jameson's Links  Terms of Service  News  Chat  Forum Archives  Cord Photos  Email  

jameson's WebbSleuths

Subject: "Thomas depo part 4 - handwriting" Archived thread - Read only
 
  Previous Topic | Next Topic
Printer-friendly copy    
Conferences old depo and interview threads Topic #18
Reading Topic #18
jamesonadmin
Charter Member
14249 posts
May-16-03, 05:10 PM (EST)
Click to EMail jameson Click to send private message to jameson Click to add this user to your buddy list  
"Thomas depo part 4 - handwriting"
 
   LAST EDITED ON May-18-03 AT 04:03 PM (EST)
 
Q. Thank you. Back when you all had the June 1998 presentation that is referred to -- is that
referred to as the VIP presentation?

A. We can refer to it as that.

Q. Did you ever hear it referred to as that when you had the VIPs there?

A. I think so.

Q. Let's refer to it as the June 1998 VIP presentation so we know what we're talking about. Did, in
fact, the detectives during that presentation present a long list of suspects who had been considered and
dropped, including Randy Simons, Kevin Rayburn, Bud Henderson, Linda Hoffman-Pugh, Joe Barnhill
and Chris Wolf?

A. I would certainly have to review any notes and reports from the police files on that, but that's not
inconsistent with my recollection.

Q. You recall then the presentation including a statement that Chris Wolf was a suspect who had
been eliminated?

A. No, that's not what I'm saying. What I am saying is I don't recall that -- there was a lot of
information exchanged over two days at this VIP presentation. It very well may have been said but
you asked me right now, I don't have that specific recollection about that particular individual.

Q. Do you know whether Chris Wolf's DNA was ever tested?

A. I have no personal knowledge of that.

Q. Was Chris Wolf one of the 73 individuals, that number that you referenced with respect to your
comments about 73 suspects having their handwriting analyzed, is he one of the 73?

A. I don't know.

Q. Well, how did you come up with the number 73?

A. From Detective Trujillo's briefing to other detectives about CBI's examinations.

Q. Do you know whether -- do you know as a fact firsthand or from what you've heard whether
Chris Wolf's handwriting was ever analyzed by the Boulder Police Department?

A. As I said previously, I don't know the details of Detective Weinheimer's subsequent investigation
of Chris Wolf.

Q. Is the answer no, you don't know?

A. The answer to what?

Q. To my question.

A. What is the question, sir?

Q. Listen carefully. From -- my question was, do you know as a fact, firsthand or from what you
heard, whether Chris Wolf's handwriting was ever analyzed by the Boulder Police Department, yes or
no?

A. I don't know that.

Q. Do you know?

A. I don't know that.

Q. Okay. Do you know whether Mr. Wolf, I guess you can tell me this is pretty easy, maybe you'll
understand this one. Clearly you don't know whether he was -- his handwriting eliminated him as the
author of the note, do you?

A. As I have said, I don't know the details of Detective Weinheimer's investigation but took
Detective Weinheimer's statement that Chris Wolf was cleared at face value.

Q. Knowing what you know about how the Boulder Police Department, what would one use to clear
someone, what could possibly clear an individual here? One would be a solid alibi, right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Verified, right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. What else?

A. Handwriting, certainly.

Q. Handwriting. That eliminated John Ramsey as the author of the ransom note?

A. Is that a question?

Q. Yes.

A. What is your question?

Q. You said handwriting and I said handwriting, that eliminated John Ramsey as the author of the
ransom note, true?

A. That's my understanding.

Q. All right. What else besides alibi and handwriting?

A. I don't know what was being done with it on the back end, but certainly a polygraph examination.

Q. So you would eliminate based solely on a polygraph?

A. No.

Q. All right. You would take it into consideration?

MR. DIAMOND: You have to answer audibly.

A. We would take our polygraph examinations into consideration, yes, sir.

Q. (BY MR. WOOD) All of your polygraph examinations were done by the FBI, weren't they?

A. I believe so.

Q. You didn't have anybody on the Boulder Police Department that was trained in polygraph
examinations, did you?

A. I don't know if anybody received polygraph training but we did not have an in-house polygrapher.

Q. Okay. So we've got alibi, handwriting, polygraph, what else?

MR. DIAMOND: Polygraph coupled with other things he said.

Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Well, yeah, polygraph alone would not be sufficient to clear someone, would
it?

A. Not necessarily, no.

Q. Right. So now what else could be utilized, as you understood this investigation, to clear a
suspect?

A. Witnesses.

Q. Witnesses as to alibi?

A. Yes, certainly that.

Q. Witnesses as to what else?

A. Well, I think you're hitting the highlights. Beyond that, I don't know how specifically those
determinations beyond that, the obvious, people were being cleared.

Q. You're familiar with the use of the term forensics, aren't you?

A. I am.

Q. What would be forensic evidence that could clear someone in the JonBenet Ramsey
investigation?

A. Handwriting.

Q. Anything else?

MR. DIAMOND: You're saying standing by itself?

Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Standing by itself, if I were going to say, well, John Doe has been eliminated
as a suspect in the JonBenet Ramsey investigation based on forensic evidence, what is the only
forensic evidence that you were aware of that could have itself eliminated someone from being
involved?

A. Besides the handwriting?

Q. I want the answer. If it's handwriting, if there was anything else, let me know that.

A. Well, I know the big controversy -- thank you very much -- was whether or not DNA was
clearing people in this case.

Q. And ultimately it was not, was it?

A. I don't know. I certainly don't hold myself out as a DNA expert.

Q. No, but I mean, you knew the approach the investigation was taking from the time of your
involvement through August of '98 and the DNA either quite simply either eliminated everybody or it
eliminated nobody if it wasn't a match, true?

A. There was a huge controversy about the DNA.

Q. So it was not in and of itself viewed as a forensic piece of evidence that eliminated anyone, was
it?

A. Correct.

Q. Other than handwriting, what else was the basis for a forensic evidence that would eliminate
someone as a suspect in the Ramsey case?

A. May I have just a moment?

Q. Sure.

(Discussion off the record between the deponent and Mr. Diamond.)

A. Mr. Wood, unless I'm missing something entirely obvious, no, the handwriting, the ransom note, et
cetera, was the sort of cornerstone piece of evidence in this case and I think that's how most people
were being cleared.

Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Well, when you say most people were being cleared, had the Boulder Police
Department concluded that the murderer and the author of the note were one and the same, that is to
say, had the Boulder Police Department concluded that there could not have been involvement by more
than one person?

A. I think there was some division on that point.

Q. Because actually the handwriting, only if eliminated under analysis, only really eliminates an
individual as the author of the note but does not in and of itself eliminate the person from involvement in
the crime, true?

A. I think the collective consensus was that certainly it wasn't a leap the author of the note was
involved in the crime.

Q. I don't think that would be a leap. But the question is elimination as the author of the note did not
in and of itself eliminate one from involvement in the crime, true?

A. By way of a conspiracy that you're suggesting that --

Q. I'm just suggesting straight up, sir, handwriting analysis that eliminates you as the author of the
note does not in and of itself eliminate you from involvement in the crime, true?

A. One could argue that, yes, sir.

Q. Fiber evidence was not a forensic test that was used to eliminate in and of itself, was it?

A. As far as elimination of suspects, I don't have firsthand knowledge of the fiber evidence testing
and that wasn't an assignment I had in this case. But no, I don't believe that fiber evidence in and of
itself was any sort of eliminator.

Q. Do you know whether any fiber tests were ever conducted on non-testimonial evidence
voluntarily provided by Chris Wolf, any fibers ever tested to your knowledge?

A. I got the impression that it was.

Q. Where did you get that impression?

A. From Jackie Dilson after she turned over to Investigator Ainsworth and/or Smit in June of '97
what she told me were, I think, bed linens, a leather jacket, a diary, maybe underwear, and she told me
that she had been told they were going to submit that for testing.

Q. Do you know whether it was tested?

A. I do not.

Q. Do you -- you certainly have no idea of what any of the results would have been if tested, true?

A. Correct.

Q. Do you know how many handwriting exemplars Mr. Wolf gave?

A. No, as I said before I don't know the breadth or depth or extent of Mr. -- Detective
Weinheimer's investigation into Mr. Wolf.

Q. What was the standard practice in terms of when you were obtaining handwriting exemplars
from suspects for analysis, how many exemplars were standardly obtained?

A. It's my recollection that initially, and I can only speak to what myself and Gosage were doing
routinely, we were asking for the voluntary completion of what is known as a London letter, as well as
a second sheet including words or phrases from the ransom note and that initial screen was what I'm
assuming after booked into evidence was eventually going to CBI for analysis to see if there was any
reason to further investigate an individual.

Q. Your understanding is there were 73 suspects whose handwriting was analyzed?

A. At the time of the VIP presentation, at the time I left, yes --

Q. June of 1998?

A. -- that was the number.

Q. And of those 73, how many of those individuals were eliminated as the author of the note based
on the handwriting analysis itself?

A. And I'm not a handwriting expert, but under entire elimination, I don't know.

Q. I don't want to know about entire elimination unless you're using that in a phrase, maybe you are.
I want to -- you've got 73 people whose handwriting was tested, and you've either got a result from
CBI that says we've got a match, right, or you've got a result from CBI that says basically inconclusive
or you've got a result from CBI that says elimination, right?

A. No, I don't think it's that simple.

Q. Well, I'm not trying to make it more complicated than that. But maybe you know more about it
and if you do, then, that would be helpful for me to learn. I want to know, though, from the bottom line
that we can agree that it is simple when it comes to the question of elimination, that's simple because
that's one of the categories, elimination --

A. Right.

Q. -- right?

Right.

Q. And how many of the 73 were eliminated as the author of the note based on the handwriting
examples or exemplars?

A. I don't know.

Q. Not many, true?

A. I know that the majority fell into the no evidence to indicate category.

Q. But they couldn't go to elimination, could they?

A. Again, I don't know.

Q. Didn't you talk with the handwriting expert, sir?

A. Are we talking about the CBI expert?

Q. Any of them. There were four with respect to Patsy Ramsey, weren't there?

A. Yes.

Q. How many other of the 73 had four different examiners look at their handwriting?

A. I don't know.

Q. Do you know of any? Can you name one?

A. I'm trying to recall with those three additional examiners if other suspects' historical writings or
exemplars were provided to them. As I sit here today, I don't know. But if any, the number would be
few.

Q. Do you know whether the Boulder Police Department obtained historical writings with respect to
Chris Wolf's handwriting?

A. I don't know. I didn't get very far with Mr. Wolf, Mr. White -- or Mr. Wood, I'm sorry.

Q. That's okay. Fleet White's handwriting was tested?

A. I believe so, yes.

Q. Was he eliminated?

A. He fell into a category that he was no longer, if my understanding is correct, and this wasn't my
assignment, but by way of detective briefings, Mr. White was not in the running, if you will, by way of a
handwriting exemplar.

Q. My question is not in the running. My question is was he eliminated as the author of the note
based on a handwriting analysis conducted by the Boulder Police Department or the CBI?

A. I don't know what the CBI expert concluded as far as a categorical elimination of Mr. White.

Q. John Ramsey was categorically eliminated, wasn't he?

A. Again I would liken it to Mr. White. I simply learned that Mr. Ramsey was not a candidate
based on his handwriting.

Q. You don't know whether John Ramsey was eliminated by the examiner at CBI as an author of
the note based on that and his -- the analysis of his exemplars, you don't know that as we sit here
today?

A. He may very well have fallen into that majority of no evidence to indicate but if you're telling me
that he fell into the elimination category, I won't dispute that because we never had any concerns after
some of these results that he was the author of the note.

Q. Well, the question is not what I'm suggesting to you. Do you know? Do you have any idea
whether his report from CBI came back and said John Ramsey has been eliminated based on the CBI
analysis as the author of the ransom note? Do you know one way or the other, sir?

A. As to what category he fell into?

Q. Whether he was eliminated by the CBI analysis is my question, please, sir?

A. As to the category he fell into, including a category of elimination, I don't have personal
knowledge.

Q. Do you have any knowledge, secondary or otherwise?

A. As I told you a minute ago, Mr. Wood, it was my understanding from our briefings that he was
not a candidate as the author of the note. I don't know what else I can -- how many ways I can
answer that question for you.

Q. I just want to know if you know the results of the CBI analysis of John Ramsey's handwriting?

MR. DIAMOND: Any more clearly than he just told you?

MR. WOOD: That's my question. Do you want to answer for him? Because if so --

MR. DIAMOND: I think you --

MR. WOOD: -- I would love to swear you in and examine you under oath, but I think it would be a
waste of our time.

MR. DIAMOND: I think you're not listening to the answers. We're not --

MR. WOOD: Why don't you worry about your side of the table and let me worry about mine. If I'm
not understanding him, that's my fault. I mean, it's my walk away without the information, right? I
think I'm understanding. I'm just not sure I'm getting a straight answer. It seems to me that this
gentleman should know, as he claims to be one of the lead detectives on the case, whether John
Ramsey's CBI handwriting analysis came back elimination.

Q. (BY MR. WOOD) And you don't know, do you?

A. As I have told you, Mr. Wood, I stand on my answer, yeah, I know that he was not -- that he
was eliminated by way of handwriting. But if you're asking me if the CBI examiner reached a
conclusion of elimination, I'm sitting here again telling you I don't have personal knowledge of that.

Q. Let me go that route because I think I understand you. Do you know how many of the 73
individuals were eliminated by way of handwriting?

A. By way of falling into the category of elimination.

Q. That were eliminated by way of handwriting, your words.

MR. DIAMOND: I think he means by the Boulder Police Department.

Q. (BY MR. WOOD) I mean that were eliminated by way of handwriting, certainly by the Boulder
Police Department. You're the one that says 73?

A. Out of those 73?

Q. Out of those 73, I want to know how many were eliminated by way of handwriting?

A. If you're asking me how many of those 73 fell into the elimination category based on question
document examiner conclusions, is that what you're asking me?

Q. I think so.

A. Yeah.

Q. What is the answer?

A. I don't know.

Q. You don't have any idea?

A. No. As I have previously said on the record that number is probably very few. The majority of
those, as I have said, fell into the no evidence to indicate category.

Q. Did a lot of them have similarities?

A. Did a lot of who?

Q. A lot of the 73 people, did their -- did their analysis show similarities?

A. I don't know, I'm not a handwriting expert.


  Printer-friendly page | Top

 
Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic
jamesonadmin
Charter Member
14249 posts
May-16-03, 05:17 PM (EST)
Click to EMail jameson Click to send private message to jameson Click to add this user to your buddy list  
1. "Is Wickman a BORG leader?"
In response to message #0
 
   Q. Did you review the reports on any of the 73?

A. Have you seen the -- if you've seen the CBI reports, that's not how they're stated in a narrative
form like that. No, I never saw anything like that.

Q. Nor does the CBI do handwriting analysis and reach a conclusion, for example, that 24 of 26
letters of the alphabet are similar, they don't do that, do they, sir?

A. Well, according to Detective Sergeant Wickman, he came back and told us that.

Q. But you know that Mr. Ubowski has in fact denied that as being accurate?

A. No, I don't know that.

Q. You didn't see his statement with respect to the fact that he had never concluded anything about
Patsy Ramsey in terms of 24 of 26 letters of the alphabet being similar?

A. Well, you can ask --

Q. I'm asking you this question, please.

A. I know and I'm trying to answer it for you.

Q. Please do.

A. Wickman came back from CBI and told that to John Eller and he told that to me and that was
Trujillo's account and other detectives were told that.

Q. You didn't hear it from Ubowski?

A. No, I didn't deal with Ubowski.

Q. You didn't see it in writing from Ubowski?

A. No.

Q. After your book came out you weren't aware that Ubowski publicly stated that he had never
concluded that Patsy Ramsey was the author of the note and that he had never concluded that 24 of
the 26 letters of the alphabet from her writing were similar?

A. Well, you had two questions.

Q. Are you familiar with my question?

MR. DIAMOND: Will you let him answer the question, please?

MR. WOOD: I will. I think I've let him answer every question so far.

MR. DIAMOND: You didn't. You didn't.

MR. WOOD: Well, I'm certainly going to because I want to get his answer to every question. Let's let
him do it. I'll restate it.

MR. DIAMOND: I would like the reporter to reread it.

MR. WOOD: I'll withdraw it and restate it.

MR. DIAMOND: All right.

Q. (BY MR. WOOD) After your book came out, sir, were you aware that Mr. Ubowski publicly
denied the accuracy of the statement that he concluded Patsy Ramsey wrote the ransom note?

A. No. You're telling me this for the first time.

Q. Are you familiar that Mr. Ubowski stated that he had never reached the conclusion that 24 of her
letters out of the 26 letters of the alphabet were matched with the ransom note?

A. No, I have not heard that.

Q. And you stated to the contrary in your book, didn't you?

A. Yeah, I stated what I was told by my detective sergeant.

Q. And you weren't even, I guess, aware that Mr. Ubowski and the CBI said they don't even make
that kind of analysis with respect to the 24 out of the 26 letters of the alphabet, you don't know anything
about that --

A. No.

Q. -- in terms of the public statement by the CBI after your book was published?

A. The CBI made a public statement?

Q. Yes, sir.

A. As an organization, I haven't seen that.

MR. WOOD: I'll show it to you when we come back a little bit later on. Let's take five minutes.

VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is 11:06. We're going off the record. This is the end of tape one.


  Printer-friendly page | Top
Slapfish
unregistered user
May-16-03, 09:00 PM (EST)
 
2. "RE: Is Wickman a BORG leader?"
In response to message #1
 
   I find the handwriting information to be some of the most disturbing. 73 different people submitted handwriting samples but only a few of them were completely eliminated. Patsy's sample therefore falls into the same category as MOST of the others who were analyzed. How can it possibly be held against her that she was NOT eliminated when there were several dozen others in the same category?

This is disgraceful. Comparing the handwriting as a means of eliminating suspects is pointless if only 5-10% of them can be eliminated that way. The only reason they did not completely eliminate the ones in the LOW probability range is because they would also have to eliminate Patsy as well.


  Printer-friendly page | Top
jamesonadmin
Charter Member
14249 posts
May-17-03, 10:32 PM (EST)
Click to EMail jameson Click to send private message to jameson Click to add this user to your buddy list  
3. "more on handwriting"
In response to message #2
 
   Q. Page 113. Next to the last paragraph "Additional information he shared with us at the interview,
which we were later able to confirm, further eliminated him." What are you referring to in terms of the
additional information?

MR. DIAMOND: Can I, give me a second, please, to get the context?

MR. WOOD: Bill McReynolds.

THE DEPONENT: Chuck, I need to prior to this answer just 60 seconds to ask you a question.

MR. WOOD: Go off the record.

VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is 4:07. We're going off the record. This is the end of tape three.
(Recess taken from 4:07 p.m. to 4:09 p.m.)

VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is 4:10. We're on the record. This the

MR. DIAMOND:

A.

Q. (BY MR. WOOD)

A.

Q.

A.

Q.

A.

Q. Yeah, he did. Did you ever see the letter that he had sent to Patsy before his surgery where he
talked about how much he enjoyed JonBenet giving him a tour of the house and giving him a special
present in the basement of the house a year before, Christmas of 1995; did you ever see that letter?

A. I'm not sure I ever saw a letter like that.

Q. Do you deny seeing a letter like that?

A. I'm telling you if the Ramseys had wished to share that with us, I certainly would have looked at it
but, as I sit --

Q. Are you saying they didn't?

A. -- as I sit here right now I don't recall that letter.

Q. Analysis proved that Santa Bill didn't write the ransom note. Was he in the elimination category
from CBI?

A. Again, if you want to go back to that, he was not under consideration. Whether that was
elimination or no evidence to indicate, it was my understanding from Trujillo that McReynolds was not a
candidate as the ransom note author.

Q. How many different examiners looked at his handwriting?

A. I think it was just Chet Ubowski at CBI.

Q. How about Jessie McReynolds, did he fall under the category as John Ramsey did of elimination
as the author?

A. Same in the interest of your time, same answer as for Bill McReynolds.

Q. Again, I guess in the interest of my time, thank you for your concern. When we use the term
elimination, you claim not to understand what that means from the CBI and other handwriting experts;
is that what you're telling me? Because I'm trying to find out if you've got a report where a CBI
person, in this instance Mr. Ubowski I assume, said based on his review of exemplars in the ransom
note he was able to eliminate Bill McReynolds as an author of the note. That's what I want to know
whether that was done in this case or not. Was it done or not is my question?

A. And I'm not real sure of your question, but as far as elimination or no evidence to indicate, I
believe Santa Bill and his son fell into that category.

Q. But there were examiners that said there was no evidence to indicate that Patsy was the author
of the note, true?

A. The same examiner who also said that didn't disqualify her as possibly being the author of the
note.

Q. Nor would it disqualify Bill McReynolds in and of itself, true?

A. I think it was different examiners and I don't know the standards of their professional
examination.

Q. You have seen the -- I'm sure you watched some of the appearances by Alex Hunter when he
went out on the media, didn't you?

A. I did.

Q. You've heard Alex Hunter say that the handwriting experts in this case in fact put Patsy Ramsey
somewhere around a 4.5 on a one to five scale, five being elimination. You heard district attorney
Hunter make that statement, didn't you?

A. Not only did I not hear him make that statement, District Attorney Hunter I never know what to
believe when he speaks.

Q. You don't like Alex Hunter, do you?

A. No, sir.

(I will also post this on the 3 suspects thread where McReynolds is mentioned.)


  Printer-friendly page | Top
jamesonadmin
Charter Member
14249 posts
May-18-03, 04:02 PM (EST)
Click to EMail jameson Click to send private message to jameson Click to add this user to your buddy list  
4. "Speckin"
In response to message #3
 
   Q. Mr. Speckin we've been over, although do you recall Mr. Speckin stating that, When I compare
the handwriting habits of Patsy Ramsey with those presented in the --

A. Mr. Wood, bring me to where you are. I'm lost, sir.

Q. I'm sorry, I'm in my notes. I'm not in the book.

A. Okay.

Q. Do you recall Mr. Speckin finding-- we talked about he found no evidence that Patsy Ramsey
disguised her handwriting exemplars. I didn't want to go over this part and I wanted to. Mr. Speckin
stated, When I compare the handwriting habits of Patsy Ramsey with those contained in the questioned
ransom note, there exists agreement to the extent that some of her individual letter formations and letter
combinations do appear in the ransom note. When this agreement is weighed against the number type
and consistency of the differences present, I am unable to identify Patsy Ramsey as the author of the
questioned ransom note with any degree of certainty. I am, however, unable to eliminate her as the
author. Does that sound correct in terms of what Mr. Speckin's formal report was?

A. If that's what you're reading from, that's consistent with my recollection. He did have other
comments and information as well.


  Printer-friendly page | Top
jamesonadmin
Charter Member
14249 posts
May-18-03, 04:05 PM (EST)
Click to EMail jameson Click to send private message to jameson Click to add this user to your buddy list  
5. "RE: Thomas depo part 4 - handwriting"
In response to message #0
 
   Q. Lloyd Cunningham and Howard Ryle were obviously employed by the Ramsey family, true?

A. That was my belief.

Q. You knew that Lloyd Cunningham had in fact been the CBI examiner that had certified Chet
Ubowski?

A. No, but I do recall him saying he had done some training or had some capacity in that effect with
Mr. Ubowski.

Q. How about Howard Ryle, did you know him to be formerly with the CBI?

A. I didn't know he was previously with the CBI.

Q. Did?

A. Did not.

Q. I'm just trying -- I may be confused about which one was with the CBI or taught Mr. Ubowski?

A. One was with, I think, previously the San Francisco PD and you may be correct; the other one
may have been with CBI.


  Printer-friendly page | Top
jamesonadmin
Charter Member
14249 posts
May-18-03, 04:12 PM (EST)
Click to EMail jameson Click to send private message to jameson Click to add this user to your buddy list  
6. "RE: Thomas depo part 4 - handwriting"
In response to message #5
 
   A. I have heard, I think even you say that after -- or at a point in time after which I left the
investigation, I was of the impression that after Kane came on board, they gave a number of consent
releases.

Q. They also provided a considerable amount of historical writings from Patsy Ramsey, didn't they,
in addition to the five exemplars?

A. I don't know if those were -- if those were seized by crime scene search warrant or if those were
surrendered.

Q. I think we went over Mr. Dusak, bear with me again, the Secret Service document examiner
found a lack of indications and said that a study and comparison of the questioned and specimened
writings submitted has resulted in the conclusion that there is no evidence to indicate that Patsy Ramsey
executed any of the questioned material appearing on the ransom note. Is that consistent with your
recollection of Mr. Dusak's conclusion?

A. If you're reading verbatim, I won't --

Q. I'm asking you if it's consistent with your recollection. I'm not representing anything other than
my notes here on it.

A. Yes, but he said many other things, too.

Q. But that portion is certainly consistent with your recollection, true?

A. As I sit here today, yes.

Q. Howard Ryle put his opinion, another Ramsey expert who was, I believe, the former CBI
document examiner, but regardless of whether I'm right about that or not, Mr. Ryle put his opinion at
between probably not and elimination of Patsy Ramsey as author of the ransom note, further stating
that he believes that the writer could be identified if historical writing was found. Is that consistent with
your recollection of Mr. Ryle's opinions?

A. You know what, I don't know that the Ramsey, attorneys or the Ramseys -- or at least I never
saw Mr. Ryle's report.

Q. You weren't part of the presentation that Mr. Ryle and Mr. Cunningham made for Michael Kane
and the DAs?

A. I was present at a presentation they made. Michael Kane was not yet on the case and I think
this was in May of '97.

Q. May of '97 was the presentation that Ryle and Cunningham made, you did --

A. I did observe that.

Q. What I have read to you does that seem, though, clearly to be consistent with your recollection
about what Mr. Ryle and Mr. Cunningham concluded?

A. One or the other sounds accurate.

Q. I want to show you and get the benefit of my elaborate markings.

MR. WOOD: Why don't we mark this as Defendants' 3.

(Exhibit-3 was marked.)

Q. (BY MR. WOOD) I don't have copies, I apologize. I'll give you a clean copy of that, too, if you
don't mind instead of putting my stuff on it?

MR. DIAMOND: Do you have a clean copy?

MR. WOOD: No, that's the only one I've got. I told Sean I didn't want to check bags so I didn't bring
a bunch of copies.

(Pause.)


  Printer-friendly page | Top
Myself
unregistered user
May-18-03, 06:59 PM (EST)
 
7. "suprised"
In response to message #6
 
   I for one am surprised that Thomas has such limited knowledge of the handwriting tests and the findings that were used in this case.
Sounds as if some of this stuff is news to him!


  Printer-friendly page | Top
jamesonadmin
Charter Member
14249 posts
May-18-03, 09:49 PM (EST)
Click to EMail jameson Click to send private message to jameson Click to add this user to your buddy list  
8. "more"
In response to message #7
 
   VIDEO TECHNICIAN: Careful, your mike is --

MR. WOOD: I'm making noises.

Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Burden of Proof 4/17/2000, Greta Van Sustren said to AlexHunter, In the
Ramsey book Patsy and John Ramsey write that John has been excluded from being the author of the
note and that Patsy on a one to five scale, five meaning excluded, hit 4.5. Do you endorse those two
findings?

Hunter: Well, I think that's close, but I think that this is a mumbo jumbo area.

Do you ever remember hearing -- I had mentioned this to you earlier and I found the transcript. Do
you recall hearing that Alex Hunter had basically agreed with the 4.5 finding?

A. As I said earlier, no, I didn't see that or read that transcript.


  Printer-friendly page | Top
Margoo
Charter Member
May-19-03, 03:13 PM (EST)
Click to send private message to Margoo Click to add this user to your buddy list  
9. "RE: more"
In response to message #8
 
   LAST EDITED ON May-19-03 AT 03:14 PM (EST)
 
Q. And you weren't even, I guess, aware that Mr. Ubowski and the CBI said they don't even make
that kind of analysis with respect to the 24 out of the 26 letters of the alphabet, you don't know anything
about that --
A. No.
Q. -- in terms of the public statement by the CBI after your book was published?
A. The CBI made a public statement?
Q. Yes, sir.
A. As an organization, I haven't seen that.

***

As an "organization", I haven't seen that(??)

What the heck does that mean?

This case needed ONE individual within BPD pulling together all the reports and evidence at the end of each day and then reporting a summary to all involved and then assigning a to do list that would bring the loose ends together. It just sounds like there were all these fingers in the pie, each with their own individual 'knowledge', and no coordination of the gathered results. It sounds to me like Steve was assigned Patsy (or chose Patsy). Was Eller supposed to be the one to do this? Eller, the guy who didn't need anyone's help on this case?

I have a feeling that Lou was gathering EVERYTHING and coordinating the information and TRYING to report the results to the others. Fell on deaf ears?

Something was very amiss in the way in which the gathering and sharing of information was being handled - or was it just Steve Thomas?

Is there anyone there (at BPD) who really KNOWS this case?


  Printer-friendly page | Top
jamesonadmin
Charter Member
14249 posts
May-19-03, 04:06 PM (EST)
Click to EMail jameson Click to send private message to jameson Click to add this user to your buddy list  
10. "Q&A"
In response to message #9
 
   Q. Is there anyone there (at BPD) who really KNOWS this case?

A. I don't know but I am thrilled that it no longer matters. TheBPD doesn't have the case and should never EVER be allowed to touch it again.

The new team of investigators has my confidence - - if anyone can solve it, they can.


  Printer-friendly page | Top
Margoo
Charter Member
May-19-03, 04:21 PM (EST)
Click to send private message to Margoo Click to add this user to your buddy list  
11. "RE: Q&A"
In response to message #10
 
   LAST EDITED ON May-19-03 AT 04:24 PM (EST)
 
I definitely agree with you on that! Those files, handed over to the DA's office in February 2003, must have been really something, though. If this deposition is any indication, there would have to be a significant time allotment just to coordinate the information into some form of order. Quite the undertaking - 40,000 pages held by a variety of detectives in their "working file briefcases".

And, since Larry Mason was very involved in the case in its earliest days, I wonder if his information was ever dealt with since he had never managed to write his reports before he left. Or, are his notes in his garage somewhere?


  Printer-friendly page | Top
Margoo
Charter Member
May-19-03, 04:39 PM (EST)
Click to send private message to Margoo Click to add this user to your buddy list  
12. "RE: Q&A"
In response to message #11
 
   LAST EDITED ON May-19-03 AT 04:39 PM (EST)
 
Q (Hoffman). The report that you actually were able to physically examine, do you know how many subjects or persons were actually being discussed in that report?
A (Thomas). Yeah, many. Many, many, many, you know, 20,30,40 maybe.
Q. Do you know whether or not the reprt drew any conclusions with respect to authorship of the ransom note?
A. Yes.
Q. Could you tell me what you remember the conclusionto be?
A. As I sit here today without that document in front of me, I recall language in that document that along the lines, and I'm certainly paraphrasing,that there was evidence to suggest that Patsy Ramsey was the author of the ransom note.
Q. Is that the language that you remember "evidence to suggest"?
A. Yes.

(p 19/40 Part 4)

***

There were 20,30,40 people's handwriting being reported on and that's all he got out of it? I don't suppose he stopped to see what it said about the handwriting of the other 39 people. Surely, there were several who fell into "evidence to suggest" since PR's was darn near at the elimination level.

Carnes re Ubowski:
Footenote 14 - "Chet Ubowski of the Colorado Bureau of Investigation concluded that the evidence fell short of that needed to support a conclusion that Mrs. Ramsey wrote the note. (SMF 197; PSMF 197.)"

II. The Ransom Note
"None of the six consulted experts identified Mrs. Ramsey as the author of the Ransom Note. (SMF 195; PSMF 195.) Rather, the experts' consensus was that she "probably did not" write the Ransom Note. (SMF 196; PSMF 196.).... The experts described the chance of Mrs. Ramsey being the author of the Ransom Note as "very low." (SMF 204; PSMF 204.)."

How does "probably did not" and "evidence to suggest" equate?


  Printer-friendly page | Top
jamesonadmin
Charter Member
14249 posts
May-19-03, 05:33 PM (EST)
Click to EMail jameson Click to send private message to jameson Click to add this user to your buddy list  
13. "RE: Q&A"
In response to message #12
 
   HUGE number of files went to the new team - - they had to read and organize, make up lists of things they wanted to do, prioritize the lists and start their investigation.

It will take time but they have started to follow leads - - let's give them until next Easter to solve this before we start complaining about them dragging their feet, OK?


  Printer-friendly page | Top
Myself
unregistered user
May-19-03, 05:55 PM (EST)
 
14. "new investigators"
In response to message #13
 
   Is it public knowledge who the new investigators are?


  Printer-friendly page | Top
jamesonadmin
Charter Member
14249 posts
May-19-03, 10:05 PM (EST)
Click to EMail jameson Click to send private message to jameson Click to add this user to your buddy list  
15. "RE: new investigators"
In response to message #14
 
   No - - Everyone knows about Lou Smit, Mary Keenan and Ollie Gray, but any others involved are being very quiet about it.

Back on Thomas - he seems to be saying that Patsy was the only one not eliminated out of 73 - but that is not accurate. What Thomas actually says is that of the 73 individuals whose handwriting was analyzed, Patsy was the only one who was not eliminated and who was in the house the night JonBenet was murdered. A very calculating way to wrongfully convey that the other 72 were eliminated -- not true at all.

In his deposition he indicated that few were actually eliminated from suspicion.


  Printer-friendly page | Top
Myself
unregistered user
May-19-03, 11:10 PM (EST)
 
16. "so"
In response to message #15
 
   basically what that means is that they looked at the three people they knew to be in the house:
John, Patsy and Burke
and the one who was less furthest from being possible was the one they claimed to have not eliminated as the writer of the note.


  Printer-friendly page | Top
jamesonadmin
Charter Member
14249 posts
Jun-05-03, 09:12 PM (EST)
Click to EMail jameson Click to send private message to jameson Click to add this user to your buddy list  
17. "Beckner on handwriting -"
In response to message #0
 
   This is from Mark Beckner's deposition - - having seen Wolf's handwriting - - and it is certainly similar to that of the RN - - I am surprised he didn't have others do a comparison - - after all, they were right there - - this was a big case and... why am I surprised? Shouldn't be - - the BPD had already determined who the focus would be - - Thomas made it clear any testing done was to eliminate possible suspects, not to seriously check....


Q (BY MR. WOOD) Did you -- did the Boulder

24 Police Department ever have Chris Wolf's handwriting

25 analyzed?

28

1 A Yes.

2 Q Okay. How many different handwriting

3 analysts looked at Chris Wolf's handwriting?

4 A As far as I'm aware of, one.

5 Q Did Leonard Speckin look at Chris Wolf's

6 handwriting?

7 A I'm not sure.

8 Q Did Edwin Alford look at Chris Wolf's

9 handwriting?

10 A I'm not sure.

11 Q Did Richard Dusak analyze Chris Wolf's

12 handwriting?

13 A I'm not sure.

14 Q Did Chet Ubowski analyze Chris Wolf's

15 handwriting?

16 A Yes.

17 Q The other individuals Speckin, Alford and

18 Dusak, were employed by the Boulder Police

19 Department --

20 A Yes.

21 Q -- to analyze handwriting?

22 A Yes.

23 Q Is there any reason why you don't know

24 whether they actually analyzed Chris Wolf's?

25 A I just can't recall what was submitted to

29

1 them at this time.


  Printer-friendly page | Top
jamesonadmin
Charter Member
14249 posts
Jun-05-03, 09:15 PM (EST)
Click to EMail jameson Click to send private message to jameson Click to add this user to your buddy list  
18. "confusing or what????"
In response to message #17
 
   from Beckner's deposition

Q Do you recall what was concluded with

23 respect to Chris Wolf?

24 A The conclusion was he didn't write the

25 note.

32

1 Q And was there a written report or analysis

2 of Chris Wolf's handwriting?

3 A Yes.

4 Q Done by Mr. Ubowski?

5 A Yes.

6 Q Do you recall when that analysis was done?

7 A Well, there were several, actually,

8 because we had different, as I recall that, we had

9 different pieces of his handwriting that we submitted

10 at different times. And so there were a couple of

11 times that his handwriting actually went through a

12 comparison. So I believe there were a couple reports

13 that actually came back with some of his samples that

14 had been compared on them.

15 Q Were there any similarities found, to your

16 recollection, between Mr. Wolf's handwriting

17 exemplars and the note?

18 A I don't recall what the exact language was

19 on the lab report.


  Printer-friendly page | Top

Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic