Quote:

 

1 Q: Okay. All right. Is there anything else
2 about your disclosure of the records of the lacrosse team
3 members that you haven't told us that you recall?
4 A: Not that I can think of.
5 Q: All right. Okay. Let me kind of go back a
6 little bit over some of the more preliminary things.
7 What's your birth date?
8 A: My birth date?
9 Q: Uh-huh.
10 A: October 4, 1960.
Page 80

11 Q: Okay. All right. And where are you from?
12 What's your hometown?
13 A: Durham.
14 Q: All your life?
15 A: Unfortunately, yeah.
16 Q: Where is your family now?
17 A: What part of my family?
18 Q: Are they all here or are they --
19 A: Most of my family is in this area; if not
20 Durham, in the Triangle.
21 Q: Okay. Do you know anybody in Kansas, who
22 lives in Kansas?
23 A: Actually, yeah.
24 Q: Who do you know?
25 A: Bill Rehm.


1 Q: How do you spell that?
2 A: R-e-h-m.
3 Q: Who is he?
4 A: A friend.
5 Q: All right. And how do you know him?
6 A: I knew him from Durham Tech.
7 Q: Okay. Do you keep in touch with him at all?
8 A: Hardly any now. Once a year, maybe.
9 Q: Were you in touch with him all during the
10 time of the investigation?
11 A: I don't recall.
12 Q: You don't recall?
13 A: No. I speak to him maybe once a year.
Page 81

14 Q: What does he do?
15 A: He's in -- what was the company Ross Perot
16 owned? He's in IT.
17 Q: Okay. Tech guy. What does he do?
18 A: Now mostly I think administrative.
19 Q: So he's administrative -- you were done
20 answering the question?
21 A: Okay. You were about to say something,
22 though.
23 Q: What does he do with IT? In communications?
24 Computers?
25 A: Initially, he started with them in tech


1 support.
2 Q: Could you say that again?
3 A: Tech support. Computer tech, computer
4 support.
5 Q: Okay. All right. Do you know what he was
6 doing around the time of the investigation?
7 A: He was still working for the same company. I
8 don't know exactly what he was doing.
9 Q: All right. Did he ever express any interest
10 in the case?
11 A: I don't recall that we ever spoke of it.
12 Q: Do you recall ever asking him to do you a
13 favor of any kind with respect to the case?
14 A: No.
15 Q: Do you know where in Kansas he lives?
16 A: Now he lives in Lawrence, Kansas. At the
Page 82

17 time of 2006, he lived in Tulsa.
18 Q: Tulsa?
19 A: Oklahoma, yeah.

(SNIP)

1 A: Well, I received the Criminal Investigator's
2 Certificate.
3 Q: Okay. And that involved 400 hours of
4 training in legal and investigative topics?
5 A: Yes.
6 Q: Okay. And that was in May of 2006, right?
7 A: I completed it in May of 2006, yes.
8 Q: Okay. All right. So is that what you were
9 referring to just a moment ago?
10 A: Yes.
11 Q: So do you recall what you were trained in, in
12 those 400 hours?
13 A: There were numerous courses. I do not
14 remember the specific courses. I can tell you some, but
15 I can't remember them all.

(SNIP)

7 Did you have any specialized training in
8 investigation of sexual assault?
9 A: Other than the two classes, I'm -- if I
10 did -- and I don't say I didn't, but if I did, I don't
11 recall.
12 Q: Okay. All right. Were you aware of the
13 experience level of Detective Himan when he was
14 designated investigator on the case?
15 A: When he was designated investigator, no.
16 Q: And do you know how much experience Sergeant
17 Gottlieb had when he was an investigator on the case?
18 A: No.
19 Q: How familiar are you with the Durham Police
20 Department's structure allocation of responsibilities?
21 A: Very general.
22 Q: Are you aware that it has a criminal
23 investigations division?
24 A: Yes.
25 Q: All right. And it has patrol divisions,


1 right?
2 A: Yes.
3 Q: And this case was being investigated by two
4 people in the patrol division, right?
5 A: My understanding is that Gottlieb and Himan
6 were investigators assigned to a specific district.
Page 88

7 Q: Patrol district, right?
8 A: Yes. But they were investigators assigned to
9 a specific -- a specific district.
10 Q: Okay. Were either one of them in the violent
11 crimes unit?
12 A: I don't know if they had been or hadn't been.
13 Q: Okay. Did you ever wonder?
14 A: No.
15 Q: Did it ever occur to you that maybe the
16 investigation wasn't going too well?
17 A: No.
18 Q: Didn't?
19 A: No.
20 Q: You thought it was going well?
21 A: I didn't have an opinion as to how it was
22 going.
23 Q: None at all?
24 A: Once the investigation was ongoing, I didn't
25 really have a reason to have -- it wasn't my


1 investigation.
2 Q: Well, you just testified you were the lead
3 investigator.
4 A: No. I was the lead investigator in Duke's
5 investigation unit. I was not investigating it.
6 Q: I didn't say you were. You said you didn't
7 have a reason to be --
8 A: I wasn't -- it wasn't my case. I wasn't
9 investigating it.
Page 89

10 Q: Okay.
11 MR. SUN: Wait for a question.
12 THE WITNESS: Okay.
13 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
14 Q: Let me hand you what's been -- going to be
15 marked as Exhibit 10, Smith 10.
16 [SMITH EXHIBIT NO. 10 WAS MARKED FOR
17 IDENTIFICATION]
18 Q: Have you ever seen this before?
19 A: I don't recall seeing it.
20 Q: Okay. Let me just read it into the record.
21 It says -- and stop me if you think I'm wrong. It says,
22 "James, Investigator Gary Smith called me wanting to know
23 about rape on Buchanan. Says Duke students live there
24 and he can give you names. Call him. [_____]."
25 A: Okay.


1 Q: All right. Does that refresh your
2 recollection about your involvement in the investigation?
3 A: I provided Durham with information. I was
4 not investigating the rape.
5 Q: Let me hand you what we're going to mark as
6 Exhibit 11.
7 [SMITH EXHIBIT NO. 11 WAS MARKED FOR
8 IDENTIFICATION]
9 Q: Now, that's just a handwritten page. I
10 believe the address at the top is the home address for
11 Crystal Mangum. But it says, "1020, Gary Smith provide
12 info sheets." And, "1024, Investigator Smith requested
Page 90

13 Sergeant Tiffin run Duke Pistol on all three." And then
14 it says, "David Evans, no record. Matthew Zash," and
15 then nothing.
16 You don't happen to know who wrote this, do
17 you?
18 MR. SUN: Objection.
19 THE WITNESS: No, I don't.
20 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
21 Q: Okay. You talked about the info sheets. Is
22 there any other info sheets that that could be referring
23 to besides the players' Duke card data?
24 A: No. I -- I'd have to guess right now. I
25 don't recall, so -- I don't recall.


1 Q: All right. What is a Duke Pistol?
2 A: It's a program for us to look at. It's the
3 online program we use to access our incident reports, or
4 our reports.
5 Q: Okay. That's the Duke Police Department?
6 A: Yes, the Duke Police Department.
7 Q: Okay. All right. And why did you request
8 that Sergeant Tiffin do that?
9 MR. SUN: Objection.
10 THE WITNESS: Well, I don't remember
11 making the request. I'm not saying I didn't; I just
12 don't remember, so --
13 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
14 Q: Okay. All right. Let me ask you something.
15 So you're an investigator. How important are notes to
Page 91
16 you?
17 MR. SUN: Objection.
18 THE WITNESS: I keep notes on my
19 investigations.
20 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
21 Q: You keep notes on your activities as a police
22 officer of the Durham -- Duke Police Department?
23 A: Not everything.
24 Q: All right. Did you keep notes as the Duke
25 lead investigator on this case?


1 MR. SUN: Objection.
2 THE WITNESS: I was not the Duke lead
3 investigator on this case. And I may have kept some --
4 some things I may have noted, other things I didn't.
5 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
6 Q: Okay. Where did you note them?
7 A: Anything I -- various places.
8 Q: Various places?
9 A: I don't really use a notebook; I use a legal
10 pad. If I had a report, I might make notes directly on
11 the report.
12 Q: What do you do with your notes wherever you
13 happen to put them to keep track of them?
14 A: Mostly a legal pad. Usually, if I've got a
15 case, my notes go directly -- everything that's in my
16 notes goes directly in the report. Sometimes I would
17 keep them with the report; sometimes I wouldn't.
18 Q: Okay. Regardless of whether you incorporate
Page 92

19 some or all of your handwritten notes in a report, what
20 do you do with the handwritten notes?
21 A: Sometimes -- well, if I didn't attach them to
22 a report, I probably dispose of them.
23 Q: What do you mean dispose of them?
24 A: Throw them away.
25 Q: Where?


1 A: Trash can.
2 Q: Is that in your SOPs?
3 A: I don't know that -- I don't recall if it's
4 in our SOPs.
5 Q: You've read them, right?
6 A: Yes. And if there's something there, I've
7 probably read it. Right now, I don't remember it.
8 Q: You don't know what the standard operating
9 procedure is for maintenance of notes?
10 A: If I have a question about a standard
11 operating procedure, I go to the standard operating
12 procedure and read it.
13 Q: Okay. But you don't know what the standard
14 operating procedure is today, sitting in front of me --
15 A: I'm not --
16 Q: -- about your handwritten notes?
17 MR. SUN: Wait for a question, please.
18 THE REPORTER: And was there an answer?


19 MR. SUN: Why don't you read it back to
20 him.
21 [QUESTION READ AS REQUESTED]
Page 93

22 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
23 Q: With respect to your handwritten notes.
24 A: Honestly, I'm not sure there is a standard
25 operating procedure regarding our notes.

[Even I know that the common procedure
in Law Enforcement is to retain all notes. An officer's field notebook is retained by him even
after he retires.]


1 Q: Okay. Do you know if you threw away your
2 notes in connection with your activities relating to this
3 case?
4 A: I have some documents related to this case
5 that I kept.
6 Q: Where are they?
7 A: I have turned them over to the counsel's
8 office.
9 Q: Okay. The question was, do you know if you
10 threw away notes of your activities in connection with
11 this case?
12 A: I disposed of notes in regard to lots of
13 cases, probably this as well.
14 Q: Do you remember which notes?
15 A: No.
16 Q: Okay. All right. I'm going to hand you what
17 will be marked as Smith 12.
18 [SMITH EXHIBIT NO. 12 WAS MARKED FOR
19 IDENTIFICATION]
20 Q: The first thing I want to ask you about this
21 document, it's entitled an "Operations Report DUPD." Is
22 that the Duke University Police Department?
23 A: Yes.
24 Q: Now, on top, it says, "CC: Smith file." Is
Page 94

25 that you?


1 A: Yes.
2 Q: Okay. What file is that referring to?
3 A: Well, "CC: Smith" means for purposes of case
4 management, I assigned it to me. "File" means the report
5 was simply filed. There was no follow-up on it.
6 Q: Okay. Now, this is an operations report
7 dated March 16, 2006, right?
8 A: Yes.
9 Q: It says the case number is 2006-1304, right?
10 A: Yes.
11 Q: What does that case number designate?
12 A: It's simply -- it's a -- it doesn't designate
13 anything except it's the number of the report.
14 Q: It's the number of the report, not the case?
15 A: Well, if there's any follow-up on the case,
16 that follow-up would be documented with the same case
17 number.
18 Q: Okay. Let me just -- this is a report of the
19 search of 610 North Buchanan, right?
20 A: That's what it appears to be.
21 Q: Okay. All right. So the case number at the
22 top refers to just the search and not the underlying
23 report of an assault at 610 North Buchanan?
24 A: Just a report, and therefore, I guess, the
25 case number refers to the service of the search warrant

Page 95


1 at 610 Buchanan.

Quote:

 

2 Q: Okay. All right. Let me back up. I wanted
3 to ask you about where you kept your notes to make sure
4 that we understand this. I don't know if you answered
5 where you kept the notes that you retained. Do you keep
6 them at home? At the office?
7 A: No, at the office.
8 Q: Where in the office?
9 A: In a file cabinet.
10 Q: Okay. Do you have a file designated for
11 this, for Crystal Mangum's allegations and activities
12 related to the investigation of them?
13 A: I had a file folder where I kept some
14 documents and notes in reference to the incident at 610
15 Buchanan.
16 Q: Okay. Do you still have it?
17 A: I no longer have the folder.
18 Q: Okay. What happened to it?
19 A: I turned it over to my attorneys.
20 Q: Okay. Counsel's office?
21 A: Counsel's office.
22 Q: Okay. All right. When did you do that?
23 A: When did I do that?
24 Q: Uh-huh.
25 A: Initially, I provided them copies of the


1 contents within the last three months. I provided them
Page 96

2 with the originals.
3 Q: Okay. So you provided them copies when?
4 A: Probably late 2006, early 2007.
5 Q: Okay. All right. And when you say
6 "counsel's office," who in counsel's office did you give
7 them to?
8 A: I walked in -- I don't recall if I delivered
9 them to the front desk or to Kate Hendricks, the copies.
10 Q: Okay. Is it fair to say you were essentially
11 delivering them to Kate Hendricks?
12 A: The copies, I delivered to Kate Hendricks.
13 Q: And then you were asked for originals
14 recently?
15 A: Yes.
16 Q: And do you have all the originals of the
17 copies you had originally given?
18 A: They're -- everything I provided copies of to
19 counsel's office was in the folder.
20 Q: All right. What were you going to say?
21 A: The only additional thing that was in the
22 folder was probably a -- probably a letter reference Mike
23 Nifong's bankruptcy.
24 Q: Okay. Do you know if you preserved your
25 notes relating to the original acquisition of the key

1
1 card data?
2 MR. SUN: Objection.
3 THE WITNESS: Excuse me?
4 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
Page 97

5 Q: Did you preserve your notes of your original
6 acquisition of the key card data?
7 MR. SUN: Objection.
8 You can answer.
9 THE WITNESS: Okay. I didn't have any
10 notes in regard to the -- that I recall in regard to the
11 key card data.
12 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
13 Q: All right. If we wanted to get any of your
14 notes, we'd just contact your lawyers and they have them?
15 A: If anything I've got regarding any of this,
16 my attorneys already have it.
17 Q: All right. I will hand you now what I am
18 marking Smith 13.
19 [SMITH EXHIBIT NO. 13 WAS MARKED FOR
20 IDENTIFICATION]
21 Q: This is another Duke University Police
22 Department operations report, right?
23 A: Yes.
24 Q: And the date is March 14, 2006, at 3:08 a.m.?
25 A: Yes.


1 Q: All right. And who prepared this report?
2 A: It appears to have been written by
3 Christopher Day.
4 Q: All right. And the alleged victim in the
5 report?
6 A: Is Crystal Mangum.
7 Q: Now, let's just go through this narrative
Page 98

8 really quickly.
9 It says, "On the above date and time, a
10 female was brought into the emergency department by Duke
11 [sic] Police in reference to a possible rape."
12 MR. SUN: Durham Police.
13 MR. EKSTRAND: Did I say Duke? Durham
14 police.
15 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
16 Q: "A female was picked up at the Kroger on
17 Hillsborough Road, and she was claiming that she was
18 raped by approximately 20 white males at 610 North
19 Buchanan."
20 Do you remember that claim?
21 A: I remember this report.
22 Q: Do you remember the claim in it?
23 A: I -- honestly, this is the first time I've
24 read this report in -- well, no. Let me see. I don't
25 recall that. This is refreshing my memory somewhat.


1 Q: Whose name is that at the top?
2 A: That's my name.
3 Q: Smith. That's you?
4 A: Yes.
5 Q: Why is your name up there?
6 A: Because I -- in case management. I case-
7 managed it and gave it to me.
8 Q: You were the lead investigator.
9 A: I was an investigator. I was the lead
10 investigator for Duke investigations.
Page 99

11 Q: And this was a Duke University Police
12 Department report?
13 A: This is an operations report, yes.
14 Q: It went to you?
15 A: It went to me.
16 Q: About the same time it was submitted, right?
17 A: The day after, probably.
18 Q: All right. So the day after, you knew that
19 the claim was 20 white men at 610 North Buchanan Street
20 raped Crystal Mangum, according to her, right?
21 A: According to her.
22 Q: And let me ask you, Sergeant Gettliffe asked
23 you to run a Pistol on three residents of the house. Did
24 you ask him, "Aren't you looking for 20 guys"?
25 MR. SUN: Objection.


1 THE WITNESS: Repeat the question,
2 please.
3 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
4 Q: When Sergeant Gettliffe came to you and you
5 said it was either the 14th, 15th, or 16th in your
6 testimony earlier today, he came to you and asked you for
7 photographs and key card data and ask you to run a Pistol
8 or you asked somebody to run a Pistol on the three
9 residents. Did you think that that was odd in light of
10 the fact that she was claiming that she was raped by 20
11 men?
12 MR. SUN: Objection.
13 THE WITNESS: I can't say that even
Page 100

14 occurred to me.
15 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
16 Q: Okay. Well, what about here at the bottom,
17 it says, "The victim changed her story several times, and
18 eventually the Durham police stated that the charges
19 would not exceed misdemeanor simple assault against the
20 occupants of 610 North Buchanan. There were no charges
21 filed by Duke police officers. No suspects have been
22 identified."
23 Misdemeanors. Have you read that report?
24 A: I've read that report.
25 Q: And when a Durham police officer named


1 Gottlieb came to you and said, "I want all this stuff
2 about all the members of the team," did you say, "My
3 gosh, this is a big investigation for a misdemeanor"?
4 A: That's not what I said.
5 Q: Okay. Did you ask him about what's changed?
6 A: I don't think this came up in our
7 conversation.
8 Q: You didn't mention it?
9 A: I don't recall mentioning it to him. I don't
10 recall mentioning the accusation that she was raped by 20
11 white males or that someone at the scene had told
12 Christopher Day that charges probably would not exceed
13 misdemeanors.
14 Q: All right. Now, the middle paragraph
15 identifies a number of police officers. There's
16 Mazurek --
Page 101

Quote:

 

17 A: Mazurek.
18 Q: -- Eason --
19 A: Yes.
20 Q: Robertson --
21 A: Yes.
22 Q: -- and Day?
23 A: Yes.
24 Q: Those are all Duke police officers, right?
25 A: Yes.


1 Q: Okay. It says here that, "Mazurek contacted
2 Lieutenant Best in reference to the victim. Lieutenant
3 Best stayed at the emergency department to gather
4 information from the victim and -- with Durham police."
5 Do you know anything about that personally?
6 A: No.
7 Q: Okay. Then it says, "Eason, Robertson, and
8 Day went to 610 North Buchanan to follow up and see if we
9 could make contact with the occupants of the house,"
10 right?
11 A: That's the report says.
12 Q: Okay. So are they investigating?
13 A: I don't -- are they investigating? I think
14 they were going to the house to -- I don't know what they
15 were doing. They went to the house to make contact with
16 the occupants. That's all I know. That's what the
17 report says.
18 Q: Why would they want to make contact with the
19 occupants?
Page 102

20 A: To, (a) identify them; to, I guess, make an
21 initial inquiry to determine if it was something that was
22 related to Duke or not. I don't know.
23 Q: Does it stand to reason that they're
24 investigating?
25 A: Huh?


1 Q: Does it stand to reason that they are
2 investigating when they go to the house?
3 A: They may be making an initial investigation.
4 Q: Okay. All right. Let me ask you something.
5 Is it possible for the Durham and Duke Police Departments
6 to both participate in any one investigation?
7 A: It's possible.
8 Q: Okay. But you testified earlier that you
9 told Sergeant Gettliffe that Duke was not investigating
10 this particular allegation at some point, right?
11 A: Absolutely.
12 MR. SUN: Objection.
13 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
14 Q: Huh?
15 A: Yes, I did.
16 Q: Okay. All right. And that was your choice
17 or was that a departmental choice?
18 MR. SUN: Objection.
19 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
20 Q: Who made that decision?
21 MR. SUN: Objection.
22 THE WITNESS: I told Gottlieb that --
Page 103

23 when asked by Gottlieb if we were taking the case, I told
24 him no. I also communicated that to Phyllis Cooper who
25 didn't disagree with me.


1 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
2 Q: Okay. Why didn't you take the case?
3 A: It was, in my opinion, not our jurisdiction.
4 Q: Okay. And is that the only basis of your
5 decision?
6 MR. SUN: Objection.
7 THE WITNESS: That it was not our
8 jurisdiction.
9 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
10 Q: But you know that it was a house owned by
11 Duke University, right?
12 A: It was -- at that point, I'm not sure that I
13 was aware -- well, no, prior to that, I'm not sure that I
14 was aware that it belonged to Duke University. In any
15 event, it was a property that we did not exercise direct
16 control over. It was a residential property handled, I
17 believe, through a property manager. I could be wrong
18 there, but through a property manager, so I didn't
19 consider it our jurisdiction, and it was off campus.
20 Q: So you don't investigate crimes that occur
21 off campus?
22 A: We will if the property is under the direct
23 control of Duke University.
24 Q: Okay. And where does that come from, the
25 direct control of the university? Is that in an SOP
Page 104



1 somewhere?
2 MR. SUN: Objection.
3 THE WITNESS: I don't recall.
4 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
5 Q: You just made it up?
6 A: No, I didn't make it up. That's been my
7 practice for -- and the practice of the department, as I
8 understand it, for years.
9 Q: Let me hand you --
10 MR. SUN: Could we take a comfort break?
11 MR. EKSTRAND: I was going to tell
12 you -- yes, we can. I was going to say I think we may be
13 getting close to -- I want to keep it under an hour.
14 MR. SUN: Thank you.
15 MR. EKSTRAND: Yes, let's take a break.
16 [RECESS - 1:57 P.M. TO 2:09 P.M.]
17 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
18 Q: Now, I'm going to hand you, Officer Smith,
19 what I will mark as Smith 14.
20 [SMITH EXHIBIT NO. 14 WAS MARKED FOR
21 IDENTIFICATION]
22 Q: This is a Duke University Police Department
23 operations report, right?
24 A: Yes.
25 Q: And it is about four pages. And the date of

117
Page 105

1 the report is April 1, 2006, right?
2 A: Uh-huh.
3 Q: All right. Now, it says here that the
4 location of the incident is the 700 block of North
5 Buchanan Boulevard in front of 704 North Buchanan
6 Boulevard, right?
7 A: Yes.
8 Q: Okay. And it appears that the Duke
9 University Police responded to this call, right?
10 A: Yes.
11 Q: And the nature of the incident was suspicious
12 activity with a traffic stop?
13 A: Yes.
14 Q: All right. Would it be fair to say that Duke
15 University Police investigated and closed this
16 investigation?
17 A: There's nothing -- Duke investigated it, and
18 it's marked as pending. I don't recall doing anything
19 with it, any follow-up on it.
20 Q: The last page is a citation issued to
21 Mr. Anderson?
22 A: Yes.
23 Q: Okay. And your name is at the top?
24 A: Yes.
25 Q: Does that mean that you were in charge of


1 this case?
2 A: It means that --
3 Q: Overseeing it?
Page 106

4 A: Huh?
5 Q: Overseeing it?
6 A: Overseeing if there was any follow-up that
7 needed to be done, I would do it. But I don't recall
8 what follow-up I did, if any.

Quote:

 

9 Q: Okay. And who is Ellerbe?
10 A: Ellerbe was a patrol officer with our
11 department.
12 Q: And who is Gustafson?
13 A: Gustafson was a lieutenant with our
14 department.
15 Q: Okay. All right. And if I could hand you
16 what I will mark as Smith 15.
17 [SMITH EXHIBIT NO. 15 WAS MARKED FOR
18 IDENTIFICATION]
19 Q: This is a breaking and entering of a motor
20 vehicle?
21 A: Uh-huh.
22 Q: Injury to personal property. And where is
23 the location of this incident?
24 A: 704 North Buchanan.


[IE, this is discussing another case, not the lax case]

25 Q: Okay. And isn't it true that the Duke


1 University Police Department investigated and closed this
2 case?
3 A: They investigated it. I don't know how it
4 was closed.
5 Q: Was it referred -- any indication it was
6 referred to another police department?
Page 107

7 A: No, I don't see any. But this is just the
8 initial report.
9 Q: At the bottom it says, "Case status,"
10 "Closed" is checked. Does that tell you anything?
11 A: Oh, okay, yes. Apparently it was closed.
12 Q: Okay. Closed by the Duke Police Department,
13 correct?
14 A: Yes.
15 Q: All right. And that's 704 North Buchanan
16 Boulevard?


17 A: Yes.
18 Q: All right. That's not on campus?
19 A: No, it's not.
20 Q: That's right next to 610 North Buchanan,
21 isn't it?
22 A: I don't know if it's right next door or down
23 the street.
24 Q: In fact, it's in a parking lot that this
25 occurred?


1 A: I -- well, let me read it.
2 [WITNESS EXAMINES DOCUMENT]
3 A: So your question, it was there was a parking
4 area outside the building at 704 North Buchanan.
5 Q: It says "Incident Data," and it says
6 "Premises Type," and there the Duke Police Department
7 wrote "Parking lot/area."
8 A: That is what it was. Cars were apparently
9 parked in the parking lot; therefore, that was the
Page 108

10 premises.
11 Q: Okay. So that's where the breaking and
12 entering allegedly occurred?
13 A: Yes.
14 Q: And the Duke University Police Department
15 investigated and closed this case?
16 A: Well, yes, it looks to -- appears to me that
17 they did. Had this report come in yesterday, it would
18 have been -- or after -- within the last three years, it
19 would have been referred to Durham. I don't know why it
20 wasn't in this case. I don't recall.
21 Q: Well, what is the date of this report? It's
22 September 29, 2006, right?
23 A: Yes.
24 Q: So that's several months after the alleged
25 incident at --


1 A: I --
2 Q: -- 610 North Buchanan?
3 MR. SUN: Hold on. Let him finish the
4 question.
5 THE WITNESS: Okay.
6 Actually, there is our primary
7 jurisdiction with Duke and secondary jurisdiction. Right
8 now, and around the time of Duke lacrosse, things
9 immediately on Duke campus would be our primary
10 jurisdiction. Things that happened off campus at this
11 time were divided into what would be serious matters and
12 not-so-serious matters. Class 1, Class 2, Class -- I
Page 109

13 keep getting the numbers confused, but the more serious
14 would be a homicide, burglary, sexual assaults, things of
15 that nature.
16 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
17 Q: Sexual offense?
18 A: Huh?
19 Q: Sexual offense?
20 A: Sexual offense.
21 Q: Second-degree sexual offense?
22 A: Any sexual offense.
23 Q: Kidnaping?
24 A: Kidnaping, serious felonies.
25 Q: Those would go there?


1 A: Those would go to Durham. They had primary
2 jurisdiction in all of those. Other minor things that
3 they would have reported to us less serious, it was a
4 decision of the shift commander whether it was going to
5 get passed over or not. If there was a question in the
6 shift commander's mind, he would inquire of a staff
7 officer. So that is consistent with this.
8 Q: Okay. So primary, secondary jurisdiction,
9 where does that come from?
10 A: That comes from our mutual aid agreement with
11 Durham.
12 Q: That's what I thought. Okay.
13 All right. I'm going to hand you what we
14 have premarked as Smith 16.
15 [SMITH EXHIBIT NO. 16 WAS MARKED FOR
Page 110

16 IDENTIFICATION]

[Another example of DUPD investigating a case--this is not the lax case]

17 Q: This is another Duke University Police
18 Department investigation report?
19 A: Yes.
20 Q: And it is a report of an incident that's been
21 styled as second-degree sexual offense and kidnaping?
22 A: Yes.
23 Q: And the officer reporting this or preparing
24 this report appears to be Christopher Day, correct?
25 A: Yes.


1 Q: And this alleged sexual offense and kidnaping
2 was investigated by Christopher Day and closed by
3 Christopher Day; isn't that true?
4 A: It says "Closed, leads exhausted."
5 Q: And the date of --
6 A: Oh --
7 Q: Go ahead.
8 A: These incident reports aren't -- these are
9 printouts that are printed out months, maybe, after the
10 date and whether -- frankly, in my mind, as far as case
11 status goes, when they're originally written, the status
12 may be different than what it is or what the status is
13 when you finally get a copy.
14 So I don't know what went into closing this
15 case, whether it was closed by Christopher Day or whether
16 it was assigned to an investigator, since there's no
17 notation on it, it's a printout, who it was assigned to
18 and what work they put into it before it was cleared.
Page 111

19 That would remain true of this as well.
20 MR. SUN: When you say "this," go ahead
21 and identify the exhibit number.
22 THE WITNESS: "This" would be the other,
23 Exhibit Number 15 as well.
24 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
25 Q: So how would we know what else happened in


1 connection with this sexual offense and kidnaping that
2 was closed?
3 A: There should be investigative follow-up and
4 their follow-ups.
5 Q: Their follow-ups?
6 A: The investigator will document what he did in
7 reference to this investigation.
8 Q: On the second page, it says on the above date
9 the sexual assault occurred, or she reported a sexual
10 assault at --
11 A: Right.
12 Q: -- at a laundry facility on Yearby Street?
13 Strike that.
14 It says on the above date and time, a female
15 student reported that she was sexually assaulted at the
16 2017 Yearby Street laundry facility, and there are no
17 suspects at this time.
18 A: That, it does.
19 Q: And it says it's closed. And the date of the
20 report is July 31, 2006?
21 A: Yes.

Quote:

 

22 Q: Okay. Who is Copley, William C. Copley?
23 A: Copley, he's a sergeant. At this time he was
24 with B Squad.
25 Q: With the Duke University Police Department?


1 A: Yes.
2 Q: And Christopher Day is, we know, a Duke
3 University police officer at this time, right?
4 A: Yes.
5 Q: Okay. Is there any indication that this was
6 referred to Durham?
7 A: It wouldn't have been referred to Durham. It
8 occurred on Duke campus.
9 Q: Okay. Yearby Street is Duke campus?
10 A: Central campus apartments.
11 [SMITH EXHIBIT NO. 17 WAS MARKED FOR
12 IDENTIFICATION]
13 Q: Okay. I'm going to hand you what we have
14 marked as Exhibit 17 and ask you if you can tell us what
15 that is.
16 A: Is this the mutual aid agreement?
17 Q: You tell me.
18 A: It appears to be the mutual aid agreement.
19 Q: Okay. Now, I want to direct you to page 2.
20 At the top of the page it says, "Agreement for Police
21 Cooperation, Mutual Aid, and Campus Law Enforcement
22 Agency Extended Jurisdiction."
23 A: Yes.
24 Q: Is this the agreement that governed the
Page 113

25 jurisdictional relationship between Durham police and


1 Duke police?
2 MR. SUN: Objection.
3 THE WITNESS: Repeat the question,
4 please.
5 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
6 Q: Is this the agreement that governed the
7 jurisdiction sharing between Duke police and Durham
8 police?
9 A: This is -- it appears to be.
10 Q: The definitions in this define "campus,"
11 which I believe you just referred to, it says, "Campus
12 shall mean all property owned and/or leased by the
13 university that is within the corporate limits of
14 Durham," right?
15 A: That's what it says.
16 Q: So is that your understanding of what
17 "campus" means when you say it happens on campus when the
18 police investigate?
19 A: That's what it says.
20 Q: Okay. This was -- if you look at the last
21 page, page 5 of 5, it was signed by President Keohane on
22 April 6, 2004. Is that right?
23 A: That is what it says.
24 [WHEREUPON, MR. THOMPSON AND MS. SPARKS LEAVE
25 THE PROCEEDINGS]

Page 114

1 [SMITH EXHIBIT NO. 18 WAS MARKED FOR
2 IDENTIFICATION]
3 Q: I am going to show you now what we have
4 marked as Smith 18. Do you recognize this message slip?
5 A: No.
6 Q: Do you recognize the handwriting?
7 A: No.
8 Q: Okay. All right. It says, "To Soucie." Do
9 you know who that is?
10 A: Investigator with the Durham Police
11 Department.
12 Q: Who was involved in the investigation of the
13 allegations in this case?
14 A: Yes.


(SNIP)

1
1 Q: I think so. Is that familiar to you at all?
Page 115

2 A: No, it's not.
3 Q: All right. Indicates that there are pictures
4 of all the suspects. Is that familiar to you?
5 A: Excuse me?
6 Q: The direction to go to a page to find
7 pictures of all the suspects on Facebook?
8 A: None of this isn't familiar to me.
9 MR. SUN: Objection.
10 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
11 Q: All right. Okay. Are you familiar with the
12 joint command, Duke/Durham joint command?
13 A: Not as such.
14 Q: Do you know of anything --
15 A: It doesn't ring any bells.
16 [WHEREUPON, MS. SPARKS JOINS THE PROCEEDINGS]
17 Q: Were you aware of any meetings between Duke
18 University Police Department officials and Durham Police
19 Department officials about this investigations?
20 A: I only know about one.
21 Q: You wouldn't?
22 A: I only know about one.
23 Q: Oh. What was that?
24 A: My understanding from Gottlieb in a
25 conversation we had was that Dean and Graves had met with


1 Gottlieb, and I think Chalmers was the chief at the time,
2 for Gottlieb to present to Aaron Graves and Robert Dean I
3 guess what they had on the case, was how it was explained
4 to me.
Page 116

5 Q: Okay. Do you know when that occurred?
6 A: No, I don't know exactly when. It was
7 several weeks before the indictment. How far in advance
8 or how long after the incident, I don't recall.
9 Q: Does March 29th sound about right?
10 A: I honestly couldn't put a date on it.
11 Q: Okay. All right. And what did Sergeant
12 Gottlieb say to you about this meeting?
13 A: Other than that we -- other than that the --
14 I guess the case was discussed and Graves and Dean were
15 provided with what their case was, that they were both
16 informed -- but I don't know if it was either by Gottlieb
17 or the chief -- that they were not to discuss that
18 information outside of that meeting.
19 Q: Okay. So your understanding is that Gottlieb
20 and perhaps was Himan also there? Was Himan there?
21 A: I have no idea who was there beyond Gottlieb
22 and Graves, Dean, and Chalmers. If Gottlieb told me that
23 anybody else was there, I don't remember.
24 Q: Okay. But you're clear that he said that
25 Graves and Dean were present and briefed on the


1 investigation to date?
2 A: I don't recall him characterizing it. My
3 sense was -- well, what I recall was they were told
4 what -- let me think of the best way to say this. My
5 sense and my recollection is that they were told what
6 evidence they had against the -- any of the Duke lacrosse
7 players and what -- whether they had a case or not.
Page 117

8 Beyond that, I don't have a clue.
9 Q: Okay. Are you aware of what Mr. Nifong said
10 about the quality of the evidence about that time?
11 A: I don't remember what I heard and what I
12 didn't hear on the news in regard to that.
13 Q: Do you recall any testimony at the disbarment
14 hearing where Himan indicated that Nifong told them that
15 they were F'd?
16 A: I didn't follow any of the news on the
17 disbarment hearings, thank you.

[He must be one of the few people in Durham who didn't, IMHO]

18 Q: You didn't hear that?
19 A: No. That, I would remember.
20 Q: Would you disagree with that assessment?
21 A: I don't know enough about the case to have an
22 opinion one way or the other, in truth.
23 Q: All right. You're aware that they took DNA
24 swabs of all the --
25 A: I am aware they took DNA.


1 Q: -- members of the team?
2 MR. SUN: Let him finish his question.
3 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. Go ahead and
4 finish your question.
5 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
6 Q: Are you aware that they took DNA swabs of all
7 the white members of the team?
8 A: Absolutely, yes, I'm aware of that.
9 Q: Okay. Did you become aware of the results of
10 those tests or tests conducted with those swabs?
Page 118

11 A: No, I don't recall ever hearing what the
12 results were.

[Again, he must be one of the few people in Durham who never heard about the case, IMHO.]

13 Q: Do you know today?
14 A: I've been told the results were negative.
15 Q: Okay. And in all of your training, what does
16 that indicate to you?
17 A: It indicates they damn well better have a lot
18 of other evidence.
19 Q: Were you aware of any other evidence?
20 A: I'm not aware of anything. I'm not aware
21 of -- I understand items were collected from 610 Buchanan
22 Street during their search warrant. Whether it provided
23 them with evidence to support their case or not, I don't
24 have a clue.
25 Q: All right. You're familiar with the


1 allegations that were written in the affidavit, right,
2 the affidavit to support the NTID order?
3 A: The what who? No, I never read the
4 affidavit.
5 Q: Never did?
6 A: No.
7 Q: Are you aware of the nature of the rape
8 that's described in that affidavit?
9 A: I've never read the affidavit.
10 Q: Are you aware of the nature of the rape that
11 was alleged?
12 A: Only in very general terms that a rape was
13 alleged.

Quote:

 

14 Q: That it was in a small bathroom?
15 A: That sounds familiar.
16 Q: That it was about 30 minutes long?
17 A: I have no idea. I don't recollect the
18 length.
19 Q: Do you know what transference is?
20 A: It would -- as I understand the term, it
21 would be transference of material from one person to
22 another.
23 Q: Genetic material, right?
24 A: What?
25 Q: Could be genetic material, right?


1 A: Could be genetic material. Could be a number
2 of things.
3 Q: And would it be safe to assume that if you
4 engaged in a 30-minute violent gang rape of a woman with
5 two other people, that one or all of you would leave a
6 skin cell behind that would be detected?
7 MR. SUN: Objection.
8 THE WITNESS: Please ask me the question
9 again.
10 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
11 Q: Do you think that transference would occur in
12 a violent, 30-minute gang rape of a woman by three men?
13 A: I think it might depend on multiple factors.
14 Q: Like what?
15 A: Well, I've had cases where a young lady had
16 reported that she had been sexually assaulted, and we
Page 120

17 processed the scene, and there was no doubt in her mind
18 that there had been vaginal intercourse, but there was no
19 DNA or anything in her subject or a condom, and we didn't
20 find anything else when the scene was processed. No
21 other -- no other material, hair, anything.
22 Now, you would assume -- I could assume lots
23 of things. I'd rather not assume. I wasn't there. I
24 didn't do the investigation.
25 Q: Are you familiar with YSDR testing?


1 A: Who?
2 Q: YSDR DNA testing?
3 A: No.

[The poor man knows nothing... (MOO)]


4 Q: Let me just ask you about that case you
5 mentioned. Was that a 30-minute violent gang rape?
6 A: I think that's what I said, it wasn't. It
7 was an acquaintance rape -- well, yeah.
8 Q: Okay. Now, back to this joint command. You
9 don't know of any other joint command meetings between
10 Duke and Durham police?
11 A: I don't know of any.
12 MR. SUN: Objection.
13 THE WITNESS: In reference to?
14 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
15 Q: Anything.
16 A: I'm sure they have meetings all the time. I
17 don't --
18 Q: Okay. Have you ever participated in a joint
19 command meeting?
Page 121

20 A: Not as such.
21 Q: Are you aware of whether Dean or Graves
22 reported on the meeting they had with the Duke
23 investigator or the Durham investigators in the joint
24 command meeting that you referred to?
25 MR. SUN: Objection.


1 THE WITNESS: I don't know that it was a
2 joint command meeting. And, two, you would have to ask
3 them. I'm not aware of any.
4 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
5 Q: I understand. I'm asking you if you're aware
6 of any report that they gave/made about that meeting?
7 A: I'm not aware of any. If there were a
8 meeting or meetings, you'd have to ask them.
9 Q: Well, no, I'm asking you.
10 A: I know.
11 Q: I think we're clear.
12 A: Yeah.
13 Q: We're clear.
14 Did anybody ask you what your thoughts were
15 about the state of the evidence?
16 A: When?
17 Q: At any time. Did anybody at Duke University
18 ask you --
19 A: Nobody -- I'm sorry. Finish your question.
20 Q: -- ask you what you thought your opinion was
21 of the evidence as it existed?
22 A: No, not that I recall.
Page 122

23 Q: Okay. Did anybody in the Duke University
24 Police Department express their opinion to you about the
25 evidence in the case?


1 A: If they did, I don't remember it.
2 Q: Do you know -- did you at the time know who
3 Crystal Mangum was at all?
4 A: At what time?
5 Q: At the time of her allegation when you
6 were --
7 A: I was unfamiliar with -- unfamiliar with her
8 prior to the allegations.
9 Q: Okay. That was the first you encountered her
10 as a person?
11 A: Yes.
12 Q: Okay. All right. Have you ever -- strike
13 that.
14 Are you familiar with the procedures relating
15 to an involuntary commitment?
16 A: Yes.
17 Q: Okay. Tell me about what you understand
18 those to mean.
19 A: They can be initiated through the
20 magistrate's office or by emergency committal. The
21 person either comes to or is brought to a location for an
22 evaluation by a psychiatrist, and the determination will
23 be made whether they are going to commit or not.
24 Papers are drawn out. I know them when I see
25 them, but I can't -- of the commitment papers. The
Page 123



1 evaluation papers on the commitment papers come from the
2 magistrate. The doctor will fill out -- will fill out
3 forms. Those forms will be taken to a magistrate. The
4 person will be committed, transported to whatever
5 facility they're going to where a second evaluation then
6 takes place. And if the second evaluation agrees with
7 the first evaluation, then they're kept. That's my
8 understanding. That may not be exact.
9 [WHEREUPON, MS. SPARKS LEAVES THE
10 PROCEEDINGS]
11 Q: Okay. If it's an officer-initiated
12 involuntary commitment proceeding, what are the criteria
13 that you, as an officer, are looking for to determine
14 whether or not you should initiate them?
15 A: You know, whether the person is a danger to
16 themself or others.
17 Q: Okay. And could you elaborate a little on
18 that?
19 A: It may -- it sounds very general whether
20 they're a danger to themself or others, but that's
21 essentially their actions are such that you think they're
22 going to harm themself or they're going to harm somebody
23 else.
24 Q: Okay. What if the cause of that is just
25 alcohol intoxication, they're just drunk, would that be a


Page 124

1 basis for involuntary commitment?
2 A: I'm not a psychiatrist. My basis would be
3 looking at them and determining whether their actions
4 constitute a danger to themself or others. Alcohol? I
5 don't know. Everything is situational. I can't really
6 comment.
7 Q: Okay. What are the kinds of things you do to
8 rule in or rule out that determination whether they're a
9 danger to themselves or others?
10 A: I'm not sure I've given it all that much
11 thought. I mean, I've been involved in quite a few,
12 but -- repeat your question one more time, please.
13 Q: That's good. I know it's a hard question,
14 and let me ask you a different way.
15 You said you've been involved in a few.
16 Could you illustrate what -- without naming anybody's
17 name, what you saw in the behavior of the person that
18 caused you to initiate those proceedings?
19 A: We've had on occasion people have made
20 comments to other people that they wanted to harm
21 themselves, and we'll go and we'll talk to the person.
22 They may or may not admit it, but based on what we see
23 and what the other person says, try to gather additional
24 information. You know, it could be their demeanor, it
25 could be -- there could be factors of whether they're --


1 whether they've consumed alcohol, whether they've
2 consumed other drugs, whether there's any sign that
3 they've tried to harm themselves, things of that nature.
Page 125

4 Q: Okay. Let me ask you, are there standard
5 operating procedures for involuntary commitments within
6 Duke University --
7 A: You know, I don't remember. There may be. I
8 don't recall it at this time.
9 Q: Do you recall knowing at the time your
10 investigation started -- the investigation started, do
11 you recall knowing that Ms. Mangum had been presented for
12 an involuntary commitment?
13 A: I do not --
14 MR. SUN: Objection. I was just making
15 sure he was finished with the question.
16 THE WITNESS: I don't recall at the time
17 realizing or being told that she had been presented for
18 an involuntary commitment. I may have been told. I
19 don't remember it.
20 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
21 Q: All right. What is Durham Access?
22 A: It's a mental health facility.
23 Q: Okay. And where is it located?
24 A: I believe it's on Crutchfield Street, over near
25 Durham Regional.

Quote:

 

1 Q: Is it in the Durham Regional Hospital compounds
2 or complex there?
3 A: Are you familiar with Crutchfield Street?
4 Q: Huh-uh.
5 A: It's the street to the -- if you're facing
6 Regional, to the right. It runs between Duke Street and
Page 126

7 Roxboro Road there on the Duke Street end.
8 Q: Okay. All right. Is it a part of Durham
9 Regional Hospital?
10 A: I want to say it's a county facility, but I
11 could be -- it's one of those things I've never even
12 given a whole lot of thought.
13 Q: Okay. Are you aware that Duke University
14 operates Durham Regional Hospital?
15 A: Yes, they do now.
16 Q: Are you aware of whether they did then, in
17 2006?
18 A: I know there was a point where Duke was
19 contracted by I guess the Durham County Hospital
20 Corporation to run Durham Regional. Now it seems more
21 like they own it, but I'm not sure. I know we have
22 jurisdiction there.
23 Q: Okay. Because Duke owns it or operates it?
24 A: They're in control of it at least.
25 Q: So that's the test?


1 A: Yes.
2 Q: Okay. So at the time in 2006, are you aware of
3 whether or not Duke operated Durham Access?
4 A: No, I'm not.
5 Q: All right. Now, you were not called to the
6 scene that night, were you, on March 13th?
7 A: No.
8 Q: You were not on duty?
9 A: At the time the event happened, I wasn't on
Page 127

10 duty. I may have been the on-call investigator. I don't
11 recall.

[The result of 6 years of Judge Beaty and "judicial economy", I suppose.]

12 Q: Okay. What's an on-call investigator?
13 A: With Duke, the investigators in investigations
14 rotate as on-call, and the on-call is available by pager
15 or cell phone to members of the Duke Police Department if
16 they have need of our services.
17 [WHEREUPON, MS. SPARKS JOINS THE PROCEEDINGS]
18 Q: Okay. All right. Is there an on-call
19 investigator rotating all the time?
20 A: Yes.
21 Q: Off hours, as in nine to five?
22 A: From 5 o'clock in the afternoon to 8 o'clock in
23 the morning.
24 Q: Okay. And an on-call investigator is assigned
25 and it rotates every so often?


1 A: Every seven days.
2 Q: Okay. And you don't recall if you were the
3 on-call investigator on the night of the 13th or not?
4 A: I know I was the on-call investigator -- I was
5 the on-call investigator on or around that time.
6 Q: Okay. Were you called in at all with respect
7 to Ms. Mangum's allegations as the on-call investigator?
8 A: I don't recall receiving a call in regard to
9 the incident itself when it happened.
10 Q: Did you get a call about anything?
11 A: I was called -- I was called -- I don't think
12 it was that night. I think a little later in the day --
Page 128

13 again, I'm confused about times --

[See above.]

by Chief Dean and
14 asked Chief Dean -- and asked to see if I could obtain a
15 copy of the Durham police report.
16 Q: What did Chief Dean say to you?
17 A: I don't recall if he provided me any details of
18 the incident, but he requested that I contact Durham and
19 see if I could get a copy of their police report.
20 Q: And were you able to?
21 A: Yes.
22 Q: Okay. And do you recall what that looked like?
23 A: It was a printout, two or three pages, maybe
24 four.
25 Q: Sorry. Go ahead.


1 A: That's it.
2 Q: Do you know who wrote it?
3 A: I have a half memory, but it would be a guess,
4 so --
5 Q: Could it be Shelton, Sergeant Shelton?
6 A: I don't recall.
7 Q: Do you recall what that report conveyed?
8 A: What I recall, the report was a victim,
9 obviously a victim listed, descriptions of possible
10 suspects. I don't remember -- what I remember the
11 narrative was that Mangum met officers in the parking lot
12 of Kroger and made an accusation that she'd been sexually
13 assaulted. I recall that the suspects were described as
14 white males. I don't remember if it -- I'm sure it
15 provided an address. I don't recall it as such on the
Page 129

16 report.
17 Q: Did you ever follow up with the security guard
18 at Kroger who called that in?
19 A: I wasn't investigating the case, no.
20 Q: All right. When did you find out that that
21 scenario that you've just described was false and that
22 she didn't make any such allegation at the Kroger parking
23 lot?
24 MR. SUN: Objection.
25 THE WITNESS: That may be my memory


1 playing me false.
2 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
3 Q: Okay. And what did you do with the report when
4 you got it?
5 A: Provided it to Chief Dean.
6 Q: Okay. Did you ever talk to Gottlieb about the
7 case?
8 A: In what aspect?
9 Q: Well, you've told us about the key card reports
10 and your initial efforts to help him, but in a more
11 general sense after that, did you talk to him about the
12 case?
13 A: After the key card --
14 Q: Uh-huh.
15 A: -- or before the key card or --
16 Q: After you gave the key cards and the photos --
17 A: I met him on occasion and we spoke not
18 specifically about the case. I spoke to him on a number
Page 130

19 of occasions, but I don't remember the substance of it.
20 Q: Well, you gave him photos?
21 A: I gave him photos.
22 Q: Did you ever ask him, "Hey, Sergeant Gottlieb,
23 did she pick anybody out?"
24 A: He told me that -- no, actually, I never asked
25 about the lineups.


1 Q: How did you know there was more than one
2 lineup?
3 A: Well, I know that Investigator Soucie put the
4 lineups together and she put together -- she said that
5 she was putting the lineups together.
6 Q: Did you talk to her about the results of those?
7 A: No. It was when they were putting together the
8 search warrant for Edens.
9 Q: Ryan McFadyen's room?
10 A: No, it wasn't Ryan McFadyen's room, it was at
11 their office.
12 Q: No, no, the warrant was --
13 A: To Ryan McFadyen's room, yes. She -- I asked
14 her how she was doing; she said she was busy putting
15 together lineups.
16 Q: Okay. You were at her office?
17 A: I was at Gottlieb's office.
18 Q: Okay. Where is that?
19 A: Their substation -- was at their substation at
20 Northgate Mall.
21 Q: Okay. And that was where they were getting the
Page 131

22 warrant prepared for --
23 A: Yes.
24 Q: -- McFadyen's room? Okay.
25 Did you assist with that?


1 MR. SUN: Objection.
2 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
3 Q: The question is, did you assist with issuing a
4 warrant for Ryan McFadyen's room?
5 A: I assisted in -- yes.
6 Q: Okay. What did you do?
7 A: I provided them with pictures of the dormitory
8 for their search warrant.
9 Q: What else?
10 A: I provided Gottlieb with a description of the
11 dorm for the search warrant.
12 Q: What else?
13 A: That's it. Oh, I showed Gottlieb -- Gottlieb
14 to the dorm, and I went to the dorm so that they would
15 see it and know where it was.
16 Q: Okay. And when you got there, you remained
17 there as they searched, right?
18 A: When they served the search warrant, I stood by
19 while they carried out the search warrant.
20 Q: Okay. And when they served it, they read it?
21 A: When they served it, Himan read it.
22 Q: And you were there for that?
23 A: I was there for parts of that.
24 Q: Okay. Did you review the search warrant when
Page 132

25 you were at the office?


1 A: No.
2 Q: Did you ask to?
3 A: No.
4 Q: Did you go with them to get it presented to the
5 judge?
6 A: No.
7 Q: Did they do that after you were at their
8 office?
9 A: Yes, I assume.
10 Q: Okay. And then you met up with them again and
11 took them to Edens?
12 A: Yes.
13 Q: Okay. Do you remember what date that was?
14 A: Not offhand.
15 Q: The same day as the search took place?
16 A: It was the same day, yes.
17 Q: Okay. All right. When you were there helping
18 them prepare the search warrant, did you become aware of
19 an e-mail that was being added to the NTID affidavit?
20 A: I --
21 MR. SUN: Objection.
22 THE WITNESS: Excuse me. What?
23 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
24 Q: Did you become aware of an e-mail that would be
25 added to the prior NTID affidavit?

Page 133

148
1 A: Do you have a particular e-mail in mind?
2 Q: The e-mail that's in the search warrant that
3 you were helping them prepare.

[The poor man knows nothing, IMHO...(sarc/off)]

4 A: There was an e-mail that was allegedly from
5 Ryan McFadyen. I was made aware of that e-mail at that
6 time.
7 Q: During that meeting at their office?
8 A: Uh-huh.
9 Q: Okay. Did you ask them how they got it?
10 A: I don't recall whether I asked or not. I
11 understand they got it through Crime Stoppers.
12 Q: Okay. Do you know who delivered that to them?
13 A: No.
14 Q: Did you look into who delivered that to them?
15 A: No.
16 Q: Did it occur to you that somebody might have
17 gone into Mr. McFadyen's e-mail account and taken it?
18 A: No, that didn't occur to me.
19 Q: Did they say they knew where it came from?
20 A: From an anonymous source.
21 Q: Do you know what the e-mail address of the
22 delivering party was?
23 A: No.
24 Q: The e-mail address dukelose44@gmail.com?
25 A: If I was told that, I don't remember it.


1 Q: Do you know anybody who set up an e-mail
Page 134

2 account by that name?
3 A: No.
4 Q: Were you ever asked to look into who might have
5 done it?
6 A: No.
7 Q: So nobody asked you and you didn't look into
8 who procured an e-mail purportedly from Ryan McFadyen's
9 Duke e-mail account?
10 A: I understand -- I don't remember the exact
11 conversation between me and Gottlieb about where they got
12 the e-mail. What I do remember is that it was from an
13 anonymous source, and his feeling was whoever had sent it
14 was somebody that knew McFadyen that had received the
15 e-mail. Gottlieb.
16 Q: He had a feeling?
17 A: Well, he may have known. I don't know. He
18 didn't share that information with me.
19 Q: All right. You guys are police officers,
20 right, sitting around the table and you're investigators.
21 Did you have any conversation about whether information
22 from an unknown anonymous source had any place in an
23 affidavit --
24 A: I --
25 Q: -- in a search warrant?


1 MR. SUN: Let him finish the question.
2 THE WITNESS: No, we didn't have any -- I
3 didn't have any conversation with them over the validity
4 of the e-mail.
Page 135

Quote:

 

5 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
6 Q: Well, I'm asking you a slightly different
7 question.
8 Do you know whether or not a judicial officer
9 or judicial official reviewing a probable cause affidavit
10 can consider any information from an unknown or anonymous
11 source?
12 MR. SUN: Objection.
13 THE WITNESS: I know that if you're using
14 information from an anonymous source, you should have
15 corroboration.
16 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
17 Q: All right. But this is an unknown anonymous
18 source, right?
19 A: Well, yes.
20 Q: Okay. And you're pretty clear on the
21 proposition that no judicial official can consider
22 information from an unknown anonymous source in
23 determining whether probable cause exists, right?
24 MR. SUN: Objection.
25 THE WITNESS: I'm not an attorney.


1 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
2 Q: You're an investigator.
3 A: I know that there was an e-mail, that Gottlieb
4 included it in his search warrant, that he presented to a
5 judicial official, and that it was -- and that search
6 warrant was signed. Who am I to second-guess a judge.
7 Q: Yeah. Well, I'm asking you whether or not it
Page 136

8 occurred to you that there was no point in putting an
9 e-mail from an unknown anonymous source in a probable
10 cause affidavit?
11 A: It occurred to me that Gottlieb had included it
12 in a probable cause affidavit, and he felt that it -- or
13 whatever he had in his affidavit provided him with
14 sufficient probable cause.
15 Q: Okay. Let me ask you this way. If you had an
16 e-mail from an unknown anonymous source, somebody just
17 like this through Crime Stoppers, don't know where it
18 came from, who it came from, it just looks like an e-mail
19 from somebody's account, but you don't know that, and
20 that's all you have. Would you even bother going to a
21 judge with it to get a warrant to search somebody's
22 residence?
23 MR. SUN: Objection.
24 THE WITNESS: The fact is I haven't ever
25 been in that situation where I had that -- and I had to


1 make the decision whether to include it in the affidavit,
2 and I don't have an opinion.
3 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
4 Q: You don't have an opinion. What kind of
5 training do you have in the determination of probable
6 cause?
7 A: I've gone through the PLI.
8 Q: What's that?
9 A: Police Law Institute.
10 Q: Okay. So at the Police Law Institute, did they
Page 137

11 talk to you at all, did they teach you at all about the
12 idea that if you have nothing but information from an
13 unknown anonymous source, you're not going to get a
14 warrant?
15 A: Well, ideally, they taught me you take your
16 probable cause and you put it in an affidavit and you
17 take it before a magistrate or a judge, depending on the
18 nature of the search warrant. You present it to that
19 judicial official, and then they decide whether you have
20 probable cause or not.
21 Q: Okay. So based on your training, in light of
22 all the allegations that were already in the NTID
23 affidavit, was there any need to supplement that to get a
24 warrant to search anybody's room, assuming it was true,
25 of course?


1 MR. SUN: Objection.
2 THE WITNESS: What's your question?
3 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
4 Q: The question is, did you all talk about why on
5 earth you needed to add an e-mail from an unknown
6 anonymous source?
7 A: I don't remember the topic coming out in our
8 conversations.
9 Q: Tell me about the conversation about the
10 e-mail, then.
11 A: I don't -- other than Gottlieb mentioned it to
12 me, I think he read it to me. I don't recall -- there
13 wasn't really a whole lot of conversation about it.
Page 138

14 Q: Okay. What was the crime that they were
15 investigating on that search warrant?
16 A: I never read the search warrant. I don't
17 recall overhearing what it was. Well, I didn't read it
18 that day. I don't remember.
19 Q: Does conspiracy to commit murder sound
20 familiar?
21 A: I don't remember what the charge was on the
22 search warrant.
23 Q: Okay. All right. Well, having learned all
24 that, who did you tell at Duke about the search warrant
25 itself?

1
1 MR. SUN: Objection.
2 THE WITNESS: I told Chief Dean about the
3 search warrant when the search warrant was served.
4 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
5 Q: Okay. Did you tell him what was in the search
6 warrant or what was in the affidavit?
7 A: Other than my recollection was that I called
8 Chief Dean and said when we got to Edens dorm and told
9 him Durham is serving a search warrant on one of the
10 lacrosse player's rooms. I don't remember the exact --
11 I'm sure I gave him the room number, but I don't remember
12 any details I gave him.
13 Q: Okay. So you don't remember his reaction to
14 the e-mail or any description of it?
15 MR. SUN: Objection.
16 THE WITNESS: I don't remember mentioning
Page 139

17 to him that the e-mail was part of the search warrant.
18 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
19 Q: Do you remember mentioning to him that they
20 were investigating a conspiracy to commit murder?
21 A: I simply told him that -- what I recall is I
22 simply told him that I was there with members of the
23 Durham Police Department, Sergeant Gottlieb, at Edens 2C,
24 and they were serving a search warrant on one of the
25 lacrosse players.


1 Q: Okay. All right. I am handing you what we
2 are making as Smith 19. And once we're done with this,
3 I'm going to give you a break.
4 [SMITH EXHIBIT NO. 19 WAS MARKED FOR
5 IDENTIFICATION]
6 Q: This is a news letter from the Duke University
7 Police Department, right?
8 A: Yes.
9 Q: The Ten-Fourteen.
10 A: Oh, okay. Yes.
11 Q: And it looks like you have the banner piece
12 here entitled, "Who Sent That E-mail? by Gary Smith."
13 A: Okay.
14 Q: That's you, right?
15 A: I wrote it. I don't think I titled it.
16 Q: That was in August of 2006, wasn't it?
17 A: Yes.
18 Q: Seems like you have a lot of interest and some
19 training in accessing information about who's sending
Page 140

20 e-mails and from what location and what IP address. Is
21 that right?
22 A: Well, I was familiar with how to determine the
23 original IP address on an e-mail and, in general,
24 determine what the source of that e-mail was.
25 Q: Okay. So it seems like you have a pretty good


1 understanding of how to track down where an e-mail came
2 from, right?
3 A: Yes.
4 Q: Okay. You've already testified here that you
5 took no steps to find out where Ryan McFadyen's purported
6 e-mail came from, right?
7 A: Right.
8 Q: Are you familiar with an e-mail that was sent
9 through Breck Archer's Duke account?
10 A: No. I don't recall.
11 MR. EKSTRAND: Let's take a break, if that
12 makes sense.
13 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
14 MR. EKSTRAND: All right. It's 3:10.
15 Maybe ten minutes?
16 MR. SUN: Very good.
17 [RECESS - 3:10 P.M. TO 3:29 P.M.]
18 MR. EKSTRAND: We're back on the record.
19 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
20 Q: Before the break, we were talking about your
21 publication in the Ten-Fourteen entitled, "Who sent that
22 e-mail."
Page 141
23 A: Yes.
24 Q: All right. Do you remember writing that?
25 A: I remember writing the first paragraph of it.


1 Q: Okay. All right. And it says, "Reading the
2 E-Mail Header, by Mary Landesman, Your Guide to Antivirus
3 Software"?
4 A: Yes.
5 Q: Who is that?
6 A: It's an article I found online.
7 Q: And your paragraph basically walks you through
8 how to find the IP address of the sender and then where
9 to go to determine to whom the IP was assigned, right?
10 A: Yes.
11 Q: That's arin.net, a-r-i-n.net?
12 A: Yes.
13 Q: Have you ever used that?
14 A: Oh, yes.
15 Q: Okay. You use that to identify, as you say, to
16 determine to whom the IP was assigned?
17 A: It will -- it will help me determine not the
18 individual to whom it was assigned, but the original
19 server and the date and time the e-mail was sent.
20 Q: Okay. And that can often lead you to who
21 originated the e-mail, right?
22 A: It may or may not.
23 Q: Okay. All right. Let me hand you what we've
24 premarked as Smith 20.
25 [SMITH EXHIBIT NO. 20 WAS MARKED FOR
Page 142


158
1 IDENTIFICATION]
2 Q: This is an e-mail with just the kind of header
3 information that I think you're describing in this
4 article. Is that right?
5 A: Yes.
6 MR. SUN: Objection.
7 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. Yeah, more or
8 less.
9 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
10 Q: Okay. Now, at the top, it says return path is
11 breck.archer@duke.edu. Are you familiar with that e-mail
12 address?
13 A: Maybe. At this point, it doesn't really ring a
14 bell.
15 Q: Well, duke.edu, is that the Duke University
16 server?
17 A: Yeah, that's Duke University.
18 Q: Okay, breck.archer, that's the name of the
19 person to whom it belongs, typically?
20 A: It's been a long while since I've done one of
21 these. Usually -- that may be. Usually -- wait a
22 second. Let me read this.

[Even I know that much. Is it really plausible that Smith doesn't remember that name@duke.edu is the standard
Duke email address? (MOO)]
23 [WITNESS EXAMINES DOCUMENT]
24 A: So what's your question again?
25 Q: That the e-mail address belongs to somebody


Page 143

1 named Breck Archer, right?
2 A: Based on the e-mail, yes.
3 Q: That's how Duke sets up their e-mail accounts
4 pretty much?
5 A: In this -- e-mail accounts or e-mail addresses,
6 what? I'm not sure what you're asking.
7 Q: Okay. I don't want to lead you to an answer.
8 If you don't know, you don't know.
9 A: No, I mean, ask the question again.
10 Q: Does the return path to breck.archer@duke.edu
11 refer to a person named Breck Archer, typically, as Duke
12 sets up their e-mails?
13 A: That -- looking at this e-mail address, seems
14 to me typical of what I've seen in the past.

[took a lot of questions IMHO to get that simple admission]

15 Q: All right. Do you know who Breck Archer is?
16 A: It doesn't ring a bell.

[He doesn't know who he's being sued by?]

17 Q: Okay. All right. Now, at the very bottom of
18 all this text, it says, "I am going to the police
19 tomorrow to tell them everything that I know. Breck,"
20 right?
21 A: Yes.
22 Q: When was this sent --
23 MR. SUN: Objection.
24 [WHEREUPON, MS. SPARKS LEAVES THE PROCEEDINGS]
25 BY MR. EKSTRAND:

160
1 Q: -- according to the header?
2 A: I'm looking to see if I can find that
3 information.

Quote:

 

4 According to the e-mail, it appears that this
5 was sent on the 14th of April 2006 at 3:06:01.
6 Q: Okay. Were you aware of this e-mail being
7 sent?
8 A: If I've seen this e-mail before, I don't
9 remember it.
10 Q: Were you aware -- do you recall there being a
11 report from Breck Archer or his counsel indicating that
12 somebody had sent an e-mail from his account without his
13 consent?

14 A: I don't recall it.
15 Q: Do you remember giving anybody access to either
16 Breck's account or a means to access Breck's account?
17 A: No.
18 Q: Are you sure?
19 A: Yes.
20 Q: Have you ever accessed a student's e-mail
21 account before?
22 A: No.
23 Q: It's never come up, or why not?
24 A: I do not recall ever, in the case of an
25 investigation or anybody else's investigation, giving


1 anybody the means to access a student or anybody else's
2 e-mail account without their permission. And that would
3 mean they, the person, the owner of the account, would
4 have to provide the information to access the account. I
5 don't recall even doing that.
6 [WHEREUPON, MS. SPARKS JOINS THE PROCEEDINGS]
Page 145

7 Q: Okay. Why is that, in your mind, any different
8 than giving access or giving reports of a student's key
9 card data?
10 A: I don't have access to their e-mail
11 information. I can't get it.
12 Q: Okay. So is that the difference?
13 MR. SUN: Objection.
14 THE WITNESS: Repeat, the difference
15 between e-mail and what?
16 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
17 Q: Duke card accounts.
18 A: At -- I don't have access to their e-mail. I
19 don't access a person's account without a court order.
20 At that time, my understanding with the Duke card
21 information that I released it was I didn't need their
22 permission to release it, and at the time I released it,
23 that I didn't need a court order.
24 Q: All right. Let me just ask you, when a search
25 warrant is executed on Duke campus --


1 A: Yes.
2 Q: -- does Duke University, as a matter of course,
3 get a copy of the warrant?
4 A: No.
5 Q: Do they ever?
6 A: I only recall two, maybe three instances, maybe
7 four, where Durham or another agency served search
8 warrants on campus, and I don't recall -- can't say that
9 we didn't in at least one of them. But I don't recall
Page 146

10 getting copies of search warrants at the time the warrant
11 was served, any of them.
12 Q: Are you aware of any SOP that would require
13 that --
14 A: No. To my knowledge, there is no SOP.
15 MR. SUN: Let him finish the question,
16 please.
17 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
18 Q: Do you know if there's any SOP governing the
19 execution of search warrants generally on Duke campus?
20 A: There may be. I don't recall it offhand.
21 Q: Okay. Now, just to be clear, during the search
22 of Ryan McFadyen's dorm room, you were present?
23 A: For most of it.
24 Q: Okay. And you were also present for the search
25 of his car?


1 A: I was present for the search of his car.
2
3 Q: All right. And to get them, the police
4 officers who executed the warrant, into the dorm room,
5 did you have to unlock any doors?
6 A: Into the dorm room itself, no.
7 Q: Into the dorm building?
8 A: Swipe the card.
9 Q: And so you unlocked the door, right?
10 A: Into the dorm, yes.
11 Q: Swipe of a card?
12 A: Huh?
Page 147

13 Q: With the swipe of the card?
14 A: A swipe of the card.
15 Q: Did you do the same thing when you assisted
16 them in getting access to the dorm to interrogate members
17 of the team?
18 MR. SUN: Objection.
19 THE WITNESS: I was not present when they
20 entered the dorm to interview members of the team.
21 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
22 Q: So you did not help them access the dorm?
23 A: I made sure Sergeant Gottlieb knew who he
24 needed to make contact with to make arrangements to enter
25 the dorm. I made sure the person that was on duty knew


1 that he might call to access the dorm.
2 Q: And were you present at all for the search of
3 the residence at 610 North Buchanan?
4 A: No.
5 Q: Were you present at all for the execution of
6 the NTID order?
7 A: NTID order?

[The poor man knows nothing...(sarc/off)]

8 Q: The nontestimonial identification order?
9 A: No.
10 Q: Do you know who was present from the Duke
11 University Police Department for the search of 610 North
12 Buchanan?
13 A: Other than what was on the report, I don't
14 know.
15 Q: All right. Are you familiar with the Crime
Page 148

16 Stoppers poster that was distributed around Durham and
17 Duke?
18 A: Vaguely.
19 Q: Do you know how that was made and produced?
20 A: (Shakes head.)
21 Q: You don't know anything about it?
22 A: No.
23 Q: Now, let me ask you about the pictures that you
24 gave to the Durham police officers, I guess it was
25 Gottlieb. You said you got that from a website. Is that

1 true?
2 A: Which pictures are we -- I gave them --
3 Q: A CD?
4 A: I gave them pictures -- you're referring to the
5 pictures of the lacrosse players?
6 Q: Uh-huh.
7 A: Okay. I got them off the website.
8 Q: And you said that was goduke.com?
9 A: Yes.
10 Q: Are you sure?
11 A: Absolutely.
12 Q: Okay. You didn't get them from the sports
13 information officer or department?
14 A: No.
15 Q: And you burned them onto a CD?
16 A: Yes.
17 Q: Why didn't you just tell the Durham police to
18 go to www.goduke.com?
Page 149

19 A: He was there. We were waiting for copies of
20 the reports that we were going to give to him. I just --
21 Q: The site was still live with those pictures at
22 the time?
23 A: Yes.
24 Q: Okay. All right. Did you give any other
25 pictures besides the ones from the website --


1 A: Of la- --
2 Q: -- of any of the players?
3 A: I don't recall giving them anything but what
4 was on the website.
5 Q: All right. Is it true that Stotsenberg was the
6 liaison at the time to the Durham Crime Stoppers?
7 A: Yes.
8 MR. SUN: At what time?
9 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
10 Q: At the time of the investigation of Mangum's
11 allegations.
12 A: I know -- I recall Greg Stotsenberg was a
13 liaison and served as a liaison between the department,
14 our department and the Durham Police Department for Crime
15 Stoppers.
16 Q: All right. What did that role entail?
17 A: What I recall is it would entail that if I had
18 information that I needed to submit or someone within
19 investigations or the Duke Police Department wanted to
20 submit to Crime Stoppers, at that point we'd give it to
21 Stotsenberg, and he would submit it. On occasion, I
Page 150

22 believe -- I remember he may have -- he may have
23 delivered rewards to people for Crime Stoppers'
24 information.
25 I remember -- beyond that, I know he had -- I


1 know he did some things with Crime Stoppers, but, like
2 I -- I seem to -- I remember he may have substituted
3 for -- what's his name -- the Durham officer, Rick
4 Addison, at some point while Addison was out of town with
5 Crime Stoppers and submitting information, and I don't
6 know if he ever distributed information.
7 Q: Okay. He would, though?
8 A: Huh?
9 Q: He would?
10 A: He should remember what his activity was with
11 Crime Stoppers.
12 Q: Okay. All right. I'm going to hand you what
13 I'll mark as Smith 21.
14 [SMITH EXHIBIT NO. 21 WAS MARKED FOR
15 IDENTIFICATION]
16 Q: This is just a document that's denominated a
17 Federal Statement, Form 990. I don't necessarily expect
18 you to know what that is, but as you look at the roster
19 of names, do these people listed here appear to be
20 familiar to you or known to you?
21 A: Robert Dean is familiar to me.
22 Q: He's the chief?
23 A: He's the current -- well, no, not the current.
24 He was the chief of the Duke Police Department. And Sue
Page 151

25 Wasiolek's name is familiar to me.

1 Q: Who is she?
2 A: She's a dean within the Duke -- within Duke
3 University, or was. I'm not sure what her role is --
4 exact role is now.
5 Q: How about Dan Hill, do you know him?
6 A: The name doesn't ring any bells. Maybe I
7 should, but I don't.
8 Q: What about Kent Fletcher?
9 A: The name sounds familiar.
10 Q: Is he with the Duke or Duke University Police
11 Department?
12 A: I couldn't place him.
13 Q: Did you ever talk to Dean Sue about the case?
14 A: I don't believe so. I don't believe so.
15 Q: Are you familiar with Robert Dean being the
16 chair of the Durham City/County Crime Stoppers?
17 A: I remember he had involvement with Crime
18 Stoppers. I didn't recall what his involvement was.
19 Q: Is that during the case of the investigation of
20 Mangum's allegations?
21 A: I don't know if he held that role -- I don't
22 know if he was in -- if he held that position during --
23 well, looking at this, at least at some point he did, but
24 I don't know when he took the position and when he left
25 it.

Page 152


1 Q: Okay. All right. Now, do you recall at any
2 time anybody within the Durham or Duke Police Departments
3 asking for all the Duke officers who had any interactions
4 with Mangum on the night she made her allegations to
5 write any reports about it?
6 MR. SUN: Objection.
7 THE WITNESS: Repeat your question.
8 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
9 Q: Do you recall any specific request that
10 officers of the Duke Police Department who had
11 interactions with Mangum on March 13th, 14th, were asked
12 to write to reports about that?
13 A: No.


Quote:

 

14 Q: Did you ever write a separate report about the
15 events of the night?
16 A: No.
17 Q: Okay. All right. Let me be really specific.
18 Do you ever -- do you recall ever hearing about an order
19 or directive to Duke police officers to revise their
20 statements from the night?
21 A: No.
22 Q: To revise their memories from the night?
23 A: No.
24 Q: To write reports that revised their memories or
25 the statements from the night?


1 A: No.
Page 153

2 MR. SUN: Objection.
3 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
4 Q: All right. Let me hand you what I'll mark as
5 Exhibit 22.
6 [SMITH EXHIBIT NO. 22 WAS MARKED FOR
7 IDENTIFICATION]
8 Q: While I do that, do you know -- can you tell us
9 who William Mazurek is?
10 A: He was a patrol officer.
11 Q: For?
12 A: For Duke University Police Department.
13 Q: Okay. All right. And the document you have in
14 front of you, Exhibit 22, do you recognize that?
15 A: I don't recall ever seeing this before. I
16 don't know that I haven't; I just don't remember it. I
17 haven't seen it before.
18 Q: Okay. In terms of a form, this appears to be a
19 narrative of sorts, but is this any kind of a standard
20 form for the Duke Police Department to use?
21 A: Well, statements by officers are sometimes
22 placed on continuation pages.
23 Q: Does this look like a continuation form?
24 A: I'm not -- but just as often, the officer might
25 simply pull up a Word document and put it in memo form.


1 Q: Okay. So you're saying this is a common --
2 A: This isn't --
3 MR. SUN: Objection.
4 Let him finish the question.
Page 154

5 THE WITNESS: Right.
6 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
7 Q: Is this a common approach to supplementing a
8 statement?
9 A: It's not an unusual.
10 Q: Okay. Did you ever have any conversations with
11 Officer Mazurek about his actual recollections?
12 A: I don't remember.
13 Q: Would you be surprised if you learned that
14 after he left the employment of Duke University, his
15 recollection was very different than what he wrote here?
16 A: That wouldn't -- I don't -- if -- I'm not sure
17 that it would surprise me.
18 Q: Why?
19 A: I just -- I'm not aware that he changed his
20 statement. I'm not aware of what his opinion after the
21 fact was. To be surprised, I'd have to have an opinion,
22 and since I don't know, I don't have an opinion.
23 Q: Okay. All right. Let me hand you what I'll
24 mark as 23.
25 [SMITH EXHIBIT NO. 23 WAS MARKED FOR


1 IDENTIFICATION]
2 Q: And just keep 22 in front of you for a second.
3 At the bottom, if you would, just read the
4 entry from Himan's report --
5 A: Which one?
6 Q: It's page number 30 of the document, Bates
7 stamped number 9028.
Page 155

8 At the bottom it says, November 2, 2006, 9:27
9 in the morning, spoke with William Mazurek.
10 A: Oh, I see, yes.
11 Q: Is that the same William Mazurek whose name
12 appears on the report, Exhibit 22?
13 A: That should be the same.
14 Q: Did William Mazurek start working at the
15 Chatham County Sheriff's Office sometime around July of
16 2006?
17 A: He left our department to work for a sheriff's
18 department. Yeah, I believe it was the Chatham County
19 Sheriff's Department. As far as the date goes, that's
20 what this says.
21 Q: All right. And it says here in Himan's report
22 that it appears to be an interview that Himan conducted
23 of Mr. Mazurek. It says that Mazurek started at Duke in
24 February of 2004. Does that square with your
25 recollection?


1 A: I don't remember when he started.
2 Q: It says here that Mazurek, along with Officer
3 Day, were officers in charge. He was 740 and Officer Day
4 was 741.
5 A: Okay.
6 Q: Does that make sense or were they the officers
7 in charge at the time of Mangum's allegation?
8 MR. SUN: Objection.
9 THE WITNESS: 740 and 741 are designations
10 for radios within the hospital. This says that on that
Page 156

11 day, he and Day were in charge. That would -- the date
12 could have been a date -- they very easily could have
13 been assigned to the hospital on that day.
14 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
15 Q: Okay. All right. It says in Himan's report,
16 he cites that victim was brought into the hospital and
17 was crying. He stated it was almost not real, possibly
18 faking, was not sure. He stated at no point did he smell
19 alcohol on her. He did state that she seemed like she
20 was in a daze, that he never asked her any questions, and
21 that Sara Falcon was designated to be with the victim in
22 the family conference room.
23 A: Uh-huh. Yes.
24 Q: Okay. Do you know anything about that report
25 from Himan or that interview of Mazurek?


1 A: No.
2 Q: Did you ever see that before?
3 A: No.
4 Q: All right. Let me hand you what we've marked
5 as Exhibit 24.
6 [SMITH EXHIBIT NO. 24 WAS MARKED FOR
7 IDENTIFICATION]
8 Q: This is a supplement that Christopher Day
9 wrote.
10 Now, this is entitled a continuation page. And
11 is that signed by Christopher Day?
12 A: Yes.
13 MR. SUN: Objection.
Page 157

14 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
15 Q: It says, "This narrative is a continuation to
16 an operations report." And does that refer to his
17 original operations report that we've submitted already?
18 A: If his was numbered 1259, then yes. I don't
19 want to go through the file --
20 THE REPORTER: I'm sorry?
21 THE WITNESS: If his original report was
22 titled -- was numbered OCA File Case Number 1259, then
23 it's a continuation to his report.
24 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
25 Q: Okay. Let me hand you --


1 A: I think you've already --
2 [SMITH EXHIBIT NO. 25 WAS MARKED FOR
3 IDENTIFICATION]
4 Q: Let me just go ahead, so we don't get confused,
5 I've handed you Exhibit 25. Is that what you're
6 referring to --
7 A: Yes.
8 Q: -- as the original report by Christopher Day?
9 A: Yes.
10 Q: What's the date of that report?
11 A: 3/24/06 [sic].
12 Q: Okay. And the substance of the narrative, what
13 is that occurring?
14 A: It talks about Crystal Mangum being brought
15 into the emergency room.
16 Q: On what date?
Page 158

17 A: On the 14th of March '06.
18 Q: Okay. So Exhibit 24 is dated March 31, 2006,
19 right?
20 A: Yes.
21 MR. SUN: Bob, is Exhibit 25 the same as
22 what you marked earlier?
23 THE WITNESS: Yes.
24 MR. EKSTRAND: I believe it is. For
25 purposes of the record, I just wanted to make sure that


1 these --
2 MR. SUN: I didn't want to go through and
3 look at the -- I'll accept that representation it's the
4 same.
5 MR. EKSTRAND: Well, let's keep it as
6 25 --
7 MR. SUN: That's fine.
8 MR. EKSTRAND: -- and that way the record
9 will reflect what the original report was. And that is
10 number --
11 THE WITNESS: Thirteen.
12 MR. EKSTRAND: Thirteen of twenty-five.
13 Thirteen is page 1 of 25.
14 MR. SUN: Why don't you just confirm that
15 13 is page 1 of 25.
16 THE WITNESS: Looking at this, what I see,
17 13 appears to be page 1 of 25; 25 has names blanked out.
18 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
19 Q: Okay. All right. So more than two weeks
Page 159

20 later, this continuation page is written, and it says,
21 "This narrative is a continuation to an operations report
22 in reference to assisting Durham police at 610 North
23 Buchanan. After all Duke police officers cleared from
24 610 North Buchanan, I went to the Duke emergency
25 department to meet with Lieutenant Best, the watch


1 commander for Duke police. While standing at the
2 emergency department entrance, I overheard the District 2
3 sergeant state that the victim, which was inside the
4 emergency department, had changed her story several
5 times, and that if charges were filed, they would
6 probably not exceed that of a misdemeanor."
7 And then it goes on, it says, "In reference to
8 the conversation with Durham officers, I did not speak
9 directly with the victim or with an investigator, nor did
10 I ask questions regarding the case. The information was
11 secondhand from the patrol sergeant standing on the
12 emergency room dock outside the ED."
13 Can you surmise what the purpose of this
14 supplemental report is?
15 A: It appears, based on the content, to be a
16 clarification and additional detail to the original
17 report.
18 Q: What's that detail?
19 A: Let me see.
20 [WITNESS EXAMINES DOCUMENT]
21 A: The only difference I see between the last
22 paragraph of the original report and the supplement would
Page 160

23 be how Day came to the -- how Day came to write the
24 original statement or get the information for the
25 original statement that the charges would not exceed a


1 misdemeanor.
2 Q: Okay. He was referred to by Mazurek as the
3 officer in charge, one of the two, right?
4 A: He may have been the OIC. I don't know.
5 Q: That's what Himan's report reflects.
6 A: Himan's report is --
7 Q: You just read it.
8 A: It's page --
9 Q: It's page 30 of Himan's supplemental report.
10 A: Says "he along with Officer Day were officer in
11 charge." That right there is confusing the way it's
12 written, and it doesn't say which of them was the officer
13 in charge.
14 Q: Okay. All right.
15 A: And now I'm lost again. Okay.
16 Q: Seems like what's new in this report from Day
17 is that he's saying he did not speak directly with Mangum
18 or with any investigator, and he says, "Nor did I ask
19 questions regarding the case."
20 A: Yes.
21 MR. SUN: Objection.
22 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
23 Q: Okay. Does that make sense to you?
24 A: Doesn't have to.
25 MR. SUN: Objection.
Page 161



1 THE WITNESS: I know that's not -- looking
2 at the original report and looking at the follow-up, not
3 having spoken to Officer Day about his original report or
4 his follow-up, it seems to me that he simply clarified
5 the original statement in the original report.
6 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
7 Q: All right. My question is, does it make sense
8 to you that a person, an officer who has just gone to the
9 scene of an alleged rape, comes back and doesn't ask
10 questions regarding the case?
11 A: We weren't investigating the case; Durham was
12 investigating the case.
13 Q: What were they doing at the house? All those
14 Duke police officers, what were they doing at the house?
15 A: Responding to the initial call.
16 Q: Which was routed to Duke Police Department,
17 right?
18 A: I don't recall how the routing worked,
19 whether -- and I don't recall at what point Durham
20 responded to it.
21 Q: Okay. All right. But that doesn't hit you at
22 all sideways that he didn't ask any questions about the
23 case?
24 A: It wasn't our investigation. Durham was
25 investigating it.


Page 162

1 [WHEREUPON, MS. SPARKS LEAVES THE PROCEEDINGS]
2 Q: And exactly what is it that you are relying on
3 when you say that at that time on that dock in the early
4 morning hours of March 14, 2006, that Duke University
5 wasn't -- Duke University Police weren't investigating
6 the case?
7 A: My understanding is that Durham was the
8 primary -- primary in the case. We were not
9 investigating it.
10 Q: Okay. Go ahead.
11 A: Had we been investigating a sexual assault as a
12 crime, it would have been on this report.
13 Q: Would you have gone to the house to --
14 A: To --
15 Q: -- to the residence or investigate --
16 A: I don't --
17 MR. SUN: Let him finish the question.
18 THE WITNESS: Okay. Right. I'm not aware
19 that any of our officers at the scene interviewed anyone.
20 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
21 Q: But the report says that nobody was there.
22 A: Well, again, if our officers receive a call for
23 service, they may very well go to the scene initially to
24 determine whether it's something that Duke is going to be
25 involved with or not. To do that, you have to ask people


1 questions.
2 Q: Okay. All right. Do you recall anything about
3 why it was important that Officer Day clarify that he
Page 163

4 didn't ask questions or speak directly to the victim
5 or --
6 A: No.
7 Q: You don't remember?
8 MR. SUN: Objection.
9 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. Would you
10 repeat --
11 MR. SUN: Let him finish the question.
12 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry.
13 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
14 Q: I think he answered it. But you don't remember
15 anything about why -- what caused Officer Day to write
16 this supplemental report so long after the fact?
17 MR. SUN: Objection.
18 THE WITNESS: I don't have any knowledge
19 of that.
20 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
21 Q: You don't have any knowledge of why he wrote
22 his report about the same time these others are writing
23 their reports?
24 MR. SUN: Objection.
25 THE WITNESS: No.


1 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
2 Q: Let me hand you Exhibit 26.
3 [SMITH EXHIBIT NO. 26 WAS MARKED FOR
4 IDENTIFICATION]
5 Q: Can you identify this document?
6 A: Can I identify the document?
Page 164

7 Q: Uh-huh.
8 A: It appears to be a statement written by Officer
9 Falcon.
10 Q: Okay. It says, "S., Number 12." What does
11 that -- what is that about? Is that her badge number or
12 ID number or something?
13 A: I -- I don't know what Number 12 refers to.
14 Q: Okay. Let me read from this report. Does it
15 have a date, by the way?
16 A: Yes.
17 Q: What's the date?
18 A: 28 March 2006.
19 Q: Okay. So two weeks after the alleged -- the
20 allegations that were investigated at the emergency
21 department, right?
22 A: Right.
23 Q: Okay. So two weeks later, she writes this
24 report. Falcon is a female, correct?
25 A: Yes.


1 Q: All right. Do you know where she is now?
2 A: I have no idea where she is now.
3 Q: Okay. All right. It says here she was
4 stationed in the emergency room on the date that Crystal
5 Mangum arrived there.
6 And then at the bottom, I want to read
7 something to you. Tell me what you think about it. She
8 says, "I never asked her," Mangum, "any questions, and
9 she never verbally directed anything to me. She only
Page 165

10 cried out the above information to the male nurse and the
11 Durham city officers in the doorway while I was trying to
12 calm her down. Not at any time did I direct any
13 questions to Ms. Mangum concerning the investigation by
14 the Durham City PD. Not at any time was I a direct party
15 to any investigation of the Durham City PD of this
16 alleged incident other than to assist the outside agency
17 of Durham City PD."
18 Does that sound familiar to you?
19 MR. SUN: Objection.
20 THE WITNESS: I don't recall seeing this
21 document before.
22 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
23 Q: I'm asking if these statements seem familiar to
24 you, that, "I never asked her any questions. She never
25 verbally directed anything to me. Not at any time did I


1 direct any questions to Ms. Mangum concerning the
2 investigation. Not at any time was I a direct party to
3 any investigation."
4 A: Familiar in what way?
5 Q: Is it familiar? Does it kind of seem a lot
6 like what we just read from Officer Day?
7 A: In Officer Day's --
8 Q: Supplemental report about the same day.
9 A: -- supplemental continuation page, he clarifies
10 that he did not speak directly with the victim in the
11 investigation. In Sara Falcon's statement, she writes
12 that she did not question the victim.
Page 166

13 [WHEREUPON, MS. SPARKS JOINS THE PROCEEDINGS]
14 Q: Okay. I want to take you back to an exhibit we
15 were talking about, the Himan report, Exhibit Number 23.
16 If you would turn to page 30 again. This time I want you
17 to -- well, actually, turn to page 29, at the bottom, the
18 entry dated October 30, 2006, at 9:39 a.m. It begins,
19 "Met with Sara Beth Falcon." Goes on to say, "She was
20 working for the Duke police on March 14th when the victim
21 came in to the Duke Hospital." That Officer Day was the
22 officer in charge.
23 Does that suggest to you that Officer Day was
24 the officer in charge at the hospital?
25 A: That suggests to me --


1 MR. SUN: Objection.
2 THE WITNESS: What this says is that
3 Officer Day -- she wrote she allegedly told Himan that
4 Officer Day was the officer in charge.
5 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
6 Q: Okay. All right. Now, the second paragraph of
7 Himan's report says that, "Falcon stated that Lieutenant
8 Best and a sergeant were called in and other people were
9 also called. She didn't ask why but thought it was weird
10 that they were calling people in. She thought that Major
11 Schwab was called in." And she was with Ms. Mangum. She
12 said that during her time with Ms. Mangum, "Durham police
13 sergeant kept going in and out of the room and stated, 'I
14 have to conduct an investigation.' At one point he asked
15 her to leave the room. He was inside the room alone with
Page 167

16 Crystal Mangum, and that happened once. And after he
17 left the room, he said loudly so everyone around heard
18 him say, quote, 'I think she is lying,'" end quote.
19 Do you see that anywhere in her report on
20 Exhibit 26 that the Durham sergeant interviewed her,
21 Ms. Mangum, and came out of the room and said, quote, "I
22 think she is lying"?
23 A: I do not see that statement, that quote in her
24 statement.
25 MR. SUN: And identify, just for the


1 record, what you were looking at by exhibit number.
2 THE WITNESS: I do not see that quote in
3 her statement, which is Exhibit 26.
4 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
5 Q: Okay. This reference that she's watching all
6 these people being called in and thinking Major Schwab
7 was called in and Lieutenant Best was called in and isn't
8 sure what that's all about, did you ever hear anything
9 about that, about the senior Duke Police Department
10 officials being called in to the ED?
11 MR. SUN: Objection.
12 THE WITNESS: I don't recall around the
13 time of the incident knowing that Major Schwab had been
14 called in. Lieutenant Best was the squad lieutenant.

Quote:

 

15 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
16 Q: Okay. And it was, according to this note,
17 Lieutenant Best that asked Falcon to write a report a
18 couple of weeks after the event, which would be around
Page 168

19 March 28, 2006, right?
20 A: Wait a second. That would have been 14 days
21 after March 14th.
22 Q: The Himan report, you're saying, was a couple
23 of weeks later that Lieutenant Best asked her to complete
24 a report?
25 A: Yes.


1 Q: All right. Do you know anything about
2 Lieutenant Best asking anybody to complete or write
3 reports of events at the hospital like which you've just
4 reviewed?
5 A: No.
6 Q: And do you know who asked Christopher Day to
7 write his supplemental report?
8 A: No.
9 Q: Actually, I'm just going to hand you quickly
10 what we've marked or are marking 27, Smith 27.
11 [SMITH EXHIBIT NO. 27 WAS MARKED FOR
12 IDENTIFICATION]
13 Q: At the bottom, there's a reference -- this is,
14 I believe, Sergeant Gottlieb's report, at the bottom
15 dated March 29, 2006, at 1300. I'll just read the entry
16 and ask you a question about it.
17 It says, "Investigator Himan and I were
18 summoned to a meeting at police headquarters to discuss
19 the case with Durham police command staff, Duke police
20 command staff, city manager, and the police department
21 legal advisor." And that's March 29th.
Page 169

22 Is that the meeting that you believe Gottlieb
23 told you about?
24 MR. SUN: Objection.
25 THE WITNESS: I don't know if that's the


1 meeting Gottlieb told me about.
2 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
3 Q: I know. But does it sound like it? Does it
4 square with your recollection of what he told you about?
5 A: I don't know if it's the meeting.
6 Q: I understand that. The question is different.
7 A: I know Gottlieb and Chief Chalmers and Graves
8 and Dean met at some point to discuss the case. I do not
9 know if they met on any other date, at any other time. I
10 don't know.
11 Q: All right. I don't think you've answered my
12 question. The question is, does that description square
13 with your recollection of what Gottlieb described to you?
14 A: Gottlieb told me that he and Chalmers and
15 Graves and Dean met. I do not recall him mentioning
16 anybody else being at the meeting.
17 Q: Okay. All right. Hang on a second.
18 [BRIEF PAUSE]
19 Q: Do you know who gave you the role of lead
20 investigator for the Duke Police Department in the case,
21 who assigned that to you?
22 MR. SUN: Objection.
23 THE WITNESS: I wasn't the lead
24 investigator in Durham's investigation of the case.
Page 170

25 BY MR. EKSTRAND:

189
1 Q: You called yourself the lead investigator at
2 one point. I'm asking you who gave you the designation?
3 A: I was appointed or told I was lead investigator
4 for the Duke University investigations section by Phyllis
5 Cooper.
6 Q: Relating to the case of Mangum's allegation or
7 of all allegations of all crimes?
8 A: I was our lead investigator. That did not
9 mean -- that meant that I did -- I carried out some of
10 the functions that the lieutenant would normally carry
11 out. But since we didn't have a lieutenant, I got them.
12 Essentially, I did case management. I did statistics.
13 Case management included making case assign- -- it was
14 case assignments.
15 Q: Okay. The question is, who gave you the title?
16 A: Of lead investigator?
17 Q: The role, yes.
18 A: I was appointed lead investigator for the
19 investigative section by Phyllis Cooper.
20 Q: Okay.
21 A: Well --
22 Q: Huh?
23 A: Okay.
24 MR. EKSTRAND: All right. Give me about
25 five minutes. I think I might be done.

Page 171


1 [RECESS - 4:26 P.M. TO 4:32 P.M.]
2 MR. EKSTRAND: Back on the record briefly
3 to announce that we have no further questions, and I'll
4 just repeat the stipulation Mr. Thompson made earlier
5 that we don't -- we don't feel comfortable with the
6 documents that have been produced and hope that we don't
7 have to recall or continue this deposition, but we may
8 need to, depending on what comes up.
9 MS. SPARKS: And thank you for your time.
10 MR. EKSTRAND: Very much.
11 MR. KING: Nothing from me.
12 MR. SHUIRMAN: No, sir.
13 MR. SUN: Give us five minutes.
14 MR. EKSTRAND: You bet.
15 [RECESS - 4:33 P.M. TO 4:39 P.M.]
16 CROSS EXAMINATION
17 BY MR. SUN:
18 Q: Mr. Smith, just -- I think we all identified
19 ourselves at the beginning, but I'm Paul Sun, and I'm
20 just going to ask you a couple of questions.
21 Pull out Exhibit 6, if you would, please.
22 A: Six.
23 Q: Mr. Smith, what's the subject line on this
24 e-mail that's been marked as Exhibit 6?
25 A: "The 46."


1 Q: How many names are on this e-mail that you sent
Page 172

2 to Roland Gettliffe?
3 A: Forty-four.
4 Q: At the time that you asked Mr. Gettliffe to run
5 a report with Duke card information regarding -- let's
6 try that again.
7 At this time when you were communicating with
8 Mr. Gettliffe about those Duke lacrosse players, you
9 wanted him to run the report for Duke card information
10 about, was there any other list that you provided to
11 Mr. Gettliffe?
12 A: No.
13 Q: Mr. Smith, if you'll look at Exhibit 8, please.
14 A: Okay.
15 Q: Mr. Smith, do you recall being asked some
16 questions about this document that was marked Exhibit 8?
17 A: Yes.
18 Q: Do you recall being asked some questions about
19 when it was that you disclosed that you had provided Duke
20 card information to the Durham police?
21 A: Yes.
22 Q: Do you recall that you were asked to try to
23 relate the time when you provided the Duke card
24 information to the Durham police, that you were asked to
25 relate that to the time of this e-mail, Exhibit 8?


1 A: Yes.
2 Q: Mr. Smith, what event would allow you most
3 accurately to identify the time it was when you disclosed
4 for the first time that you had provided the Duke card
Page 173

5 information to the Durham police?
6 MR. EKSTRAND: Objection.
7 MR. SUN: What's the basis for the
8 objection?
9 MR. EKSTRAND: I don't know -- I don't
10 know what the question is asking. There's too much
11 preamble there.
12 MR. SUN: Okay.
13 BY MR. SUN:
14 Q: Mr. Smith, what event, if any, would allow you
15 most accurately to determine the time when it was that
16 you provided notice that you had given Duke card
17 information to the Durham police, you provided that
18 notice to anyone?
19 A: That would be when I spoke -- when Greg
20 Stotsenberg and I met with Paul Stirrup.
21 Q: When in chronological time was that?
22 A: That was sometime after the date on this
23 e-mail.
24 MR. SUN: I don't have any further
25 questions.

193
1 MR. EKSTRAND: We're all set. Thank you
2 so much.

Quote:

 

5 Q: Were you present at all for the execution of
6 the NTID order?
7 A: NTID order?

Quote:

 

10 Q: Okay. Did you ever have any conversations with
11 Officer Mazurek about his actual recollections?
12 A: I don't remember.
13 Q: Would you be surprised if you learned that
14 after he left the employment of Duke University, his
15 recollection was very different than what he wrote here?
16 A: That wouldn't -- I don't -- if -- I'm not sure
17 that it would surprise me.
18 Q: Why?
19 A: I just -- I'm not aware that he changed his
20 statement. I'm not aware of what his opinion after the
21 fact was. To be surprised, I'd have to have an opinion,
22 and since I don't know, I don't have an opinion.

Quote:

 

1 BY MR. EKSTRAND:
2 Q: You're an investigator.

3 A: I know that there was an e-mail, that Gottlieb
4 included it in his search warrant, that he presented to a
5 judicial official, and that it was -- and that search
6 warrant was signed. Who am I to second-guess a judge.

7 Q: Yeah. Well, I'm asking you whether or not it
8 occurred to you that there was no point in putting an
9 e-mail from an unknown anonymous source in a probable
10 cause affidavit?

11 A: It occurred to me that Gottlieb had included it
12 in a probable cause affidavit, and he felt that it -- or
13 whatever he had in his affidavit provided him with
14 sufficient probable cause.

15 Q: Okay. Let me ask you this way. If you had an
16 e-mail from an unknown anonymous source, somebody just
17 like this through Crime Stoppers, don't know where it
18 came from, who it came from, it just looks like an e-mail
19 from somebody's account, but you don't know that, and
20 that's all you have. Would you even bother going to a
21 judge with it to get a warrant to search somebody's
22 residence?

23 MR. SUN: Objection.

24 THE WITNESS: The fact is I haven't ever
25 been in that situation where I had that -- and I had to
1 make the decision whether to include it in the affidavit,
2 and I don't have an opinion.

3 BY MR. EKSTRAND:

4 Q: You don't have an opinion. What kind of
5 training do you have in the determination of probable
6 cause?

Quote:

 

THE WITNESS: I don't remember.