A. Okay.

Q. Do you have it in front of you?

A. Yes, I'm sorry, yes.

Q. Fine. Would you look at thethird paragraph from the top, which begins "Two days before we
were to go onstage." And would you read that whole paragraph, please.

A. Certainly. "Two days before we were to go onstage, we got some surprising big news when the
Colorado Bureau of Investigation lab told us that the acrylic fibers found on the duct tape that covered
JonBenet's mouth were a quote, likely match, for Patsy's blazer. We were ready."

Q. You've been asked earlier with respect to the forensic, you know, not importance, but the
forensic views that the ransom note was being made for. Did this become an important piece of
forensic evidence in the case?

MR. WOOD: You're talking about the ransom note now or the likely match of four fibers?

MR. HOFFMAN: I'm sorry, thank you, Lin.

Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Did the fibers that were found on the duct tape that were covering
JonBenet's mouth that were, quote, a likely match for Patsy's blazer, did that become an important
piece of forensic evidence in the investigation?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Do you know when or at what point in the case the CBI made that report?

A. I think it was sometime before we were told -- I think that information may have been held by
Wickman and Trujillo and Beckner possibly.

Q. Do you know whether or not that information was actually part of anyone's presentation before
the district attorney that was made prior to the convening of a grand jury when you turned the case
over to the district attorney?

A. Mr. Hoffman, are you asking me -- I'm sorry, that's not clear to me.

Q. All right. That CBI report, did you receive it before you made your formal presentation to the
district attorney's office? That's a presentation that was made prior to the convening of the grand jury.
I believe it was in May or June of 1998 when you formally turned over the case to the district attorney.
I may have that date wrong.

MR. WOOD: Hey, Darnay, I'm just a little unclear if you don't mind.

MR. HOFFMAN: Yeah.

MR. WOOD: There were two presentations, one was made by Trip DeMuth I believe in May and
then there was what we call a VIP presentation that was made of a lot of people other than the DA's
office in June. Those are the two presentations. I'm not sure which one you are referring to.

MR. HOFFMAN: Well, thank you. It is confusing, there is no question about it.

Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) The presentation that most people, and myself included, think of is that
large presentation where you stood up and you gave evidence yourself. That's the one where you refer
to Alex Hunter is talking on a cell phone and it sort of -- it seems at the end of that you decided that
you had had enough of the case and you were going to move on. That's the presentation I'm talking
about.

MR. HOFFMAN: I'm assuming -- is that the VIP presentation, Lin?

MR. WOOD: I don't know. I mean, Steve Thomas would have to figure out whether that's an
accurate statement about whether he heard, saw, or thought or felt. I'm not sure.

Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Well, you know what, I'm just confusing the issue. I'm going to drop
that line of questioning and just ask you, did you have occasion to actually see the CBI report that
indicated that there was a likely match for Patsy's blazer with the acrylic fiber found on the duct tape?

A. Not that I recall. Detective Trujillo, who was in charge of all the evidence and forensic testing in
this case, he and Wickman verbally offered that to the rest of the detective team.

Q. All right. So you never personally saw a report with that result or that conclusion?

A. I'm relying on a fellow officer.

Q. Okay. Do you know whether or not there was ever any evidence that you saw or you heard
about in the course of the investigation while you were still with the Boulder police force showing
whether or not any fibers from either Patsy's clothing or from her boots or from any part of her was
found in JonBenet's panties?

MR. WOOD: That's about three or four questions, Darnay.

Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Do you know whether or not there was ever any evidence, forensic
evidence, showing that any article of clothing could be matched to a substance found in JonBenet's
diaper or panties?

MR. WOOD: I have to just comment that I don't believe there was any evidence that JonBenet was
wearing a diaper.

Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) All right. To her panties?

A. If I understand the question correctly, and now just rephrase it so I'm answering the right
question or --

Q. Yeah, when JonBenet Ramsey was found she was wearing I don't know what other word there
is for it but panties and there was a question as to whether or not there were substances found in that
panty area. What I'm asking you is do you know if there was ever any forensic evidence indicating that
any article of clothing that Patsy wore was found as a particle in that panty area of JonBenet?

A. No, I am unaware of any forensic or fiber evidence from Patsy Ramsey's clothing to the victim's
under clothing or underwear.

Q. Do you know if there was any forensic evidence of Patsy Ramsey's clothing at all besides the
duct tape area on JonBenet?

A. As we sit here now, no, I don't recollect any other fiber evidence, other than what we have
discussed linking the mother to JonBenet.

http://www.fbi.gov/hq/lab/fsc/backissu/july2000/deedric3.htm

It is not possible to say positively that a fiber originated from a particular fabric ….

In order to say that the fiber originated from the item of clothing, the clothing either had to be the only fabric of its type ever produced or still remaining on earth, or the transfer of fibers was directly observed. Since neither of these situations is likely to occur or be known, fiber examiners will conclude that the fibers could have originated from the clothing or that the fibers are consistent with originating from the clothing.

It is argued that the large volume of fabric produced reduces the significance of any fiber association discovered in a criminal case. It can never be stated with certainty that a fiber originated from a particular garment because other garments were likely produced using the same fiber type and color.

A. I believe so, yes.

Q. And it's also true that those fibers were not capable or there was no identification made, no
source found in the investigation, true?

A. When I left, I don't believe those other fibers had been sourced.

Q. And, you know, without going and I guess we could do it if we need to, maybe we'll do it later but
let's just for a moment see if we can't generally agree, that there were a considerable number of fibers
found on JonBenet Ramsey's body and articles of clothing that were not in fact sourced by the
investigation, true?

A. Whether artifact or evidence, yeah, there were a number of hair and fiber pieces in this case that
I know they, Trujillo and CBI, were trying to source.

Q. And as of August of '98 had not been able to do so, true?

A. That's my understanding.

Q. And CBI had at one point come up with a conclusion that there was a consistency between fibers
found on a blanket in the suitcase that matched fibers on JonBenet's body or were consistent with, is
that the right term?

A. I heard Mr. Smit and Mr. DeMuth refer to that but I didn't hear Trujillo ever offer a report or an
explanation concerning that.

Q. But the FBI disagreed with the CBI, didn't they?

A. On what point?

Q. On the question of whether there were fibers inside materials found in the suitcase found under
the window in the basement consistent with fibers found on JonBenet?

A. No, I'm aware of Smit and DeMuth's position or stating this consistency of these fibers, but I'm
not aware of a disagreement between the FBI and that finding.

A. Yes.

Q. That were consistent or a likely match with Patsy Ramsey's jacket?

A. Yes.

Q. That was the red and black and gray jacket that she was wearing?

A. I've always heard it referred to as a red and black jacket, yes.

Q. It's the one in the photograph, though, that was produced where they went back a year
afterwards and tried to find what they were wearing, right?

A. Yes.

Q. Were you aware of the fact that Priscilla White owned an identical jacket, that in fact Patsy
Ramsey bought her jacket because she liked Priscilla White's so much?

A. Until you told me that right now, no.

Q. So I assume that no request, that you're aware of, was ever made for the Whites to give articles
of clothing with respect to this investigation?

A. They may have been asked to give clothing; I'm unaware of that.

Q. There were no black fibers that were found on the duct tape that were said to be consistent with
the fibers on Patsy Ramsey's red and black jacket, were there?

A. It's my understanding that the four fibers were red in color.

He forgot to say he found none of Patsy's DNA in there either.

The fiber evidence does not prove a parent did this.

(Oh, I really wish Lin would hurry up and release the rest of the depositions. It is even more clear that the crime was done by an intruder.)

why do you keep bumping up pieces of the deposition?
im sure most everyone has read it in its entirety by now.

Why do you care?

If you don't like to be in a forum where the focus is the case, I suggest you go elsewhere.

I would love to be able to move on to another deposition or to a NEW development, but that isn't happening.

Maybe we should revisit another older deposition - - we have John and Patsy's.... but to be honest, I don't have time right now.

But if you wouldlike to tackle that project, divide up their depositions like I did Thomas', go for it!