Boulder Skies at Dusk

searchinGirl - searchinTruth - always searchin...

Time takes everything but the Truth ~ True Detective

Part 5. Steve Thomas Deposition

Q. Right. Now, your materials, just so that I have got this down, how many boxes were these police records and file copies of reports and things, both the ones you copied and the ones anonymously sent to you from, you believe, from someone in the Boulder Police Department, right?
A. Logic would conclude that.
Q. Yeah, and that was your conclusion?
A. Yes.
Q. And, you know, how many boxes did you store those materials in?
A. One cardboard box.
Q. Size?
A. A file-size cardboard box, a banker's box.
Q. How was it marked?
A. Unmarked.
Q. What color was it?
A. White.
Q. Did you have a concern? I mean, you've been in law enforcement for a number of years. You've got an ongoing investigation. Did you take any particular precautions to maintain the integrity of those documents?
A. No.
Q. Did you give them to Don Davis?
A. Don Davis doesn't have -- no, he doesn't have that box or any of those records.
Q. Did he look at them?
A. Are you talking about the preparation of the book?
Q. I'm talking about the reports. Did Don Davis ever see the reports --
A. He may have.
Q. -- and the copies of the file 7 that you made?
A. He may have.
Q. Have you ever made any effort to find them?
A. No.
Q. When did you learn that they were lost?
MR. DIAMOND: He didn't say ever they were lost.
MR. WOOD: I'm sorry?
MR. DIAMOND: He never testified that they were lost.
MR. WOOD: Misplaced or lost. Can we agree one of the two things occurred? I always kind of figured lost means misplaced, too. When you've lost something, you've lost it. It doesn't imply intentionally. Although, one might draw their own conclusion.
Q. (BY MR. WOOD) The point is when did you -- if you -- you've made no effort to look for them. When did you first learn that the file box was either lost or misplaced and couldn't be found?
A. The last time I recall looking in that box was at some point in the weeks prior to the book coming out.
Q. I'm not asking you the last time you looked at it. I'm asking you when you first learned that you couldn't find it. You came here today under oath and told me --
A. I haven't been looking for it, Mr. Wood.
Q. Because you've told me under oath, sir, that you can't find it, haven't you?
MR. DIAMOND: I don't think he has. I don't think he's ever testified to that. Why don't you ask him that.
Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Didn't you tell me where -- do you know where it is?
A. No.
Q. Have you made any effort to look for it in recent months?
A. No.
Q. You didn't think that, you know, Lin Wood is going to examine me on the Ramsey investigation, I ought to try to read over some of my reports and remember some things so I'm up to speed; you didn't ever have that thought as you came into this 9 deposition?
A. No, I'm here to answer your questions today.
Q. But why would you not want to refresh your recollection about the investigation when you know I'm going to be asking you about it and you knew that?
A. I did. As I told you earlier, I reread my book.
Q. But your -- all these reports and all these copies of police reports, there is a lot more information there than what is in your book, isn't there, sir?
A. There may be, yeah. The book is not a police report, it's a narrative.
Q. No, then it's not complete. It certainly is not as complete as the hundreds of pages of police files, reports and copies of reports that you have had at least at some point in time in your possession, is it?
A. It's not a reproduction of the 30,000 plus page case file, no. That's ridiculous. No.
Q. It's not a reproduction of the hundreds of pages that you had in your possession, is my question, is it, sir?
A. No.
Q. I mean, if we want to find out what information you know about this investigation from the police reports, we can't get an answer to that from reading the book. We would have to look at all the files and the reports that you had, wouldn't we?
A. I'm here to answer your questions today.
Q. Answer that one for me. If I want to try to find out what information you had known or what you knew about this investigation from all these hundreds of police reports that you copied or that were sent to you, I can't get that answer from your book. I can only get that answer if I can look at those files and reports, true?
A. Okay.
Q. Is that true?
A. Sure.
Q. Do you know Jeff Shapiro?
A. I did, so I guess in present tense I do if I knew him at one time.
Q. Do you know of Mr. Shapiro's documentation of telephone conversations by taping them?
A. In a particular context I do.
Q. Do you have any knowledge, recollection of telephone conversations between you and Jeff Shapiro when you were in Quantico, Virginia preparing to meet with the FBI? Did you talk with Mr. Shapiro during that time period?
A. I did.
Q. Do you have any notes about those conversations?
A. No.
Q. Do you have any recollection of the substance of those conversations?
A. Vaguely.
Q. You did, in fact, provide information to Ann Bardach at Vanity Fair about the JonBenet Ramsey investigation, didn't you, sir?
A. I did.
Q. You also provided information about the JonBenet Ramsey investigation to Carol McKinley, didn't you, sir?
A. We discussed the politics of the investigation. I consider Carol a friend now.
Q. While you were still on the force active in the investigation, you provided information about it to Ann Bardach at Vanity Fair, you discussed it with Carol McKinley and you also provided it to the supermarket tabloid The Globe through Jeff Shapiro, true?
A. No, I disagree with your characterization of whatever you're trying to say about Shapiro. I wasn't supplying him with information about --
Q. You didn't --
A. -- the case.
Q. You didn't tell Jeff Shapiro to come get in a tree at the Ramsey house because you were all going over there and sleep there one night?
A. I think the tree was his own doing but I did mention to him that we were going to be at the Ramsey house, yes.
Q. Well, we'll go into Mr. Shapiro and that a little bit later.
MR. WOOD: Darnay?
MR. WOOD: Give me two seconds.
MR. HOFFMAN: Should I start?
MR. DIAMOND: In two seconds.
MR. WOOD: Darnay?
MR. WOOD: I'm going to turn it over to you and you have at it.
MR. HOFFMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. Wood.
MR. WOOD: Where are we on time so that I know what I did? I might have gone over five minutes longer than I meant to.
MR. WOOD: Total time of testimony.
VIDEO TECHNICIAN: Two hours and ten minutes.
MR. WOOD: Two hours and ten minutes. Thank you.
Q. Hello, Mr. Thomas.
A. Hello, Mr. Hoffman. How are you? 4
Q. Fine. How are you?
A. Fine. Thank you.
Q. Can you hear me all right?
A. I can.
Q. All right. Mr. Thomas, you have a copy of your hardcover book with you, don't you?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. All right. Could you just turn to page 14 of your book?
A. Okay.
Q. Yes, do you see the first full paragraph on page 14 that begins "The district attorney"?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Could you just read the first sentence out loud, please?
A. Certainly. "The district attorney and his top prosecutor, two police chiefs and a large number of cops, although so at odds on some points that they almost came to blows, all agreed on one thing - that probable cause existed to arrest Patsy Ramsey in connection with the death of her daughter."
Q. Is that an accurate statement?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, I would like to ask you some questions with respect to that statement. To begin with, if you wouldn't mind, regarding one of the two police chiefs, could you turn to page 299 of your book?
A. Okay.
Q. Yes. The second paragraph on 299 begins "Even after DeMuth's recital of our shortcomings," could you just read those two sentences?
A. "Even after DeMuth's recital of our shortcomings I felt we held a decent hand. Commander Beckner told me later that he thought we had gone far beyond showing probable cause."
Q. Would you read the next sentence?
A. Certainly. "'I think she (Patty Ramsey) did it,' he said. 'We should just charge them both with felony murder and aiding and abetting'".
Q. Is that an accurate statement of what you heard?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. Did Mr. -- actually Commander Beckner tell you that personally?
A. On more than one occasion.
Q. Could you please explain or elaborate a little further on each occasion how that statement came about?
A. Certainly. Inside the police department situation room that housed this Ramsey investigation, there were probably a handful of occasions on which or in which Mark Beckner made statements like that or similar to that indicating that we had sufficient facts and circumstances rising to a level of probable cause for an arrest of Patsy Ramsey.
Q. Do you know approximately how many times -- on how many occasions he made that statement?
MR. WOOD: Wait, let me ask you a question if I could, Darnay, for clarification. Are you asking him for -- I'm sorry, I have to get my mike on. Are you asking him for the statement that Patsy Ramsey was a killer or for the statement that there was probable cause for an arrest, which is --
MR. HOFFMAN: I'm asking for the statement that is actually in the book which is that there is probable cause for an arrest.
MR. WOOD: Okay. All right. That's what I wanted to clarify. Thank you.
A. Mr. Hoffman, could you repeat your question to me?
Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) I'm sorry, can you tell me approximately how many, the number, how many times or how many occasions he made that statement?
A. As I may have mentioned, a handful that I overheard. There was no disputing that among the detective team. He may have said that outside of my presence. In fact, I think he -- I think he did in relation to what we're talking about.
Q. But within your own presence, how many times do you think approximately he said that?
MR. WOOD: Again, talking about there is probable cause for an arrest?
MR. HOFFMAN: Probable cause for an arrest, that statement.
MR. WOOD: Thank you.
Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) The gist of that statement that there was probable cause for an arrest?
A. A half a dozen times.
Q. Half a dozen times. Did on any of those occasions, did he explain why he felt there was probable cause for an arrest?
A. Mr. Hoffman, at that time I think he was sufficiently familiar with the facts of the investigation to make that conclusion on his own as did, as you previously mentioned, the other detectives in the case.
Q. All right. Do you know if the prior commander, Commander John Eller, ever commented on who he thought may have in fact either written the ransom note or committed the crime of murdering JonBenet Ramsey? MR. WOOD: Do you want him to answer two questions? Why don't you ask him one at a time.
Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Okay. Was there ever an occasion when John Eller expressed an opinion as to whether or not there was probable cause to arrest someone for the murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
A. Yeah. And, Mr. Hoffman, if you can direct me back to the first page you asked about. MR. DIAMOND: Fourteen.
Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Page 14.
A. Yeah. Eller was one of those commanders that I think I -- I'm sorry, I didn't define it as a commander but Eller was certainly one of the large number of cops, as noted on page 14.
Q. You said there are two police chiefs. Now, I believe that Commander Beckner replaced Commander Koby; is that correct?
A. Commander Beckner did indeed replace Chief Koby.
Q. All right. Now, was Chief Koby one of the police chiefs you're referring to?
A. Yes.
Q. Did Chief Koby ever express an opinion as to whether or not probable cause existed for someone to be arrested for the murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
A. He did; he's one of the two police chiefs I'm referring to in this paragraph.
Q. Do you know the substance of his statement; did he ever make a statement like that in your presence?
A. He may have but it was certainly relayed down through the chain of command through Wickman to the rest of us that Koby concurred and Koby may have very well told me that himself as well.
Q. But you presently don't have any memory of him saying it to you personally; is that correct?
A. Koby?
Q. Yes.
A. Koby was present in briefings when probable cause was discussed and Koby was in total agreement. So, yeah, I do have a recollection of Koby being present and agreeing with that concept.
Q. Did commander or Chief Koby ever indicate who it was that he believed there was sufficient probable cause to arrest for the murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
A. Yes, the discussion was concerning Patricia Ramsey.
Q. And did he express a belief that Patricia Ramsey should be arrested for the murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
A. I don't know if Koby ever went so far as allowing for an arrest to be made but certainly concurring on probable cause.
Q. Actually what I'm trying to determine is whether or not he ever actually expressed the belief that Patsy Ramsey should be arrested based on probable cause for the murder of her daughter?
A. My distinction would be not should be but could be. Koby was not entirely an over-aggressive individual that was willing to take that next step.
Q. But Commander Koby, based on the evidence that you believe existed in the case, felt that there was sufficient basis by which Patsy Ramsey could be arrested for the murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
A. Correct.
Q. Thank you. All right. Now, you also -- I also asked about John Eller, who I know is technically not a police chief, he was in charge of the investigation. Did John Eller ever express a belief or an opinion that probable cause existed for the arrest of someone for the murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
A. Yes.
Q. Can you tell me who that person was that he thought should or could be arrested -- actually I am going to rephrase that. Withdraw the question. Did he ever name an individual that he thought could be arrested for probable cause in the murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
A. Patricia Ramsey.
Q. Did he ever express that to you personally?
A. Yes.
Q. On more than one occasion?
A. Yes.
Q. Did he ever discuss why he thought probable cause existed for the arrest of Patricia Ramsey for the murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
A. My belief that he, too, was 3 sufficiently familiar with the facts and circumstances that were sufficient to meet a threshold of probable cause and said that on occasion in the detective briefings that spring of '97.
Q. Now, with respect to the district attorney, again I'm referring you back to page 14, you begin by saying "The district attorney and his top prosecutor." Who was the top prosecutor you were referring to?
A. Pete Hofstrom.
Q. Is it your testimony that Pete Hofstrom believed that probable cause existed for an arrest?
A. Yeah, absolutely. He conceded that there was probable cause but there were some sticking points beyond that. But as to the issue of probable cause, yeah, that was his express conversation with me that we had met that burden.
Q. So you actually had a conversation with Pete Hofstrom with respect to the issue of whether probable cause existed?
A. Several times.
Q. And did he identify the person who he thought could be arrested for probable cause for the murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
A. We were talking about it in connection with Patricia Ramsey. So I'm assuming he was -- it was just a two-person conversation at times. So yes.
Q. Do you know whether or not the district attorney, Alex Hunter, ever expressed an opinion as to whether or not probable cause existed for the arrest of someone in the murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
A. I'm told he did.
Q. So you, in fact, never heard Alex Hunter express an opinion with respect to that?
A. Only through, for example, Mark Beckner and Tom Wickman.
Q. Exactly what did Mark Beckner say with respect to his understanding of what Alex Hunter said regarding the issue of probable cause?
A. Very simply relaying to the detective team that Hunter was aware and knew and conceded that fact.
Q. Conceded what fact? 5
A. The fact that probable cause existed for an arrest in this case.
Q. Did -- do you know if Alex Hunter ever identified the person as being the person for which sufficient probable cause existed for an arrest in the murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
A. In the context of which it was being presented that's what we were talking about was the possible arrest of Patsy Ramsey.
Q. I would like you to look at page 327 of your book, if you don't mind, please. And I refer you, when you found that page, to the very last paragraph at the end of the page, beginning "Alex Hunter." If you would just read that sentence, that one sentence.
A. "Alex Hunter said he thought Patsy Ramsey was involved."
Q. Okay. Did he actually -- did you actually hear him say that? MR. WOOD: Hey, Darnay? MR. HOFFMAN: I'm sorry, yes? MR. WOOD: Can I ask you to put that sentence in context by having him 6 complete the reading of the next couple sentences. MR. HOFFMAN: Sure, I'm sorry.
Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) Yes, would you, please, just -- MR. HOFFMAN: How many more sentences do you want him to read, Lin? MR. WOOD: Just the next one. The next two.
Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) All right. Read the next one, please, Mr. Thomas. MR. WOOD: Start from "Alex Hunter" and read down, if you would, through "demeanor."
A. "Alex Hunter said that he thought Patsy Ramsey was involved. That was more than offset by comments from his staff."
Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) All right. Were you present when Alex Hunter said that?
A. Yes.
Q. You were. So you actually had an occasion to hear Alex Hunter express a belief with respect to Patsy Ramsey's involvement in the case?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know when that event was, when this statement was made?
A. May I look at the book for a moment and maybe it will --
Q. I have no problem with that.
A. Okay.
MR. HOFFMAN: I would just like the record to reflect that Mr. Thomas is, in fact, refreshing his memory with respect to my question by looking at the book.
MR. WOOD: If I can help, it looks to me in context that would have been on one of the evenings in June of 1998 following the interrogations. I don't know if Mr. Thomas agrees with that or not.
MR. DIAMOND: Who is testifying here?
MR. WOOD: I was trying to move it along. I would be glad to testify if you want to examine me on another occasion, Mr. Diamond.
MR. DIAMOND: All right.
A. Mr. Hoffman, this was June of 1998.
Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) June of 1998. So you were actually present and heard him make a statement to that effect; is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, do you have any knowledge as to whether or not the FBI ever had an opinion with respect to whether probable cause existed for the arrest of someone for the murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
A. It was my impression and they were very professional in our dealings with them, but I don't think they ever countered or challenged the fact that the police department had this sufficient probable cause.
Q. Do you know whether or not the FBI actually saw the evidence that the police had with respect to whether or not there was probable cause to charge someone for the murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
A. Well, certainly a lot of the facts and the evidence, the factual evidence, from this case was shared with members of the FBI.
Q. Did you ever have occasion to speak with any of the members of the FBI that were looking at the evidence?
A. Yeah, on several occasions. And again, I think they always tempered comments and were most professional. But, again, I, Mr. Hoffman, don't have that specific recollection of an exchange but it was always my impression that they supported us fully on that.
Q. Do you know whether or not the FBI had occasion to examine the ransom note and handwriting exemplars of either John or Patsy Ramsey?
A. I don't know whether or not the FBI conducted any examinations of handwriting exemplars, but they certainly reviewed and studied and discussed with us the ransom note itself.
Q. Did they offer any insight or any analysis of the ransom note?
A. They did.
Q. Do you remember what that analysis consisted of?
A. We had a meeting in Quantico, Virginia and I'm trying to recollect the date. It doesn't come to me right now. But nonetheless, the ransom note was dissected and profiled and so forth. And certainly I would suggest that you ask any of them. But it's my recollection of that meeting, of which reports were written and, you know, there is a lot of information about what went on in those meetings, but how patently bogus and crafted and stilted and just non authentic this ransom note was.
Q. I would like you to turn, if you will, please, to page 312 of your book.
A. Okay.
Q. And I would like you to look at what looks like to be the third sentence. It begins "'What's going on in that DA's office.'" If you would read that paragraph -- to the end of that paragraph and then read the next paragraph.
A. Okay. "'What's going on in that DA's office is a disgrace' one of the FBI agents observed during our last supper. This case has become an embarrassment to law enforcement. We were all in agreement. 'It is terribly discouraging how the DA is handling this,' said one Dream Team attorney, 'Hunter is going to outsmart himself on this one.'"
Q. Did you actually hear that statement made.
A. Which statement is that?
Q. The quote from the FBI agent, what's going on is a disgrace?
A. Yes.
Q. Just everything that you read there you have in quotations --
A. Yes.
Q. -- were you actually present at that?
A. I was.
Q. Yes. And is that an accurate recollection of what was said?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know what they were referring to when they said that what was going on in the DA's office is a disgrace?
A. They were certainly familiar with a lot of the history and the animosity and, you know, the ugly politics involved in this thing and I don't know to what disgrace they're specifically referring to but I think it can cover a number of things.
Q. Do you know what they were referring to when they say, quote, Hunter is going to outsmart himself on this one, unquote?
MR. DIAMOND: That was a Dream Team attorney, not the FBI.
MR. WOOD: Hey, Darnay, why --
MR. HOFFMAN: You're right, that's correct, okay, I'm sorry.
MR. WOOD: Darnay, would it be --
MR. HOFFMAN: I admit that and I'm just going to double back a little bit. Lin, what were you going to say?
MR. WOOD: I was going to say maybe it would be helpful to figure out which is which if we -- if you want to ask him who the FBI agent was and who the Dream Team attorney was.
MR. HOFFMAN: Yeah, Lin, I was about to get to that.
Q. (BY MR. HOFFMAN) In fact why don't I just do that, ask you who the FBI agent was, if you remember?
A. There were at least three agents at that dinner and it may have been Mike Morrow.
Q. Do you know what, is it Mike Morrow?
A. Um-hum.
Q. What his function was with the FBI? I mean what exactly was his involvement in the case?
A. He was or is a special agent with the Federal Bureau based out of, I think they're based out of Quantico or that Virginia-DC area and he was assigned to that child abduction and serial killer unit.
Q. Did he ever express an opinion as to who he thought committed this crime?
A. Again, I think they were very diplomatic in their response, but I don't recall that specific conversation with Mr. Morrow. But it certainly wouldn't surprise me for him to say he was consistent with everyone else.
Q. Okay. So but you have no personal knowledge of that?
A. Right.
Q. Okay. Now, to the second paragraph and, please, excuse me, I'm sorry 4 for having you read that in a way that could confuse people. That second paragraph says "'It is terribly discouraging how the D A is handling this,' said one Dream Team attorney. Hunter is going to outsmart himself on this one.'" Who was the Dream Team attorney who made that statement, if you remember?
A. I believe that was Bob Miller.
Q. Was Bob Miller at this meeting where the prior statement by the FBI agent was made which we have just referred to?
A. There were several people in this restaurant this particular evening. So I don't know whether or not he heard, overheard that conversation.
Q. Right. So his statement then may not have been in reaction to the FBI statement; is that correct?
A. Right.
Q. And do you know what he meant when he said that Hunter is going to outsmart himself on this one?
A. No. I think there are a number of ways to interpret it but it sort of stands alone in my mind. 5
Q. Mr. Thomas, would you mind, please, turning to page 302 of your book.
A. Okay.
Q. Do you have it in front of you?
A. Yes, I'm sorry, yes.
Q. Fine. Would you look at the third 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 6 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. 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 8 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 9 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 are
A. 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.
Q. With respect to what you have 1 referred to as a master affidavit, could you please describe what a master affidavit is?
A. Certainly. At some point in, I believe it was 1997, the police department asked me to be the affiant on a master affidavit and basically the case was reaching a proportion that it needed to be condensed into affidavit form in the event a search and/or arrest warrant were necessary to carry out on this case. And given that assignment I tried then over the course of the next several, many months to keep that affidavit current.
Q. When you say keep the affidavit current, how was the affidavit prepared or being prepared?
A. It was being prepared as new information became available that was relevant to include inside this affidavit, that information would be shared with me and I would include that in the narrative.
Q. Now, when you say include that in the narrative, were you preparing an ongoing written narrative at the time?
A. Yes.
Q. And where did you keep a copy of this ongoing written narrative?
A. Either in my briefcase or in my desk inside the Boulder Police Department situation room were typically the only two places that the -- that the affidavit would be left.
Q. Could you describe what form it was being kept in? By example, was it kept in a notebook? Was it kept on separate sheets of paper? How was it kept physically?
A. Eight and a half by 11 white, unbound paper, typically stapled with a heavy-duty stapler in the upper left-hand corner.
Q. And where were those pages being kept physically, in a file folder? In a book? What?
A. In my briefcase or my desk. But if you're saying how were those stored? Yeah, inside a manila-type folder.
Q. Was the folder labeled master affidavit?
A. I don't recall.
Q. Was there any marking on the folder as to what it was that was being contained there?
A. No, but it's very apparent what it is if you go looking for it.
Q. Do you know how long you kept that master affidavit before it was discontinued?
A. If memory serves, in the spring of 1998 when Beckner said that we weren't going to make a physical custodial arrest and that the case was headed for the DA's office and possibly a grand jury, that was ceased.
Q. Did Mark Beckner or anyone else tell you what you should do with the master affidavit that you had in your possession?
A. Not that I recall. That would have been -- no, not that I recall; I don't recall any instruction like that. It would have and likely and probably did just simply wind up in the at the time 80-plus case file notebooks in that room.
Q. So you turned the affidavit over at some point to the police --
A. Yeah.
Q. -- to the other people in the police department?
A. Right, that's in -- that's inside the police department.
Q. Okay. Do you know if you made a copy of that for your own use?
A. I don't know that I did.
Q. Okay. Do you know how many pages the master affidavit was when you were told to discontinue making it?
A. Well, it was continually being updated and drafted and pencil marked and everything else but I would put it at the time that I last saw it I don't know if anybody ever continued it after I left the police department, but 50, 60, 70, 80-plus pages maybe.
Q. Do you know who made the decision as to what to include in the master affidavit?
A. Well, I did partly, as did Tom Wickman, Mark Beckner. On occasion, you know, we would run ideas and thoughts by the in-house legal advisor, Bob Keatley. Kim Stewart had it for a period of time and I think she did some updating or amending or suggesting to it. It was sort of a continuing work in progress. And when a detective in the room had information that was relevant to the affidavit, it would typically be included.
Q. Were you the only person that physically included the information or did other people have access to it?
A. Well, two questions. Did other people have access to it. Yes. And was I the only one that physically made inclusions to it? Mr. Hoffman, do you mean by way of typewriting?
Q. Yes, by way of actual handwritten notations or typewritten?
A. Yes, that's my recollection.
Q. All right. So nobody that you remember made any physical notations or changes in the master affidavit beside yourself?
A. No. I'm saying others did in the room make physical changes to it, line throughs, additions, deletions, et cetera, as information, you know, became available or got stale or whatever the case might be.
Q. Mr. Thomas, directing your attention now to the handwriting reports from the Colorado Bureau of Investigation, did you ever have occasion to see any of the handwriting reports that were done at all in the case by CBI?
A. Yeah. What they called a report typically was more of a lab finding. It wasn't in a narrative form, as I recall, but those were in the possession of Trujillo, the forensic evidence detective, but I did have at least one occasion to look at those.
Q. Can you describe what one typically looked like? Like how many pages was one of these reports?
A. Fairly short, if I recall. The one that I have in mind probably ran less than four pages. On the front page was like a CBI logo or letterhead, whatever they typically manufacture their printed report on and just simply black typewritten or computer-generated ink on white paper.              (c) 2023