alibi?

18 A Witnesses, alibis, and the handwriting

19 comes back negative, well, that's corroborating why

20 nothing else is lining up as well. So it's you can't

21 look at it in a vacuum.

22 Q The handwriting is not -- would not be

23 looked at in a vacuum to determine the ultimate issue

24 of whether someone was believed to be involved or not

25 involved in the case. You have to look at, as you


1 say, all of the evidence; is that right?

2 A That's correct.

3 Q So the fact that Ubowski reached the

4 opinion that Wolf, he did not believe, wrote the

5 note, that in and of itself would not eliminate or

6 exclude Chris Wolf from being involved in the crime,

7 would it?

8 A Correct.

9 Q And again, I'm not trying to get you to

10 pin this down, but I want to make sure that you're

11 not pinning yourself down. When you said Ubowski

12 said, I don't believe he wrote it, you're not saying

13 that from the standpoint of whether he said no

14 indications or elimination or whatever, you just

15 remember that you were informed that Ubowski didn't

16 believe Wolf wrote the note; is that right?

17 A Correct.

18 Q The formal findings as such would be

19 contained in the written materials submitted by

20 Ubowski back to your department?

21 A Correct.

22 Q Okay. Were there -- you're confident

23 there were materials, written materials, submitted

24 back to the Boulder Police Department on Wolf?

25 A Yes.


1 Q By CBI?

2 A Yes.

3 Q That would have been the case in any

4 handwriting analysis done by CBI or any of the other

5 individuals who were hired by the Boulder PD?

6 A Yes.

7 Q Okay. Why did the Boulder Police

8 Department analyze Chris Wolf's handwriting?

9 A Well, again, there were a number of

10 factors, one of which being his girlfriend came

11 forward and gave some incriminating statements

12 indicating she thought he might be involved. And so

13 that is what initially brought him to the police

14 department's attention. Again this is prior to me

15 being on the case.

16 Q Right.

17 A So I'm giving you --

18 Q Your understanding --

19 A -- hearsay of the, you know, testimony

20 here.

21 Q But your understanding is when you took on

22 the role of being in charge of the investigation in

23 October of '97 I'm sure you went back, to the best of

24 your ability, to familiarize yourself with what had

25 been done in the investigation from the time of her


1 death up until the time you took on the role?

2 A Yes.

3 Q Okay. So while it's not I wasn't there at

4 the time, it's still we get an educated --

5 A I just want to make it clear I'm not

6 giving you -- I'm not giving you firsthand

7 information --

8 Q I understand.

9 A -- I just want to make it clear.

10 Q Right. But your understanding from your

11 review of the investigation was that Chris Wolf had

12 been brought to the attention of the Boulder Police

13 Department by his then girlfriend, an individual who

14 I believe you would agree is Jackie or Jacqueline

15 Dilson?

16 A Yes.

17 Q Okay. If I tell you I believe that

18 occurred in January of 1997, does that sound about

19 right to you in terms of when Ms. Dilson first

20 approached the Boulder police?

21 A Yes, that's my understanding.

22 Q Was it -- as a result of Ms. Dilson's

23 information, did Chris Wolf become a suspect in the

24 JonBent Ramsey murder investigation?

25 A I wouldn't call him a suspect.