12 MR. MILLER: Yeah, my understanding,
13 however, Lin, was in our phone conversation you said
14 you were going to show him various press releases,
15 ask him if it was true or not and that was the end of
17 MR. WOOD: On matters that might not
18 relate to Chris Wolf.
19 MR. MILLER: Right.
20 MR. WOOD: And this is a matter that
21 relates to Chris Wolf, because I believe that I'm
22 entitled to go into not only what was done by the
23 police department investigating Chris Wolf, but what
24 was not done and why it was not done particularly
25 when I can show that it was available to be used
1 against other individuals such as John or Patsy or
2 other people. I think the question of why is a
3 legitimate question in terms of the issue in this
4 case as to whether Chris Wolf and ultimately other
5 individuals were thoroughly investigated by the
6 police department.
7 MR. MILLER: I have made my objection and
8 I stand by the objection. I stand by the assertion
9 of the privilege and if you want to pose the last
10 question I guess before I objected, that's fine. And
11 see what --
12 Q (BY MR. WOOD) The question was do you
13 have any factual basis as we sit here today to
14 dispute any representation made by the family as of
15 the 29th of December that they were either physically
16 and/or emotionally not in a condition to be
18 A No.
19 Q Do you have a time frame in your mind's
20 eye, Chief, as to when you would have received the
21 first handwriting report from Chet Ubowski on either
22 John or Patsy Ramsey's first exemplar?
23 A No, I don't.
24 Q Do you think it was in January or would it
25 have been subsequent in time?
1 MR. MILLER: Of what year?
2 MR. WOOD: 1997.
3 A I'm not sure.
4 Q (BY MR. WOOD) Was Ubowski -- there were a
5 series of exemplars given by Patsy, I think the last
6 one maybe as late as May of '97?
7 A Yes.
8 Q Does that sound right?
9 A Yes.
10 Q Was it your understanding that Ubowski
11 reached his final report, analysis, after all of
12 those exemplars had been submitted?
13 A That was my understanding.
14 Q The reason I ask that is that would
15 indicate that Ubowski's report on Patsy would have
16 been post May or in or after May of 1997?
17 A You know, I would have to go back and look
18 at the file and see if there is prior reports to
19 that, I don't know.
20 Q Was the Boulder Police Department actively
21 obtaining handwriting exemplars from people under
22 suspicion during the year 1997 and the year 1998?
23 A Yes.
24 Q Do you have any explanation to offer as to
25 why there was no effort made to obtain a handwriting
1 exemplar from Chris Wolf until the early part of
3 A No, I can't speak for the time prior to my
5 Q Do you view the use of the media to
6 pressure an individual under suspicion into
7 cooperating with authorities to be a legitimate
8 investigative tool --
9 MR. MILLER: Objection. It's the same
11 MR. WOOD: I think if he says yes then I'm
12 entitled to ask why it wasn't used with Chris Wolf,
13 who we know was uncooperative.
14 MR. MILLER: You've already asked him as
15 to Chris Wolf.
16 MR. WOOD: I'm trying to do it in a way
17 that doesn't step on the toes of John and Patsy.
18 MR. MILLER: But I don't think you are. I
19 think you're trying to do it in a way that doesn't
20 really apply to this case and that's the objection
21 because it is an ongoing investigation. And,
22 frankly, it's a bit awkward since you represent them
23 as well.
24 MR. WOOD: Represent who as well?
25 MR. MILLER: John and Patsy Ramsey.
1 MR. WOOD: As well as who?
2 MR. MILLER: As well as whoever else
3 you're -- you have told me you're representing some
4 media outfit in this case as well.
5 MR. WOOD: No. No, we represent Media
6 Professional Insurance Company who is the insurance
7 company for Thomas Nelson.
8 MR. MILLER: Yes. Well --
9 MR. WOOD: Who is providing counsel for
10 John and Patsy but they're not a media group.
11 MR. MILLER: They're a different entity.
12 MR. WOOD: Well, they're an insurance
14 MR. MILLER: Yeah, that's what you told
15 me, you represented them both, on the phone.
16 MR. WOOD: I told you -- well, no, what I
17 told you was that Media Professional is defending
18 this case and that I am co-counsel.
19 MR. MILLER: Right.
20 MR. WOOD: And that we were trying, as I
21 would represent to you now, to make sure that we
22 don't cross the line of going into areas that are not
23 relevant to this case. And if we can limit the
24 amount of time, that's to the benefit of Media
25 Professional. Ultimately Media Professional if this
1 case is not dismissed on motion is going to be
2 defending this case through the trial of the murder
3 charge. So I was simply trying to accommodate your
4 request and hopefully Media Professional's interest
5 in holding down expenses. If we are able to
6 successfully defeat the case on summary judgment.
7 There is no conflict in the two and they
8 are consistent with my questions to the chief, that
9 is to say, as to Chris Wolf if he viewed that as a
10 legitimate investigative tool, then I would like to
11 know as he has told me, and you can acknowledge, why
12 it was not used on Chris Wolf in 1997 to try to get
13 him to cooperate and come in and give exemplars and
14 to give an interview. I think it's a legitimate
15 question and, you know, if we got an answer then --
16 MR. MILLER: I thought you asked --
17 MR. WOOD: We could move on to another
18 subject matter.
19 MR. MILLER: I thought you asked him about
20 Chris Wolf and the media.
21 MR. WOOD: He told me that he did not --
22 was not aware of any strategy or plan applied to
23 Chris Wolf to bring public pressure on him through
24 the media to cooperate in 1997.
25 Q (BY MR. WOOD) Am I right, Chief?
1 A Yes.
2 Q My question now is, despite the fact that
3 you say it was not used on Wolf, do you view it as a
4 legitimate investigative tool, that is, using the
5 media to bring public pressure on an individual under
6 suspicion to try to get him to either cooperate or
8 MR. MILLER: I have the same objection.
9 I've made it before. I make it again. And if you
10 don't agree with it, Lin, we'll just have to have it
12 MR. WOOD: But it seems to me, Bob, that
13 if he says yes I think it's legitimate. Then my
14 question would be can you explain why it was not used
15 on a person such as Chris Wolf. If he says no, I
16 don't view it as legitimate, then we move on.
17 I mean, it relates directly to facts that
18 have been proven about Chris Wolf's lack of
19 cooperation, lack of giving an interview, lack of
20 giving non-testimonial evidence.
21 MR. MILLER: But he did all of those
22 things, Lin.
23 MR. WOOD: Not in 1997.
24 MR. MILLER: Well, he did; he ultimately
25 did them.
1 MR. WOOD: So did John and Patsy.
2 MR. MILLER: Ultimately as well.
3 MR. WOOD: Right, before he did.
4 MR. MILLER: But this should not be
5 whether we're comparing John and Patsy Ramsey to
6 Chris Wolf.
7 MR. WOOD: We're not.
8 MR. MILLER: That's what you're trying to
9 make it and that's my objection.
10 MR. WOOD: We're really not. The reason
11 it sounds like that is you've got to remember
12 ultimately I've got to answer the question in this
13 case in defending it, one of the issues will be could
14 Chris Wolf still be a viable person to be
15 investigated, could others. And part of that, part
16 of that defense if we get there will be to show that
17 this police department did not thoroughly investigate
18 other individuals.
19 And I'm trying today to stay away from the
20 other individuals like Bill McReynolds, Mervin Pugh
21 and Fleet White and a host of others that may have
22 been either under suspicion or should have been under
23 suspicion, one could argue. I'm trying to simply
24 show as it pertains to Chris Wolf information that I
25 think would indicate that he was not thoroughly
1 investigated. And it just so happens that part of
2 showing that is to show that there were tools being
3 utilized by this department against John and Patsy
4 Ramsey that were available that weren't used against
5 Chris Wolf.
6 Now I think that's legitimate.
7 MR. MILLER: Well, I don't and I'm
8 sticking by my objection I made.
9 MR. WOOD: Okay. And the objection is so
10 that it's clear?
11 MR. MILLER: The ongoing criminal
12 investigation law enforcement privilege.
13 MR. WOOD: Any question that I ask about
14 that strategy of public pressure through the media to
15 coerce either cooperation or a confession you're
16 going to take that privilege?
17 MR. MILLER: I am.
18 MR. WOOD: Okay.
19 MR. MILLER: Insofar as it's not related
20 specifically to Chris Wolf, which he has already
22 MR. WOOD: Okay. Well, we'll just agree
23 to disagree on that one.