The Oklahoma City Bombing Trial Transcripts
Terry Nichols
Friday, November 14, 1997 (morning)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Criminal Action No. 96-CR-68
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
vs.
TERRY LYNN NICHOLS,
Defendant.
REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT
(Trial to Jury: Volume 75)
Proceedings before the HONORABLE RICHARD P. MATSCH,
Judge, United States District Court for the District of
Colorado, commencing at 8:45 a.m., on the 14th day of November,
1997, in Courtroom C-204, United States Courthouse, Denver,
Colorado.
Proceeding Recorded by Mechanical Stenography, Transcription
Produced via Computer by Paul Zuckerman, 1929 Stout Street,
P.O. Box 3563, Denver, Colorado, 80294, (303) 629-9285
APPEARANCES
PATRICK RYAN, United States Attorney for the Western
District of Oklahoma, 210 West Park Avenue, Suite 400, Oklahoma
City, Oklahoma, 73102, appearing for the plaintiff.
LARRY MACKEY, BETH WILKINSON, GEOFFREY MEARNS, JAMIE
ORENSTEIN, and AITAN GOELMAN, Special Attorneys to the U.S.
Attorney General, 1961 Stout Street, Suite 1200, Denver,
Colorado, 80294, appearing for the plaintiff.
MICHAEL TIGAR, RONALD WOODS, and JANE TIGAR, Attorneys
at Law, 1120 Lincoln Street, Suite 1308, Denver, Colorado,
80203, appearing for Defendant Nichols.
* * * * *
PROCEEDINGS
(In open court at 8:45 a.m.)
THE COURT: Be seated, please. Good morning.
Mr. Tigar?
MR. TIGAR: We have marked the transcripts of the
CD-ROM portions that were played yesterday with exhibit numbers
and would like some opportunity to read those into the record
at some point. If your Honor would like to do it at the end of
the court day --
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. TIGAR: -- so we don't waste jury time.
THE COURT: Right. Bring in the jury.
(Jury in at 8:47 a.m.)
THE COURT: Members of the jury, good morning. Once
again, a bit difficult to get around this morning, and we
appreciate your being on time.
Also, it's my understanding from a report from
Mr. Manspeaker that none of you has any conflict or prior
commitment that would affect our proceeding on the Friday after
Thanksgiving, so we will do so and hold court that day. As I
understand it, one of you would like to do it on a regular
Friday schedule. Maybe we can deal with that closer to the
time when we see just where we are on the case at that point.
But we will anticipate at least the Friday schedule of 8:45 or
8:30 till 1.
All right. You will recall that Mr. Hupp was
testifying when we recessed yesterday. We'll resume with his
testimony now.
If you'll resume the stand under your oath.
(Louis Hupp was recalled to the stand.)
THE COURT: Mr. Mearns, you were inquiring.
MR. MEARNS: Thank you, your Honor.
And Mr. Tigar and I have agreed to mark Mr. Hupp's
notebook as Government Exhibit 2102.
THE COURT: 2102.
MR. TIGAR: Yes, your Honor. That is agreed.
THE COURT: All right. And you're going to put it in
evidence. Is that also --
MR. MEARNS: I believe Mr. Tigar offered it. We have
no objection.
MR. TIGAR: Yes, your Honor. We would because it does
contain these additional materials.
THE COURT: All right. 2102 is received.
DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED
BY MR. MEARNS:
Q. Good morning, Mr. Hupp.
A. Good morning.
Q. When we recessed yesterday afternoon, I was asking you some
questions about Government Exhibit 158, and you identified for
us shortly before we broke the 13 pages on which you found
Mr. Nichols' latent fingerprint. Do you recall that?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. I think you also said that you in fact developed 14
latent fingerprints. Is that true?
A. That is correct.
Q. What -- and were you able to identify that 14th
fingerprint?
A. No.
Q. And what page was that on?
A. That was on page 54.
Q. In attempting to identify that fingerprint, did you compare
it with the exemplars provided by Mr. McVeigh?
A. Yes, I did.
Louis Hupp - Direct
Q. And were you able to make an identification?
A. No.
Q. Did you compare it with the exemplar provided by Michael
Fortier?
A. Yes.
Q. And were you able to make an identification?
A. No.
Q. During the course of your examination of Government Exhibit
158, the book, did you examine every page in that book?
A. Yes.
Q. And did you attempt to develop latent fingerprints on every
single page?
A. Yes.
Q. I'd like you now, if you would, to turn to what has been
admitted into evidence as Government Exhibit 1701. Did you
examine this document?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And did you develop any latent fingerprints on this
document?
A. Yes.
Q. How many did you develop?
A. There were eight latent fingerprints which were of value
for identification purposes developed on this particular
document.
Q. And did you identify any of those eight?
Louis Hupp - Direct
A. Yes, I did.
Q. How many did you identify?
A. I identified two latent fingerprints with the fingerprints
of Mr. Terry Nichols. I identified three fingerprints with the
fingerprints of Mr. Timothy McVeigh. And I identified one
fingerprint as a fingerprint of Marife Nichols.
Q. And the other two fingerprints, you were unable to
identify?
A. Yes.
Q. Turning then to Government Exhibit 484, which has been
admitted into evidence. Did you examine this document?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And were you able to develop any latent fingerprints on
this document?
A. Yes, I was.
Q. How many?
A. Three latent fingerprints of value for identification
purposes.
Q. And did you identify any of those?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Who did you identify?
A. I identified all three fingerprints with Mr. Terry Nichols.
Q. Turning now to Government Exhibit 495, which is in
evidence. Did you examine this document?
A. Yes, I did.
Louis Hupp - Direct
Q. Did you develop any fingerprints on it?
A. There was one fingerprint of value for identification
purposes developed on this item.
Q. On Exhibit 495, there's one or two?
A. Excuse me. I -- on 495, there were two. You're correct.
Q. Were you able to identify any of those two -- either of
those two?
A. Yes, I was.
Q. Who did you identify?
A. Both fingerprints were identified with Mr. Terry Nichols.
Q. Turning then to Government Exhibit 498, which is in
evidence, which is another $100 money order. Did you examine
this document?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Did you develop any latent fingerprints on this document?
A. One latent fingerprint which was suitable for
identification purposes.
Q. Did you identify that latent fingerprint?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Who did you identify?
A. There again identified with the fingerprint of Terry
Nichols.
Q. Turning to Government Exhibit 57 -- 572, which has only
been marked for identification. It's not in evidence. Did
you -- did you examine that document?
Louis Hupp - Direct
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And did you develop any fingerprints in that document?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. How many did you develop?
A. I developed 20 latent fingerprints and two latent palm
prints which were suitable for identification purposes.
Q. Did you identify any of those fingerprints or palm prints?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. How many did you identify?
A. I identified 18 latent fingerprints and one palm print with
Terry Nichols. And I identified two latent fingerprints as
being fingerprints of Marife Nichols.
Q. You said a moment ago that you developed two palm prints
and you identify one palm prints as Terry Nichols?
A. That is correct.
Q. Were you able to identify the other palm print?
A. No, I was not.
Q. And were the fingerprints and palm prints that you just
spoke about -- were those spread out throughout that document?
A. Yes.
Q. Turning to Government Exhibit 250, 250, which is in
evidence. Did you develop any latent fingerprints in this
document?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. How many did you develop?
Louis Hupp - Direct
A. I identified -- developed 11 latent fingerprints and four
latent palm prints which were of value for identification
purposes.
Q. And did you identify any of those fingerprints or palm
prints?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. How many did you identify?
A. I identified seven latent fingerprints as belonging to
Terry Nichols, and I identified four fingerprints and three
latent palm prints as belonging to Marife Nichols.
Q. You stated a moment ago that you developed four, but only
identified three?
A. That is correct.
Q. So there was one palm print that was not -- you were not
able to identify?
A. Yes.
Q. Turning to Government Exhibit 113, which is in evidence.
Do you recognize this document?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. And what is it?
A. This is a -- it's a rental agreement for the Boots
U-Store-It agreement for Unit 37, which was located in Council
Grove.
Q. Did you develop any latent fingerprints on this document?
A. Yes, I did.
Louis Hupp - Direct
Q. How many did you develop?
A. Two.
Q. And did you identify those two?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Whose did you identify the fingerprints to be?
A. Both fingerprints were identified with Terry Nichols'
fingerprints.
Q. Turning to Government Exhibit 88, which is in evidence. Do
you recognize this document?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. What is this?
A. This -- again is a storage agreement for Herington, Kansas,
dated 9-22-94, and it was in the name of Shawn Rivers.
Q. Did you examine this document?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Did you develop any fingerprints on this document?
A. Yes.
Q. How many did you develop?
A. There were nine latent fingerprints which were suitable for
identification purposes on this document.
Q. How many of those nine did you identify?
A. Eight.
Q. And whose did you identify those fingerprints -- those
eight fingerprints to be?
A. All eight fingerprints belonged to Timothy McVeigh.
Louis Hupp - Direct
Q. And there was one unidentified fingerprint?
A. That is correct.
Q. Turning to Government Exhibit 1717, which is in evidence.
Did you examine this telephone/address book?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Did you develop any latent fingerprints in this address
book?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. How many did you develop?
A. 38 latent fingerprints and 10 latent palm prints which were
of value for identification purposes.
Q. And how many did you identify?
A. I identified 31 latent fingerprints and eight latent palm
prints as belonging to Terry Nichols. And I identified seven
latent fingerprints and two latent palm prints as belonging to
Marife Nichols.
Q. And were those -- all of those fingerprints and palm prints
spread throughout this telephone/address book?
A. Yes.
Q. Turning to Government Exhibit 1716, which is in evidence.
Did you examine this notebook?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And did you develop any latent fingerprints in this
notebook?
A. Yes.
Louis Hupp - Direct
Q. How many did you develop?
A. I developed 12 latent fingerprints which were of value for
identification purposes.
Q. Were you able to identify any of those 12?
A. Yes. I identified all 12.
Q. Whose did you identify them to be?
A. I identified three of the latent fingerprints as belonging
to Terry Nichols, and I identified nine of the fingerprints to
belong to Marife Nichols.
Q. Let me show you what has been marked for identification,
which is not yet in evidence, Government Exhibit 142. Did you
examine this document?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And did you develop any latent fingerprints on this
document?
A. Yes.
Q. How many did you develop?
A. Two latent fingerprints which were of value for
identification purposes.
Q. Did you identify either of those two?
A. I identified one of the two.
Q. Who did you identify it to be?
A. One of the fingerprints belonged to Terry Nichols.
Q. And the -- the remainder was unidentified?
A. That is correct.
MR. MEARNS: I have no further questions, your Honor.
THE COURT: Cross-examination?
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. TIGAR:
Q. Hello again, Mr. Hupp.
A. Good morning.
Q. You've told us about some fingerprints that you could not
identify; correct?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And when you say that a fingerprint is one you could not
identify, you're referring to a latent fingerprint of value
that you could not compare to the known fingerprints of a
person; correct?
A. Well, one that I could not identify with the known prints
that were supplied to me, yes.
Q. Now, when you say the known prints that were supplied to
you, who supplied you with the known prints?
A. The various offices within the FBI submitted names, mainly
out of Oklahoma City and Kansas City.
Q. So your job is to compare fingerprints that you develop,
latent fingerprints, with those that are given to you by the
people who are directing the examination; is that right?
A. Or the investigation, yes, sir.
Q. Now, in addition to the known prints that are supplied by
the people directing the investigation, does the FBI maintain a
Louis Hupp - Cross
file of the fingerprints of people?
A. Yes, we do.
Q. How many people's fingerprints do you have in your file?
A. Right now, our criminal database is somewhere in the
neighborhood of about 35 million.
Q. Now, that doesn't mean that you have 35 million criminals
on file then, does it, sir?
A. 35 million would be our database of criminal files, yes.
Q. But the -- that doesn't mean -- a lot of the people whose
fingerprints are in there are not considered to be criminals;
is that right?
A. Well, there are additional files in addition to the
35 million, yes, sir.
Q. Okay. Oh, well, then, total, all the 35 million that you
have there in the criminal part, how many fingerprints do you
have?
A. In the criminal would be 35 million. Overall would be
somewhere in the neighborhood of about 55 million.
Q. So the FBI has on file the fingerprints of 55 million
Americans; correct?
A. Or about that, yes, sir.
Q. Now, in addition to having on file 55 million
fingerprints -- let me ask, are those 55 million fingerprints
available for comparison if somebody wanted to do it?
A. That's correct, yes.
Louis Hupp - Cross
Q. Have you developed a computer program that would permit you
to make a start on identifying fingerprints so you didn't have
to start with the manual looking from one to the other?
A. Yes, we do.
Q. And did you use that computer program in this case?
A. No, we did not.
Q. Would you tell the jury, please, what the computer program
would permit you to do with these unknown or unidentified
fingerprints.
A. It would enable us to take certain latent prints which meet
certain criteria and we could encode those and search those
against the database of 35 million people.
Q. Now, the -- you say that meets certain criteria. Are those
criteria the points-of-comparison criteria that you discussed
with the jury yesterday?
A. No. It's much more than that.
Q. What are the criteria?
A. Well, the criteria -- we would have to have a basic
description of the individual involved. We would in most
instances need to know which finger position it would be. By
that, I mean would it be the right index, left index, or thumb;
and it must be a print which is classifiable. So it's pretty
much along the lines of an inked fingerprint.
Q. I see. When you say "classifiable," do you refer to a
certain number of points of comparison?
Louis Hupp - Cross
A. No, sir.
Q. Now, you told us yesterday that you have never -- you would
not identify a print with less than seven points, you said?
A. As of this point in time, I never have.
Q. Now, in fact, the FBI prefers to have 12 points; is that
right?
A. No, sir.
Q. Well, when less than 12 points are used in making an
identification, it must be discussed with the specialist unit
chief and receive approval before being reported as an
identification; is that correct?
A. That is merely an administrative rule. However, we're not
required to have a 12-point in order to effect an
identification.
Q. My question, sir, is do you -- do you have a -- a practice
that if you use less than 12 points, you have to discuss it
with the specialist unit chief?
A. Yes, it's an administrative rule, yes.
Q. And do you follow your administrative rules when you're
doing a job?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. Now, in addition to fingerprints that you did not identify
in this case, did you find finger smudges that were not
suitable for identification at all?
A. Certainly.
Louis Hupp - Cross
Q. Now, do you remember looking at Government Exhibit 62, the
co-op receipt?
A. Yes.
Q. If you could -- and that was a case in which you found two
latent fingerprints; correct?
A. That is suitable for identification purposes, yes, sir.
Q. Right. And you made notes about that -- and if I can put
up what has been -- a page of what's been offered in evidence
as Government's Exhibit 2012? Is that correct?
MR. MEARNS: 2102.
MR. TIGAR: 2102. Excuse me. 2102.
BY MR. TIGAR:
Q. This is a page from that 2102; is that correct?
A. That is correct, yes.
Q. And these are notes that you made in preparation for your
testimony; is that right?
A. That is correct, yes.
Q. And looking at this Exhibit No. 62, you simply describe it
by its number; correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. Then you say Mid-Kansas Co-op receipt, No. 95504. That --
that further describes the exhibit; right?
A. That is correct.
Q. The date. Then it says Q641?
A. Yes.
Louis Hupp - Cross
Q. And the Q number is one that's assigned in your laboratory;
correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. Now, then you say two latent fingerprints developed; right?
A. That is correct.
Q. Two latent fingerprints identified as fingerprints of
Timothy McVeigh and no latents remained unidentified; right?
A. That is correct.
Q. Now, when you say "a latent," you are referring to
something that is of value for identification purposes;
correct?
A. Yes.
Q. I'm going to place up here another page, and my copy is not
as good as yours, but could you follow along on your copy of
the actual receipt. You've got a photo of it up there, don't
you, sir?
A. I have the same thing you have, yes.
Q. Okay. Now, what I have is a copy, so it may not be as
good. But for our purposes -- and when the jury sees this,
they'll see a red mark where I'm describing here; correct?
A. Yes.
Q. This --
A. Well, actually, I have the same thing that you have. I
have a copy just like yours.
Q. Oh, you've got a copy, also?
Louis Hupp - Cross
A. That's correct.
Q. But in the original exhibit, it'll be red and it'll say,
"No. 2, Timothy McVeigh"; correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. Because that's your practice in the laboratory is to make
the red mark and then write in the name of who you identified
it as; right?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, is it -- isn't it the case that these prints of value
that you developed were on the back side of the receipt, the
side without any writing or printing?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And the marks that we see here, the circular mark, makes it
appear that something at sometime has been wrapped or held in
that piece of paper; is that correct?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And did -- was it any part of your investigation to
determine what it was that was wrapped or held in that?
A. Actually, when I received it in the lab -- or when it was
received in the lab, the items that were in there were -- were
wrapped -- still wrapped in the item itself.
Q. Oh, so you know of your own personal knowledge they were
coins; right?
A. Yes. Yes.
Q. And did it -- was it a situation in which somebody had put
Louis Hupp - Cross
the coins on the printed side and then folded it over and over
again to make a package around the coins?
A. Yes.
Q. And how many coins were there?
A. Two.
Q. Were they about the size of 50-cent pieces?
A. Yes. Yes.
Q. So that that's the mark that we're seeing here; correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And you say that you got two prints of value. One is this
one that I'm -- whoops. I'm not yet because I -- that I'm
pointing to right here; correct?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And then the other one is right here where my other finger
is; correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. Now, those are the same finger of the hand of Mr. McVeigh;
right?
A. Yes.
Q. And did it -- is this finding here consistent with that
print having been put on there in the process of making the
first or second fold over the coins?
A. I would have no idea.
Q. Well, you unfolded the coins; correct?
A. Yes.
Louis Hupp - Cross
Q. And if we could use -- and this is -- these -- are these
the holes in the top of the receipt?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. So we see the receipt completely unfolded here, and this is
down on the side; right?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, when you first got this item -- all right -- it looked
like a little package in which something had been folded up;
correct?
A. Yes.
Q. About the size of the 1-1/2-by-1-1/2 piece of paper I'm
holding up?
A. Something similar to that, as memory serves me.
Q. Okay. Now -- when you got it, would this fingerprint over
here have been visible if somehow, latent fingerprints were
apparent?
A. I don't remember anything being visible. It didn't come up
until such time as it was processed.
Q. I understand. But what I want you to do, sir, is let's
imagine, if you would, that if we touched this document -- if
Mr. McVeigh touched it, that it would leave a mark. Suppose he
had ink on his fingers at the time he touched it. Okay? Would
you do that with me? All right. Now, if he had done that and
left a mark, would that mark have been visible to you at the
time that you saw the package in the laboratory?
Louis Hupp - Cross
A. I couldn't say with any certainty, sir.
Q. You don't -- you don't know as you sit there today which --
which side it was on?
A. I don't know which -- as to how the package was wrapped,
which was under and which was in. That, I don't remember.
Q. All right. Well, let's take it a step further. This
thumbprint that I'm pointing to here would have been visible;
correct?
A. It's possible. There again, I don't remember exactly how
the package was wrapped, so it would be speculation on my part.
Q. Let's see if we can take it a step further, sir. Do you
see this mark here that does not have a circle on it? See
right there in the middle?
A. In the center, yes.
Q. In the center. Now, that is not a latent fingerprint of
value, is it?
A. No, it is not.
Q. Mr. McVeigh is one of the higher primates; correct?
A. Yes, he is.
Q. And that means he has an opposed thumb? Right? That is,
his thumb and his finger come together like I'm showing you;
correct?
A. That's correct.
Q. Are these two marks consistent with Mr. McVeigh having
handled this document or this piece of paper closed up with the
Louis Hupp - Cross
nonprinted side showing with his thumb and his finger? Is it
consistent with that?
A. Sir, I couldn't say that.
Q. Is this smudge consistent with a thumb?
A. I would read that to be a smudge, and I wouldn't speculate
whether it was a thumb or another finger. I just don't know.
Q. Is it consistent -- is what you see here consistent with
somebody holding this like this? That's my question.
A. I just -- I just don't know.
Q. Now, you say that you don't remember how the package was
wrapped when it got to your laboratory; is that right?
A. That's correct.
Q. Did you make any notes as to how the package was wrapped in
your laboratory?
A. No.
Q. Is it ever of significance to you to be able to reconstruct
for a jury where the fingerprints are on an item of evidence
that arrives in your laboratory?
A. We place them on the paper. That was of the interest at
that point in time. At this time when this was received, we
really had no idea what this was.
Q. My question, sir, is is it ever of significance to you in
your work as a fingerprint examiner with decades of experience
to know where the fingerprints are on an item that's submitted
to the laboratory?
Louis Hupp - Cross
A. In this instance, I know they are on the reverse side.
Other than that --
THE COURT: Please answer the question.
THE WITNESS: Yes, it could be.
BY MR. TIGAR:
Q. For example, sir, if a firearm is submitted to you, it's
important to know whether the fingerprints you find on it are
consistent with someone having grabbed the barrel or holding
onto the -- the butt end?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, sir, you told us that you also looked at a Primadet
sleeve. Do you recall that?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. And with respect to the Primadet sleeve, you said that you
identified only one fingerprint and that was Mr. Nichols'. Do
you recall that?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, do you have your Primadet sleeve photograph there in
front of you?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. Let me place up this portion of 2102 that reflects the
Primadet sleeve. And what we see here that's marked, that's
the area where you say Mr. Nichols' fingerprint is; correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And would you look very carefully, please, down here in the
Louis Hupp - Cross
right. I'm going to zoom in on this, and it's not -- and I
recognize it's not the best copy in the world, but would you
look on your copy the place where I'm pointing?
A. Yes.
Q. All right. And do you see ridge detail there?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. And is that ridge detail consistent with that having been
handled by a human being?
A. It would be ridge detail of some sort, yes, sir.
Q. Now, did you make an effort to identify what portion of the
human hand is reflected by that ridge detail?
A. It was examined and determined to be of no value for
identification purposes and was not compared any further.
Q. Now, when you say "it was examined," did you examine it?
A. Yes.
Q. And looking at it now, can you see -- can you see the
ridges over by the word "adequate"?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. And when you examined the original, what did you
examine it with? DFO?
A. This was developed by ninhydrin, but it had been processed
with DFO, yes.
Q. All right. Now, the DFO processing is nondestructive;
correct?
A. No. It will destruct.
Louis Hupp - Cross
Q. Well, is it -- it doesn't destroy the latents?
A. No. No. No.
Q. That's what I meant. Doesn't destroy the latents, and the
DFO is just a chemical that you put on. DFO is an abbreviation
for some name; correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. And then by using a fluorescent-type light, it shows up,
what, yellowish?
A. Yellowish green, yes.
Q. Now, the ninhydrin is actually a chemical that you have to
spray on or soak; correct?
A. That's correct.
Q. And do you use alcohol or water for this particular
examination?
A. This particular examination, acetone was the --
Q. As --
A. -- was the agent.
Q. Dissolved in acetone. But you determined that there was
nothing of value there; correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. Now, you told us that you made an examination of all of the
pages of the book Hunter; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. And you found how many fingerprints?
A. 14.
Louis Hupp - Cross
Q. 14. Now, if -- you also examined a book that is -- that is
not in evidence, but you examined a book called Armed and
Dangerous; correct?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And for -- just to give us an idea, how many fingerprints
did you develop out of the book Armed and Dangerous, latents,
of value?
A. I don't recall.
MR. TIGAR: May I approach, your Honor?
THE COURT: Yes.
BY MR. TIGAR:
Q. I'm going to show you now some notes and ask you, is that
your handwriting, sir?
A. That is handwriting of somebody in my section, yes.
Q. And have you -- did you review that?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. All right. Does looking at this refresh -- refresh your
recollection as to how many latent prints of value were
developed in the book Armed and Dangerous?
A. Yes, it does.
Q. How many is that?
A. 149 latent fingerprints and four latent palm prints.
Q. Now, during the course of your examination, did you have an
occasion to look at an article entitled, "Whatever Happened to
Liberty Day"?
Louis Hupp - Cross
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And is that Government Exhibit 1717?
A. No.
Q. I'm sorry. Is that Government 1703? We can shorten this.
Let me just show you this and see if it refreshes your
recollection, sir. I couldn't find my copy for the moment.
A. Okay.
Q. Does that refresh your recollection?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, when you examined this article, did you know where it
had come from?
A. No, not precisely. I may have known the location as to the
field office, but other than that, no.
Q. So you didn't know whose home it was in; correct?
A. No.
Q. Now, do you recall that you developed one fingerprint of
Timothy McVeigh on this exhibit?
A. I really don't recall on that particular document.
Q. All right. So you don't recall how many, if any,
unidentified fingerprints there were on that?
A. No, I just don't recall, sir.
Q. Now, do you recall earlier today talking about a lease in
the name of Shawn Rivers?
A. Yes.
Q. And that, you did develop some fingerprints of Mr. McVeigh;
Louis Hupp - Cross
is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. In addition to the fingerprints of Mr. McVeigh, you also
said that there were -- there was one fingerprint not
identified; correct?
A. That is correct, yes.
Q. And why is it that you did not take steps beyond the names
that were submitted to you to try to identify that fingerprint?
A. I was not requested to do so at that time.
Q. Well, were you ever requested to do it?
A. No. Well, let me correct that. Initially, we were asked
to do it, and then it was put off until a later time, and then
it was determined at a later time it was not necessary.
Q. Let me take that one step at a time. There came a time
when you were furnished with certain names of people whose
fingerprints you were supposed to look for; correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. And those names included Mr. Nichols, Mr. McVeigh,
Mr. Fortier, Mrs. Nichols, and some other people; correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And you were doing these manual visual -- you were doing
comparisons manually of those fingerprints; correct?
A. That is correct, yes.
Q. You were not using your computer?
A. That is correct.
Louis Hupp - Cross
Q. Now, the list of people whose fingerprints you were to
compare changed from time to time; is that correct?
A. Yes, it did.
Q. And those changes were made by your superiors telling you
whose fingerprints you should try to find; correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. Now, then you say that you talked about using a more
complete list; correct?
A. No. We were -- at one time, there was some discussion as
to do computer searches, and it was decided that it would be
best to do those at a later time.
Q. All right. Now, when was this discussion as to whether or
not you ought to do computer searches?
A. It was early on. I don't remember the exact date. It was
early on in the investigation.
Q. Did you participate in those discussions?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Did you preside over those discussions?
A. No, I did not.
Q. Who was in charge of determining whether or not computer
searches would be used to try to identify these unidentified
fingerprints?
A. The request was made by the command post in Oklahoma City.
Discussions were made as to the feasibility of it through my
department, and it was determined that it was better to put it
Louis Hupp - Cross
off and do it at a later time.
Q. All right. And when was the determination made that it was
better to put it off and do it at a later time?
A. There again, it was early in the investigation. Probably
somewhere in August or so of 1995.
Q. Now, I'm going to show you, sir, what I've marked as
Defendant's Exhibit E61 and ask you if that is a document from
your laboratory.
A. Yes, it is.
Q. And when was that created, sir?
A. The notes on here are June 20, 1996.
MR. TIGAR: All right. We offer it, your Honor.
MR. MEARNS: May I have just one moment, please?
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. TIGAR: E61.
MR. MEARNS: No objection.
THE COURT: E61 received.
BY MR. TIGAR:
Q. Now, is that your handwriting?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. And do you write on there that -- well, let me put up page
2. You say that "Pertinent latent prints being furnished are
being held in abeyance per discussion in October 1995 between
. . ." and then there's some Government acronyms there. Tell
us what this means, this note here.
Louis Hupp - Cross
A. This means that I had -- I had had discussions with the
investigating officers in the command post in Oklahoma City as
to the feasibility of doing computer searches and it was
determined at that time that it best be put off until a later
time.
Q. Now, did there come a time when the feasibility of computer
searches was discussed again?
A. Yes, it did (sic).
Q. Now, these computer searches, they are not -- are they
real, real expensive?
A. They are very time-consuming. Very expensive in the long
run, yes.
Q. And when was it that the idea of doing these computer
searches came up again?
A. It would be very late in the investigation. Towards the
end of it when most of the evidence had been completed.
Discussions were again brought up about the feasibility of
doing computer searches, and it was decided by the command post
here in Denver that those searches would not be necessary.
Q. Now, when was it decided that they would not be necessary?
A. I don't remember the exact date. It was towards the very
end of the investigation as far as when I was receiving
evidence.
Q. All right. Now, at the time that decision was made, you
had a large number of unidentified latents; correct?
Louis Hupp - Cross
A. That is correct.
Q. The Dreamland Motel in Junction City had been
fingerprinted, had it not?
A. Yes, it had.
Q. And everything in the Dreamland Motel -- that is, the
Bible, the bed, the wall, the lamp, anything that somebody
might have touched -- had been subjected to examination by
field examiners; correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. In addition to that, sir, the Great Western Hotel or Motel
had been searched; correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. The Ryder truck agency had been searched?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. A yellow Mercury Marquis had been searched; correct?
A. Yes.
Q. An Easy Go convenience store had been searched; correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And in each of these locations, there were unidentified
latent prints that would be suitable for comparison if a
comparison had been ordered; correct?
A. I don't remember if all of them were suitable, but I'm sure
there were some in each -- some of the locations, yes.
Q. Well, sir, isn't it a fact that by July the 9th, 1996, you
had 1,034 unidentified fingers, 87 unidentified palms and 17
Louis Hupp - Cross
unidentified impressions?
A. That could be correct. It would be -- sounds familiar.
Q. Pardon me?
A. That sounds close. I don't know the exact totals right off
the top of my head, sir.
Q. All right. Now, so that we understand, a fingerprint is
the print of a finger; correct?
A. Yes.
Q. A palm print is the print of a palm?
A. Yes.
Q. What's an impression?
A. An impression is a -- an area that we could not determine
whether it is, in fact, part of a fingerprint or part of a palm
print.
Q. Now, is it the case that impressions are most often the --
they might be a fingerprint or they might be these ridged areas
that are just under the fingers that when they touch something
can sometimes look like a finger?
A. They could be any portion of the palm. There's several
areas of which -- certainly, those would come into play, but
there are other areas, also.
Q. So -- and it could also be, although less likely, this --
what would be called the heel of the hand; right?
A. That is correct, yes.
Q. So if these numbers are approximately right, you had more
Louis Hupp - Cross
than 1,000 unidentified prints from these areas that I've
mentioned; correct?
A. Those and other areas, also. That's not just limited to
those, yes.
Q. I understand.
A. Yes.
Q. But each of the areas in which you have these unidentified
prints were ones in which the investigators had determined that
there were -- that these were worth searching? That is,
investigators had been there and done the examination; right?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, among the prints you had for comparison in addition to
the ones we mentioned, by the way, were Roger Moore and Karen
Anderson; correct?
A. Yes, it was.
Q. Sir, if a computer search had been ordered, what would be
the objective of doing the computer search?
A. It would be to identify any additional latent prints.
Q. And what would be the purpose of that?
A. It would just be to identify any unidentified latent
prints.
Q. Right. For example, sir, if -- let us take, for example,
the Dreamland Motel. You know where that is; right?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. It's in Junction City, Kansas?
Louis Hupp - Cross
A. Yes.
Q. And you're aware from the investigation that there was some
evidence that Mr. McVeigh stayed there; correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Were you aware of any evidence in your investigation that
someone else had been in Mr. McVeigh's room?
A. Yes.
Q. The investigators had told you that; right?
A. Yes.
Q. And is it the case that the -- that if there was somebody
else along with Mr. McVeigh in his room, that that person has
never been identified, to your knowledge?
A. To my knowledge, yes.
Q. How many latent -- unidentified latent prints did you have
from Room 25 of the Dreamland Motel?
A. There again, I don't recall.
Q. Was it more than a dozen?
A. I have no real recollection, sir. It would be speculation.
MR. TIGAR: May I have a moment, your Honor?
THE COURT: Yes.
BY MR. TIGAR:
Q. Sir -- sir, I'm going to show you, just to refresh your
recollection, a stack of photographs; and I'll ask you to look
at those and -- just leaf through them. E104, I'm showing
you -- if that refreshes your recollection as to the
Louis Hupp - Cross
approximate number of unidentified latent prints that were
obtained by the FBI from Room 25 of the Dreamland Motel.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. All right. And with your recollection thus refreshed, sir,
would you tell the jury about how many unidentified latent
prints there were in Room 25 of the Dreamland Motel?
A. It will take a minute, but I'll count them. About --
approximately 21 latent fingerprints, four latent palm prints
and one latent impression.
Q. Now, who decided not to use -- well, first of all, you only
compared those against the names that had been given you;
correct?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Who decided not to make a computer search to see if there
would be a match within the some 35 million cards or
fingerprint sets that you had on file?
A. That decision was made by the investigators in the command
post.
Q. So you -- you didn't have any role in that; is that
correct?
A. No, sir.
Q. I'm going to show you now what I've marked as Defense
Exhibit E126; and I ask you, sir, if that is a report -- I'll
take back 104, if I may. Thank you, sir. If that is a report
from your laboratory.
Louis Hupp - Cross
A. Yes, it is.
Q. And what's the approximate date of that, sir?
A. The notes were initiated about 4-28 or 4-29-95.
MR. TIGAR: And we offer it.
MR. MEARNS: May I have a moment, your Honor?
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. MEARNS: No objection, your Honor.
THE COURT: E126 received.
BY MR. TIGAR:
Q. Now, this document -- let me put it up here. This is a --
the format of a -- a lab report; is that correct?
A. It's a format of our handwritten notes.
Q. Okay. And the -- it indicates who copies are to be sent
to; correct?
A. That is correct, yes.
Q. It says two copies are to go to SIOC, Room 5045, attention
Dave Williams; right?
A. That is correct.
Q. Was Mr. Williams, David Williams, involved in making the
decision as to whose names would be used to compare the
latents?
A. Mr. David Williams, in this instance, was the supervisor in
headquarters who was coordinating the examination from the
headquarters point. If he was in on the decision as to who was
to be compared, I don't know. That would have been between
Louis Hupp - Cross
Mr. Williams and the command post here in Denver or in Oklahoma
City.
Q. From whom did you receive the direction as to which
individuals you should compare with?
A. The command post in either Oklahoma City, the Kansas City
office, or subsequently the command post here in Denver.
Q. You didn't -- those weren't routed to you through
Mr. Williams at this time?
A. No.
Q. Now, this particular report relates to this Easy Go
convenience store in Newkirk, Oklahoma; right?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, do you know what the purpose was of -- of having taken
the latent fingerprints in -- from that convenience store in
Newkirk, Oklahoma?
A. No, sir.
Q. Now, you found that the latent prints did not match those
of Timothy McVeigh, Terry Nichols, James Nichols, Michael
Fortier, Jeffrey Martin, and Steve Colbern; correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. And it says, "There are no palm prints here for Colbern."
What does that mean?
A. That means that we did a review of our file and found no
palm prints on file which would belong to Mr. Colbern.
Q. I see. But you did have his fingerprints; correct?
Louis Hupp - Cross
A. That is correct, yes.
Q. And then it says, "No automated searches are being
conducted at this time pending comparisons of all suspects in
this case"; correct?
A. That is correct, yes.
Q. Now, was it your understanding that Mr. Colbern was a
suspect in the case?
A. Not necessarily. He had just been named for comparison
purposes.
Q. Okay. And again, you don't know why that was done;
correct?
A. That is correct, yes.
Q. Now, you say that -- here -- is this your lab report, by
the way? Did you create this originally?
A. The lab report, no. This was created by another examiner
who was assisting me in the examinations.
Q. But you were working side by side; correct?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And that was Mr. Shiflett?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. All right. And that's why his name is on the front here;
correct?
A. That's exactly.
Q. But for purposes of testimony and preparation in this case,
you are thoroughly familiar with all of the files and
Louis Hupp - Cross
fingerprint work done in this case?
A. That is correct, yes, sir.
Q. So that when it says here that "No automated searches are
being conducted at this time pending comparisons of all
suspects," what that -- did somebody say to you that it was the
FBI's intention, after you got through the existing pool of
suspects, to go out and do some more comparisons?
A. No. This was -- this was more or less a standard paragraph
which we used, and it was brought up and it's placed in a
report. We have a simple code for it. It is placed on all
reports like this to clearly state that we're waiting for
either -- elimination of prints or something to be compared.
Q. All right. But it is your testimony, sir, that there came
a time when somebody said don't compare anybody else's
fingerprints with these more than 1,000 unknown latents we
have; right?
A. That is correct, yes.
Q. And when that direction was given, compared -- the naming
of individuals -- of particular individuals to make comparisons
with stopped; correct?
A. Well, we still had a list of people to compare, but it was
determined that computer searches would not be necessary.
MR. TIGAR: All right. I have nothing further, your
Honor.
THE COURT: Any redirect?
Louis Hupp - Cross
MR. MEARNS: Very brief, your Honor.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. MEARNS:
Q. Mr. Hupp, how many -- how many different people were in the
group that you compared latent fingerprints that you developed?
A. It varied. It went from -- off and on, 16 to as high as
21, but I think the final group was about 20 -- or 17 people
that we ultimately compared.
Q. And with respect to these thousand or so unidentified
latent fingerprints -- tell us the process that it takes to do
a computer comparison for just one unidentified latent
fingerprint; that is, when you compare it against the 30- to
50-some-odd million that you have.
A. The process would be initially, I would submit the latent
prints with proper documentation as to the description, the
possible location, which can only be limited to state. I would
list any possible fingers that I felt it might be and the
possible classification it would be. Then I would -- and any
descriptors that I might have. I would submit that. It would
be encoded into the computer, and they would ask the computer
to generate a tape of people who meet -- or who fit the
descriptive data, the fingerprint pattern, the finger, as well
as the descriptive data. That would be removed from the
computer and a separate tape would be copied. Then we would go
in and encode the latent and mark the points of identity or the
Louis Hupp - Redirect
points of comparison. We would again ask the computer to go
back and recompare with that and then list us a set of
suspects. Then these would be sent to our technical files, and
they would have to be pulled and we pulled the top 20
candidates. That was just a general cutoff rule. And then we
would sit and manually compare those prints at that time.
Q. So how long does that process take for one fingerprint?
A. For one fingerprint, generally it would take three to four
days.
Q. And with respect to unidentified fingerprints that were in
public places that Mr. Tigar asked you about, like hotel rooms
or convenience stores, are you able to tell when a fingerprint
is left in a location like that?
A. No, sir.
Q. Is it possible for a latent fingerprint to remain in a
location like that for months, if not years?
A. Yes.
MR. MEARNS: No further questions, your Honor.
MR. TIGAR: Briefly, your Honor.
THE COURT: Mr. Tigar.
RECROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. TIGAR:
Q. When you say that this takes three or four days, are --
this computer search, are you able to do several
simultaneously?
Louis Hupp - Recross
A. We have a cutoff. I believe at the time there was a cutoff
number that could be submitted per night, and so there was a
cutoff. And I think it was -- could have been somewhere as
high as 50 separate sheets could have went in per night.
Q. So -- so 50 a night times three or four days, that's 200
days -- right -- to do 1,000?
A. Something like that, yes.
Q. Is this the biggest case in the FBI's history?
A. It would be one of the biggest.
Q. And you know that a lot's at stake; right?
A. Yes.
Q. Are you telling us that it just cost too much to do a
computer search that you had the capability to do?
MR. MEARNS: Objection.
THE COURT: Sustained. He didn't make the decision.
BY MR. TIGAR:
Q. I understand. Did anyone tell you that it cost too much?
MR. MEARNS: Objection.
THE COURT: Sustained.
BY MR. TIGAR:
Q. Do you know on what basis the decision was made not to make
the computer search, of your own knowledge, sir?
MR. MEARNS: Objection.
THE COURT: Do you?
THE WITNESS: No. No.
Louis Hupp - Recross
BY MR. TIGAR:
Q. Is this kind of computer search something that I could do
on the Internet?
A. No, sir.
Q. I'd have to be in the FBI headquarters to be able to do it;
correct?
A. That is correct, yes.
MR. TIGAR: Nothing further, your Honor.
MR. MEARNS: We intend to re-call Mr. Hupp.
THE COURT: All right. You may step down, and I'm
sure you'll be advised when you're back.
THE WITNESS: Thank you.
THE COURT: Next, please.
MR. MACKEY: Yes, your Honor. We call David Darlak.
THE COURT: You'll be sworn, please, by the clerk.
(David Darlak affirmed.)
THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Would you have a seat, please.
Would you state your full name for the record and spell your
last name.
THE WITNESS: David Allen Darlak, D-a-r-l-a-k.
THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Thank you.
THE COURT: All right, Mr. Mearns.
MR. MEARNS: Thank you.
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. MEARNS:
David Darlak - Direct
Q. Mr. Darlak, how old are you?
A. 29 years old.
Q. Where do you live right now?
A. Niagara Falls, New York.
Q. How long have you lived in Niagara Falls?
A. I've lived in that area pretty much my whole life except
when I was in the military.
Q. Where do you work right now?
A. I own a sign shop in Wheatfield, New York.
Q. Where is Wheatfield in relation to Niagara Falls?
A. It's a suburb of Niagara Falls.
Q. Describe what kind of a business that is, your sign shop.
A. I pretty much make any kind of sign. Small kinds of signs
that -- that are out there.
Q. And how long have you been in the business of making signs?
A. Since I graduated high school.
Q. How long have you owned your own -- your own sign shop?
A. About a year and a half.
Q. Prior to when you owned your own sign shop, where did you
work?
A. I worked at a company called Rosewood Signs in Tonawanda,
New York, a company called NAS Quick Sign in Buffalo, New York,
and then I was in the military.
Q. Tell us when you worked at Rosewood Signs.
A. From '86 to '88 and from '92 until '95.
David Darlak - Direct
Q. And you also said you worked at a store called NAS Quick
Sign?
A. Correct.
Q. When did you work there?
A. End of '96 -- end of '95 to beginning of '96.
Q. And then from there, that's when you started your own shop?
A. Yes.
Q. You indicated a moment ago that you were also in the
military at one point?
A. Yes, I was.
Q. What branch of the service?
A. The Army.
Q. And when were you in the Army?
A. From the end of '88 until April '92.
Q. Where did you go to high school?
A. Star Point Central.
Q. Where is that school located?
A. Lockport, New York.
Q. Where is Lockport in relation to Niagara Falls?
A. It's about 10, 15 minutes away.
Q. When did you graduate from high school?
A. 1986.
Q. When you were in high school, did you know a man named Tim
McVeigh?
A. Yes, I did.
David Darlak - Direct
Q. When did you meet Mr. McVeigh?
A. In -- when I just started going to high school in ninth
grade.
Q. And while you were in high school with Mr. McVeigh, did you
and he become friends?
A. Yes, we did.
Q. Approximately when did you become friends with Mr. McVeigh?
A. Approximately 1985.
Q. Did Mr. McVeigh graduate the same year -- in 1986 -- with
you?
A. Yes, he did.
Q. Graduated from the same high school?
A. Yes, he did.
Q. And then in 1986, you began first began working at Rosewood
Signs?
A. Yes.
Q. How often did you see Mr. McVeigh during that period of
time?
A. Once a week on average, maybe a couple times a month.
Q. Do you have any brothers or sisters?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. How many brothers do you have?
A. Three brothers.
Q. And what are their names?
A. Michael, Eugene, and Christopher.
David Darlak - Direct
Q. During this period of time in 1986 to 1988, did Mr. McVeigh
get to know your family?
A. Yes, he did.
Q. And did he get to know your brothers?
A. Yes, he did.
Q. Does your brother Michael have any involvement in car
racing?
A. He used to, yes.
Q. When you say "he used to," what do you mean?
A. He -- right now, he's not doing it, but he used to for a
long time.
Q. Approximately when was he involved in car racing?
A. Probably from '80 to '90.
Q. What kind of a -- what kind of car racing was your brother
involved in?
A. It was called dirt modified. He was -- a couple of his
friends had a car and they used to work on it.
Q. In 1988, did you enter into any kind of a business deal
with Mr. McVeigh?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Describe that for us.
A. We purchased some land in -- south of us in the southern
tier of New York.
Q. And how much did you pay, the total? How much was the
total purchase price?
David Darlak - Direct
A. Around $7,000.
Q. When did you enlist in the Army?
A. November '88.
Q. And what was Mr. McVeigh doing at that time?
A. He was in the military at the time.
Q. So you -- the two of you were in the military at the same
time.
A. Yes.
Q. Did you maintain any contact with him while the two of you
were in the military?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. How did you remain in contact with Mr. McVeigh?
A. Letters.
Q. And how long did you serve in the military?
A. From '88 until '92.
Q. What did you do when you were released from the military in
'92?
A. I moved back into my parents' house.
Q. And where was that?
A. That was in Wheatfield, New York.
Q. Do you know where Mr. McVeigh was living at that time in
'92?
A. Yes, I do. He was living with his father in Pendleton,
New York.
Q. Where is Pendleton in relation to Wheatfield?
David Darlak - Direct
A. It's bordering. Bordering county.
Q. Did you ever see Mr. McVeigh at this time?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. When did you -- how often did you see Mr. McVeigh at that
time in 1992?
A. Couple times a month.
Q. And did you remain friends, resume your friendship?
A. Yes.
Q. When was the last time that you -- that you saw Mr. McVeigh
in terms of when -- after you were released from the military?
A. Somewhere in the fall of '92.
Q. After the last time you saw him in the fall of '92, did you
ever receive a telephone call from him?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. When was that?
A. Sometime in the fall of '94.
Q. Did you receive one call or more than one call in the fall
of '94?
A. More than one call.
Q. Where -- where did you receive the first call?
A. At my place of employment, Rosewood Signs.
Q. And do you recall what the telephone number of Rosewood
Signs was in the fall of 1994?
A. Yes, I do. It was (716) 692-1435.
Q. When was the last time that you had seen or spoken to
David Darlak - Direct
Mr. McVeigh prior to receiving that call?
A. Fall of '92.
Q. What did Mr. McVeigh say?
A. We just talked about what we were doing at the time, and
then he had asked me if I had known where he could get some
racing fuel.
Q. What did you say when he asked you that question?
A. I said I had no idea.
Q. Did you ask him any questions?
A. I asked him what he wanted it for, and he told me he was at
work and he had to go.
Q. How long was this conversation with Mr. McVeigh?
A. A few minutes.
Q. During that conversation, did you tell him that if he
wanted to speak to you again, he should call you where you were
living?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you give him the phone number where you were living at
that time?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Where were you living at that time?
A. At my sister's house.
Q. What is your -- was your sister married?
A. Yes.
Q. And what is her married name?
David Darlak - Direct
A. Silvernail.
Q. And do you recall what your -- what the home phone number
was at that time?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. What was the home phone number at that time?
A. (716) 692-5002.
Q. When you received that call from Mr. McVeigh, did you ever
know him to be involved in car racing?
A. No, I did not.
Q. Had you ever known him at that point to ever be interested
in purchasing car-racing fuel?
A. No, I did not.
Q. Did you ever get another phone call from Mr. McVeigh after
that?
A. Yes.
Q. When was that?
A. A few days later at my sister's house.
Q. Tell us about that.
A. It was a message.
Q. Message on an answering machine?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you listen to that message?
A. Yes.
Q. What was the message?
A. He said, "Forget about the racing fuel."
David Darlak - Direct
Q. And did you have -- ever have any further conversation with
him about that subject again?
A. No, I did not.
MR. MEARNS: Your Honor, at this time, I'd like to
show -- have the witness look at what has been received as
Government Exhibit 1888. Specifically page 4 and page 5.
THE COURT: All right. This is part of another
exhibit?
MR. MEARNS: Yes. This is page 4 of Government
Exhibit 1888.
BY MR. MEARNS:
Q. And if we could focus down in at the last entry on the
bottom of the page there. Over in the far right-hand column,
Mr. Darlak, do you recognize the telephone number there?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. And is that the telephone number of Rosewood Signs in the
fall of 1994?
A. Yes, it was.
Q. Do you see just to the left of it -- left of it, it
indicates Terry Nichols?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you know a Terry Nichols in the fall of '94?
A. No.
Q. Now, if we could turn to the next page on page 5. If we
could focus on the second entry from the top. Is that also
David Darlak - Direct
again the telephone number for Rosewood Signs?
A. Yes.
Q. Finally, if we could focus at the bottom of that same page,
page 5. Is that Franklin Silvernail -- is that your sister's
husband's name?
A. Yes.
Q. And was that the telephone number at that residence in the
fall of 1994?
A. Yes, it was.
MR. MEARNS: No further questions, your Honor.
THE COURT: 1888 is a demonstrative exhibit that's a
part of the larger Exhibit 553?
MR. MEARNS: 553.
THE COURT: Mr. Woods.
MR. WOODS: Yes, your Honor.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. WOODS:
Q. Good morning, Mr. Darlak.
A. Good morning.
Q. My name is Ron Woods. I'm one of the lawyers appointed by
the Court in Oklahoma City to help out Terry Nichols in this
case.
You and I have never met personally; is that correct?
A. That's correct.
Q. We had a telephone conversation two nights ago; is that
David Darlak - Cross
correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And you called and asked if we could ask all the questions
of you so you don't have to come back; is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. You've been here a number of times to meet with the
prosecutors, have you not?
A. Yes.
Q. How many times have you met with the prosecutors concerning
your testimony in this case?
A. In this case right here?
Q. Well, concerning this investigation. How many times have
you met with the prosecutors to go over your testimony?
A. This year, I came to Denver -- this will be my fifth time.
Twice for testifying in the last case and then this one. Two
other times just to talk about it.
Q. Okay. Did you make trips before this year of '97?
A. Not with the prosecution. I was being interviewed by the
FBI numerous times.
Q. Was it here in Denver or --
A. No. At -- at --
Q. At your place?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Now, you do not know Terry Nichols; is that correct?
A. No, I don't.
David Darlak - Cross
Q. You've never seen him?
A. No.
Q. But you do know Timothy McVeigh?
A. Yes.
Q. You all were friends in high school and maintained that
friendship up until '92; is that correct?
A. Correct.
Q. Now, in '92, when Mr. McVeigh returned to New York -- he
got out of the Army when; do you recall?
A. I believe it was '91. The end of '91.
Q. Okay. December 31 of '91 sound accurate to you as to when
he was discharged?
A. That sounds reasonable, yes.
Q. And then you saw him during the year '92; is that correct?
A. Correct.
Q. Had he changed from what you had noticed about Mr. McVeigh
before he went in the Army?
A. Yes.
Q. In what way?
A. He was different. He was more militant.
Q. All right. During '92, did he give you a book to read?
A. Yes, he did.
Q. What book was that?
A. Turner Diaries.
Q. Did you read it?
David Darlak - Cross
A. No, I did not.
Q. What happened to the book?
A. It sat around my house for a couple months, and then he
asked me for it back.
Q. Did he say what he was going to do with it?
A. He said he had somebody else he would like to give it to.
Q. Now, the two of you bought some property about 50 miles
south of where you were in New York back in '88; is that
correct?
A. Correct.
Q. And you paid 7,000 for it?
A. Somewhere around there, yeah.
Q. Did you all share the purchase price, making the payments?
A. Yes.
Q. 50-50?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. And then when did you sell it?
A. '92. Somewhere in '92. Beginning of '92.
Q. All right. And how much did you sell it for?
A. Somewhere around $9,000.
Q. Okay. Do you recall who you sold it to?
A. No, I don't.
Q. Okay. Just somebody that -- you put it on the market and
somebody bought it?
A. Realtors sold it. I never met them.
David Darlak - Cross
Q. Okay. And did you get your share of the sales proceeds?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, during the course of the investigation, when the FBI
was talking to you, did they show you all the documents
concerning the sale -- the purchase and the sale of the
property?
A. I had the documents. They asked me to get them from the --
Q. Okay.
A. -- lawyer, yes.
Q. Now, what about the documents concerning a refund of the
property tax? Did you have those?
A. No. They showed me that sometime -- I think it was the
beginning of this year.
Q. Okay. Had you seen those before?
A. No, I had not.
Q. Do you know why the FBI was showing those to you? Did they
tell you?
A. Yes. I found out after they showed it to me.
Q. What did they tell you?
A. Well, there was a signature on the back that was my name,
but I didn't sign it.
Q. Okay. On the back of what?
A. This cancelled check.
Q. And was this check a refund of the property tax?
A. A portion of it, I believe, yes.
David Darlak - Cross
Q. All right. Was there more than one check?
A. I think there was two.
Q. Okay. And both checks had an indication that you, David
Darlak, had signed the check to endorse it?
A. Yes. It was my signature -- it was a signature, but it was
not mine.
Q. And you told the FBI that that was not your signature?
A. Correct.
Q. Did you recognize the handwriting?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And whose handwriting was it?
A. It was Tim's.
Q. Okay. Did the FBI show you records as to what happened to
the checks? Were they deposited, cashed or what?
A. They didn't show me that.
Q. Okay. Did you ever receive any of the proceeds from
that -- those two checks?
A. No, I didn't. But Tim dealt with the taxes; so if there
was any money that was owed, it was -- he kept track of that.
So I didn't really concern with it.
Q. Okay. But it wasn't your signature on the back; is that
correct?
A. No, it was not.
Q. Okay. Now, what did you use the property for when you
bought it in '88?
David Darlak - Cross
A. Originally, we just bought it just for something to do, and
then we went down there a handful of times before we went in
the military, shooting guns and just kind of walking around and
stuff.
Q. Was there ever a time when there was discussion about
building a bomb shelter on it?
A. Tim wanted to put one on there, yes.
Q. Did he say why?
A. Not really. Just that he -- that's what he wanted to do.
Q. Well, what did you understand why a bomb shelter was to be
built or wanted to be built there?
A. In case there ever came a need for it, Tim felt he had to
have one.
Q. What was going to be the need of a bomb shelter in New
York, western New York?
A. Getting bombed on.
Q. By whom?
A. By anybody, I would assume.
Q. Was there ever a discussion as to who the suspected enemy
would be?
A. Not really.
Q. Now, you say that Mr. McVeigh changed when he came back
from the military in '92 when you kept up your association with
him.
A. Yes.
David Darlak - Cross
Q. And you say he became more militant. Can you expand on
that a little bit.
A. I guess his views were just more concentrated on -- on his
fears, I guess.
Q. Fears of what?
A. Of things that could happen to the American society that he
didn't like.
Q. Okay. Was he more to the right, or more to the left, or
how would you explain his political beliefs at that time?
A. I don't know what you mean by left or right, but he was
not --
Q. Conservative, or radical left?
A. Radical.
Q. Okay. So a radical conservative?
A. Radical radical.
Q. Okay. Now, did there come a time that you broke off your
friendship and relationship with him?
A. Yes.
Q. And when was that?
A. '92. He just disappeared. Never heard from him again.
Well, until he called me a couple years later.
Q. Was there anything that happened before he left where you
began to sort of disassociate with him?
A. He was just caught up in his own thing and I was in mine,
and we were just kind of seeing less and less of each other
David Darlak - Cross
until one day I heard he was just gone.
Q. You didn't share the same beliefs; is that correct?
A. Correct.
Q. During the year of '92 when you were in contact with him,
did you go to any gun shows with Mr. McVeigh?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And where were the gun shows held?
A. I went to one in Hamburg, New York.
Q. And would you tell the jury where Hamburg is.
A. Hamburg is probably about 20, 30 miles south of where we
live.
Q. And you lived in Pendleton and Lockport, in that area,
Wheat Ridge (sic)?
A. Yes.
Q. And those are also suburbs of --
A. Buffalo.
Q. Buffalo. Okay. How big is Hamburg?
A. I would have to say probably a town of like 50,000 or so,
maybe.
Q. Okay. And approximately when did you go to the gun show in
'92? Do you have a recollection?
A. I have -- I don't know.
Q. Okay. Was Mr. McVeigh registered at the gun show and had a
booth there?
A. Yes, he did.
David Darlak - Cross
Q. And were you there just to accompany him, or did you have a
booth, also?
A. No, I was there to help him watch his table.
Q. Okay. What was he selling at his table?
A. Military paraphernalia, just like gear, whether it was
sleeping bags, anything that you could find in a -- military
duffel bag.
Q. All right. Did he have any weapons for sale?
A. No.
Q. All right. Was there a time on the property that you
bought that Mr. McVeigh set off any explosives?
A. He had set off some simulators. They are little plastic
devices used to -- in the military to simulate.
Q. Simulate what? Explosives?
A. Explosives.
Q. As part of your training?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. And can you give the jury an idea of how big an
explosion that might --
A. They were just like whistles and pops and lights and stuff.
There were no explosives.
Q. Now, at the gun show, did you see other people selling Army
surplus?
A. Yes.
Q. And did you see people selling weapons?
David Darlak - Cross
A. Yes.
Q. And can you give the jury just an idea of what type of
items you saw at the gun show in '92 that were available for
sale?
A. Oh, anything from hunting up to military paraphernalia.
Q. Okay. Did you see any literature for sale?
A. Yes.
Q. And can you describe for the jury what type of literature
you saw available at the gun show?
A. Not really. I didn't really look into it. I just know
there was some there.
Q. You didn't go around reading each one?
A. As a matter of fact, Tim had some military manuals for
sale, too.
Q. Military manuals?
A. Yeah.
Q. Do you recall what the subjects were?
A. No.
Q. Okay. When I say "literature," I'm not just limiting it to
military manuals. Did you see other types of literature?
A. Nothing that I could remember, but there was -- there was
definitely literature for sale there.
Q. Can you give an idea about how many booths were set up at
the one gun show you went to?
A. It was pretty big. I would have to say probably somewhere
David Darlak - Cross
around 50 to 75 booths.
Q. Okay. Is that the only gun show that you went to with
Mr. McVeigh?
A. That year, yes. Before we went in the military, we went to
a couple smaller ones.
Q. Okay. Now, the prosecutors showed you a document that's in
evidence relating to the first phone call you received from
Mr. McVeigh. I'm going to put that back up on the ELMO here.
And if you would, refer to the bottom of that page. It was on
a Wednesday, September the 28th. And Rosewood Signs was where
you were working; is that correct?
A. Correct.
Q. And that call was made during the workday? Of course, you
were at work; is that correct?
A. Yeah.
Q. And this record shows that it was made at 1:51 in the
afternoon, Central Daylight Time. Are you aware that Kansas is
in the Central Daylight Time?
A. Yes.
Q. You were at work; is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And you -- the call reflects it came from the Nichols'
house on Wednesday, September the 28th; but you don't know who
Terry Nichols is; is that correct?
A. No, I don't know him.
David Darlak - Cross
Q. And Mr. McVeigh told you that he was at work?
A. Yes. He told me he was at work in Arizona.
Q. All right. So that obviously was an incorrect statement --
A. Correct.
Q. -- based on these records?
A. Correct.
Q. Okay. But it is during the workday when people that have
an 8-to-5 job are at work; is that correct?
A. I'm sorry. I didn't understand.
Q. It is during the workday?
A. Yeah. Yeah.
Q. All right. Thank you. And I want to show the other
record. Silvernail is your twin sister; that's her married
name?
A. Correct. Correct.
Q. And this is on Saturday, approximately 4:44; is that
correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Now, you'll notice several calls right before that.
Do you know Michael Fortier?
A. No, I do not. I know him now from the newspaper, but I
didn't know him then.
Q. Okay. Did Mr. McVeigh tell you where he worked in Arizona?
A. A True Value hardware store, or something like that.
Q. All right. And you see the first call on that day is to a
David Darlak - Cross
True Value hardware store?
A. Yes. I see that.
Q. And then the second call is to Michael Fortier?
A. Yes.
Q. And the third call is to Brooklyn Delicatessen. Did you
ever meet a Greg Pfaff through Mr. McVeigh at the gun shows?
A. No.
Q. Do you know a Greg Pfaff?
A. No, I do not.
Q. And it's spelled P-F-A-F-F.
A. No.
Q. Okay. And then the Franklin Silvernail was the phone
number where you were living with your married sister?
A. Correct.
Q. And you testified to the jury you received a message there
definitely from Mr. McVeigh on a telephone answering machine?
A. Correct.
Q. And he said, "Disregard the request for racing fuel"?
A. Correct.
MR. WOODS: Okay. Thank you very much for answering
the questions.
THE COURT: Anything further of this witness?
MR. MEARNS: No questions.
THE COURT: He's now excused?
MR. MEARNS: Yes, your Honor.
MR. WOODS: Yes, your Honor.
THE COURT: You may step down. You're excused.
Next, please.
MR. MACKEY: Your Honor, I've consulted with defense
counsel. We'd like to call Joanne Thomas one final time.
THE COURT: All right. All right. Ms. Thomas. If
you'll please come in and again resume the stand under the
earlier taken oath.
THE WITNESS: Okay.
THE COURT: Mr. Orenstein.
MR. ORENSTEIN: Thank you, Judge.
(Joanne Thomas was recalled to the stand.)
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. ORENSTEIN:
Q. Ms. Thomas, we've got to stop meeting like this.
A. Yes.
Q. You've previously told us about some things that you
recovered at Mr. Nichols' home on a search pursuant to a search
warrant that was executed April 22d to 23d, 1995 in Herington,
Kansas; is that correct?
A. That's correct.
Q. Following your work in that search, did you also
participate in executing a search warrant later on April 23d at
a storage shed, Unit No. 2 in Herington, Kansas?
A. Yes, I did.
Joanne Thomas - Direct
Q. And did -- As a result of participating in that search, did
you go inside that storage locker, Unit No. 2, and look at it
and see what was inside?
A. I was there when they opened it.
Q. And was there anything inside?
A. No. It was empty.
Q. Now, did you notice anything about the appearance of that
storage unit when you saw inside of it?
A. Yes. My duty that day was to maintain the photo log of the
photographer, and so I was writing down what we observed when
they opened it. There were rings on the floor. There was a
stain on the floor. The unit had particle board walls and
exposed beams.
Q. And have you since looked at a photograph showing that
condition of the inside of the storage shed?
A. Yes, I have.
MR. ORENSTEIN: If I could ask Agent Tongate to
assist, there's a large photograph against the wall. If I may
have it displayed to the witness.
THE COURT: Yes.
BY MR. ORENSTEIN:
Q. Ms. Thomas, with Agent Tongate's assistance, I'm showing
you Exhibit 2054, which is a large photograph. Do you
recognize it?
A. Yes, I do.
Joanne Thomas - Direct
Q. And what is it?
A. It's a -- interior shot of the storage shed.
Q. And does it fairly and accurately depict the way that
storage shed looked when you saw it on April 23d, 1995?
A. Yes, it does.
Q. Including those stains and those rings and the particle
board that you described?
A. Yes, sir.
MR. ORENSTEIN: We offer Exhibit 2054, your Honor.
MR. TIGAR: No objection, your Honor.
THE COURT: Received. May be shown now.
BY MR. ORENSTEIN:
Q. With Agent Tongate's assistance, can you just point out --
Agent Tongate, if you could stand back so Ms. Thomas could
point.
Perhaps you could stand up. Just describe the rings
that you were describing before.
A. I'm talking about the rings here and partial ring there and
there. And then this is the stain that was on the floor in the
back of the unit.
MR. ORENSTEIN: For the jury's convenience, your
Honor, may I have Agent Tongate just walk the photo in front of
the jury box?
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. ORENSTEIN: Thank you, your Honor. I have nothing
Joanne Thomas - Direct
further of Ms. Thomas on direct.
THE COURT: Mr. Tigar.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. TIGAR:
Q. Hello again.
A. Hi.
Q. The search warrant that you had for the storage shed: That
described a shed that had been rented in the name of Shawn
Rivers; is that correct?
A. I didn't see the search warrant, sir.
Q. You did not?
A. No.
Q. Okay. Did you know whether or not the storage unit had
been rented in the name of Shawn Rivers?
A. No, I did not.
Q. And then next question is did you know who Shawn Rivers
was?
A. No, I did not.
Q. Okay. Now, were you the -- how many agents did you have
out there looking in when you opened the door?
A. There were numerous agents. I can't tell you exact number.
Q. Have -- was Agent Bodziak there?
A. The name does not sound familiar to me.
Q. He's the tire-track man. Does that refresh your
recollection?
Joanne Thomas - Cross
A. I don't believe I ever met the gentleman.
Q. Okay. And had tire-track photographs and impressions been
taken at that time before you went in?
A. Yes.
Q. And how did you know that that had been done before you
went in?
A. I was in that storage shed the day before, and we did mark
not in the storage shed but outside -- we did mark the tire
treads and we did take soil samples. And we quit because they
said somebody was coming from headquarters to do the plaster
casts.
Q. But when you did those the day before, did you mark them
off with the stakes, and so on, so that nobody was going to
trample on them?
A. That's right.
Q. When you went in the shed -- that picture that we saw: Are
there rings on the floor there?
A. Appear to be rings on the floor.
Q. Now, as you look at those, do those appear to be rust
rings?
A. Well, actually, they were kind of black, like something had
been shifted on it.
Q. Now --
A. Maybe a little rust.
Q. All right. Now, did the rings look like rings that would
Joanne Thomas - Cross
be left by leaving a metal barrel that has a lip around it --
in there?
A. At least the rings were -- appeared to be made by metal.
Q. All right. And they looked different from the rings you
would expect to have been left by plastic barrels; is that
correct, or do you know?
A. I don't know.
Q. You don't know. Did you make sure to secure the scene so
that residue tests could be performed on it?
A. That was not my function. All I did was take the
photograph log.
Q. Did you -- did you observe the other agents who were in
charge, taking care to make sure that whatever residues were
there could be preserved and collected, if necessary?
A. Yes.
Q. Were they wearing booties?
A. I don't recall.
Q. Were they wearing gloves?
A. I don't recall.
Q. Were they wearing, you know, those -- those white suits,
the cover-up suits that -- that are sometimes worn at crime
scenes?
A. Yes, I'm aware of those.
Q. Right. And you saw -- did you see Mr. Burmeister and his
crew wearing those at Mr. Nichols' house earlier?
Joanne Thomas - Cross
A. Yes.
Q. All right. Were any agents wearing those white suits?
A. Not to my recollection.
MR. TIGAR: Thank you very much. Nothing further.
MR. ORENSTEIN: Nothing further, your Honor. The
witness is excused.
THE COURT: Agreed to excuse her?
MR. TIGAR: Yes, your Honor.
THE COURT: You may step down. You're now excused.
THE WITNESS: Thank you.
THE COURT: Next, please.
MR. MACKEY: We would call Kantall Patel.
THE COURT: Come in, please.
(Kantall Patel affirmed.)
THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Have a seat, please. Would you
give us your full name and spell your last name.
THE WITNESS: Kantall Patel. Last name is Patel,
P-A-T-E-L.
THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Thank you.
THE COURT: If you'll keep your voice up just a
little, it'll help us to hear you.
Mr. Mearns.
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. MEARNS:
Q. Mr. Patel, where do you live?
Kantall Patel - Direct
A. Pauls Valley.
Q. You have to speak loudly so everyone can hear you.
A. Pauls Valley, Oklahoma.
Q. How long have you lived in Pauls Valley, Oklahoma?
A. 15 years.
Q. And where were you born?
A. In India.
Q. And when did you come to the United States?
A. 1977, January 1.
Q. Where do you work?
A. Amish Inn Motel.
Q. Again, keep your voice up, please.
A. Amish Inn Motel.
Q. Where is the Amish Inn Motel?
A. In Pauls Valley.
Q. And what is your position there?
A. Manager.
Q. How long have you been the manager at that motel?
A. Last 15 years.
Q. I want you to look inside that folder that you have in
front of you. And you'll find in a plastic case -- you'll find
a document that's been marked as Government Exhibit 142 for
identification. You'll see the number there on the back.
Is that No. 142?
A. Uh-huh.
Kantall Patel - Direct
Q. Turn it over to the front. Do you recognize that?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And what is that?
A. A registration card.
Q. Is that a registration card from your motel?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And how do you recognize it?
A. It's in my handwriting.
Q. And did you keep that -- did you maintain that record? The
business records?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. In the business records of your motel?
A. Yes, sir.
MR. MEARNS: Your Honor, we would offer Government
Exhibit 142.
MR. WOODS: No objection.
THE COURT: Received. 142.
MR. MEARNS: With the Court's permission, I'd like to
publish.
THE COURT: Yes.
BY MR. MEARNS:
Q. And Mr. Patel, you see in the lower right-hand corner that
the date is October 20, 1994. Did you write that?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And did you check the box where it says, "days occupied"
Kantall Patel - Direct
and there's a "Thursday" checked there?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And up in the upper right-hand corner, it says, "Room 107."
Did you write that entry?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. With respect to the other information, the name and
address, the name Joe Kyle and the address that's written there
and the signature: Who wrote that?
A. The customer wrote it down.
Q. And was this a registration card that you registered this
guest at the motel?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And did you observe the customer fill out the information
and write it?
A. Yes, sir.
MR. MEARNS: Your Honor, at this time, there's a
stipulation with respect to the name and address and the
signature that it is the handwriting of Mr. Terry Nichols.
MR. WOODS: Yes, your Honor. That is our stipulation.
THE COURT: All right. We accept that agreement as
fact.
BY MR. MEARNS:
Q. In the middle there, Mr. Patel, it says the number in the
party -- the number of guests. Do you see that there?
A. Yes, sir.
Kantall Patel - Direct
Q. And it says No. 1 -- it says "1"?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is that your handwriting there?
A. No.
Q. Whose handwriting is that?
A. It is the customer.
Q. Does the number of guests affect the rate that you charge?
A. One person.
Q. But if it -- if it's two guests, does the rate -- does the
room rate go up?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is it possible for a guest to come in and register and get
more people in the room than they register on the card?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Have you ever had a problem with that?
A. Yes.
Q. Where is Pauls Valley in relation to Oklahoma City,
Oklahoma?
A. South of Oklahoma City. 60 miles.
Q. And where is Pauls Valley in relation to Dallas, Texas?
A. It would be south of Pauls Valley.
Q. Prior to coming to court today, have you looked at a large
map of some of those locations?
A. Yes, sir.
MR. MEARNS: With the Court's permission, may Agent
Kantall Patel - Direct
Tongate display Government Exhibit 2049?
THE COURT: All right.
BY MR. MEARNS:
Q. Mr. Patel, if you would look at that. Do you recognize
that thing -- that large chart that the agent is holding?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And is that an accurate map of the locations that are
depicted there?
A. Yes, sir.
MR. MEARNS: Your Honor, we would offer 2049.
MR. WOODS: No objection, your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. 2049 is received, may be
displayed.
MR. MEARNS: Thank you, your Honor.
BY MR. MEARNS:
Q. Okay. Mr. Patel, if you could turn towards the map and do
you -- can you point out where Pauls Valley is.
A. Yes. Right here.
Q. And can you point out where Oklahoma City is on the map?
A. Right here.
Q. And if you'd show us where Dallas, Texas is.
A. Right here.
Q. Is there an interstate highway that runs near the Amish
Inn?
A. I-35.
Kantall Patel - Direct
Q. And is that the interstate highway that connects Oklahoma
City to Dallas, Texas?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. About how far away is your motel from that interstate
highway?
A. About a half a mile.
MR. MEARNS: No further questions, your Honor.
THE COURT: Mr. Woods?
MR. WOODS: Yes, your Honor.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. WOODS:
Q. Mr. Patel, do you recall when the person came in to your
motel to sign the registration card?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What time was it?
A. Well, I don't remember the time.
Q. Was it in the morning, afternoon?
A. I have no guess.
Q. Pardon me?
A. Probably afternoon.
Q. Okay. And were they heading north, or heading south? And
when I say "they," was the person who registered heading north
or heading south?
A. I don't know that.
Q. And do you recall who the person was at all?
Kantall Patel - Cross
A. What?
Q. Do you recall who the person was that signed?
A. Yeah.
Q. Who?
A. I don't know how to read it. I could tell by name.
Q. Pardon me?
A. I don't know how to read.
Q. Okay. You're the record custodian. That's your record; is
that correct?
A. Yes, sir.
MR. WOODS: Okay. Thank you. No further questions.
MR. MEARNS: May I -- just one other question.
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. MEARNS: May I just display page 8 of Government
Exhibit 1888.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. MEARNS:
Q. If you would look on the -- on the computer screen that you
have in front of you, the entry down there at the bottom. Is
that your telephone number at the motel, (405) 238-7545?
A. Yes, sir.
MR. MEARNS: Thank you, your Honor.
THE COURT: Any questions?
MR. WOODS: No, your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. I take it Mr. Patel may be
excused.
MR. MEARNS: Yes, your Honor. Thank you.
THE COURT: Agreed?
MR. TIGAR: Yes, your Honor.
MR. WOODS: Yes, your Honor.
THE COURT: You may step down. You're now excused.
Next, please.
MR. MACKEY: Your Honor, we would call Florence
Rogers.
(Florence Rogers affirmed.)
THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Would you have a seat, please.
Would you state your full name for the record and
spell your last name.
THE WITNESS: Florence E. Rogers. R-o-g-e-r-s.
THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Thank you.
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. MEARNS:
Q. Where do you live, Ms. Rogers?
A. I live in southwest Oklahoma City.
Q. How long have you lived in Oklahoma City?
A. Probably 40 years.
Q. And are you working, or are you retired?
A. I retired the first day of July this year.
Q. July 1 of 1997?
A. '97.
Florence Rogers - Direct
Q. Where did you work before you retired?
A. I worked at Federal Employees Credit Union.
Q. How long had you worked at that Federal Employees Credit
Union?
A. 26 years.
Q. And what was your title or position when you retired?
A. Chief executive officer.
Q. How long had you been chief executive officer?
A. 26 years.
Q. How long had the credit union been in operation when you
retired?
A. About 35 years.
Q. Would you tell us what is the Federal Employees Credit
Union.
A. It's a nonprofit financial institution owned by the members
that offers financial services such as checking accounts,
savings accounts, credit cards, loans, IRA accounts.
Q. So it's a private organization; it's not a federal agency?
A. No. It's not a federal agency.
Q. And how many members of the credit union did it have in
July of 1997 when you retired?
A. We had 15,700 members.
Q. What kind of services did the credit union provide to its
members?
A. Loans, all -- mortgage loans, auto loans, checking
Florence Rogers - Direct
accounts, savings. About anything that -- that a financial
institution would offer.
Q. How many people did the credit union employ in Oklahoma
City when you retired in July?
A. I think we had about 43 employees when I retired.
Q. In April of 1995, how many employees did the credit union
have?
A. We had 33.
Q. In April of 1995, where was the credit union office
located?
A. We were on the third floor of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal
Building.
Q. Downtown Oklahoma City?
A. Yes.
Q. I want to direct your attention now to Wednesday, April 19,
1995. Were you working that day?
A. Yes, I was.
Q. What time did you get to work that day?
A. Around 8:00.
Q. What did you do after you got to work that morning?
A. I began getting prepared for a meeting that I had planned
to -- excuse me -- have with my staff, seven of my staff
members. I had scheduled a meeting a couple weeks ahead of
that day. We were going to be doing assignments on some items
that the state banking department had requested for their audit
Florence Rogers - Direct
that was to begin the next week.
Q. What time was the meeting supposed to begin?
A. We were going to start just as soon after 8 as we could
arrange to get everybody together.
Q. And what time did the meeting start that morning?
A. It was about 8:35 before we actually began the meeting.
Q. Where were you planning to hold the meeting that morning?
A. We were going to hold it in the board -- in our boardroom
on the north side of the Murrah Building.
Q. And when you say "the north side," that's the side with the
windows?
A. Yes.
Q. Where -- where, in fact, did you hold the meeting?
A. We ended up holding it in my office on the south side of
the Murrah Building due to a printer that wasn't working that
morning. I couldn't print out the agenda. So I told one of
the vice presidents just to get everybody together in my office
and we would hold it there.
Q. I'd like you to look at what has been introduced in
evidence as Government Exhibit 952, the third floor. And
that's the floor there where the credit union was located in
April of '95?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. And could you just draw a big circle around the space that
the credit union occupied then.
Florence Rogers - Direct
A. Yes. We occupied the -- the green area.
Q. Okay. Now, if you would click your pen and show us where
the boardroom was that you had intended to have the meeting.
A. We had intended to have it here.
Q. Okay. If you would put an X where your office was located,
where you, in fact, held the meeting.
A. Here. That's -- that's where my desk was. Right there.
So that's the room where we held the meeting.
Q. About how large was the room?
A. It was about 15 by 20.
Q. And how many employees attended the meeting that morning?
A. There were seven and myself, and then my secretary was
adjacent in her office.
Q. That's that smaller room located just to the north side
of --
A. Yes. Uh-huh. Here.
Q. Tell us the names of the other people who were present at
the meeting.
A. Claudette Meek, Kathy Finley, Vicky -- Victoria Texter,
Jamie Genzer, Sonja Stroud (sic), Jill Randolph, Valerie
Koelsch.
Q. So those were the seven people that were in the meeting
with you?
A. Yes.
Q. Tell us what happened shortly after 9:00.
Florence Rogers - Direct
A. I had just turned around from reading a -- the next agenda
item that we were going to cover from my computer screen on the
credenza that was behind my desk, and I kind of leaned back;
and one of the ladies present began to talk. And suddenly, I
was thrown from my chair on to the floor in kind of a tornado-
like rush. And all the -- the building literally blew up
before my eyes, taking all the staff members that were in the
room with me down below with six floors from above on top of
them.
Q. What did you see when you looked out back where your office
was?
A. There was just space. I could not see -- there was no
floor left. My desk had disappeared. I could see through the
building and see the sky.
Q. Were any of the women that were in the meeting with you
still in the room with you?
A. No. They all disappeared.
Q. What about the window behind you? Behind your desk? I'm
sorry. Behind your credenza.
A. That had been blown out.
Q. What did you do next?
A. I knocked the dust and debris off of myself and began
yelling out the window that was no longer there. There weren't
any rescue units at the site at that time, although I could
hear them on the way. And I began yelling. And it wasn't long
Florence Rogers - Direct
before a couple of the GSA employees appeared in the stairwell
window outside my office. The building took on a U shape at
that point. And they asked me if I thought I could climb out
on the ledge outside the window. And I told them I thought I
could. And I did that. And by raising my body forward as --
as far as I could and reaching up, they were able to reach my
wrists and pull me up into the stairwell window, walk me down
the stairs and out on to the plaza on the south side of the
building.
Q. What time did you leave the area around the Murrah Building
that morning?
A. I walked the streets trying to find my staff members for
quite a while. I ended up on a bus and I rode around on the
bus for a good 45 minutes or an hour; and then when it stopped,
I got off. I didn't feel like I needed immediate medical
attention. So it was -- it was noon, and I was still in the
area.
Q. So when did you leave the area? You left the area around
noon?
A. Yes. I was finally able to find a phone that would work to
call my family and let them know that I was alive.
Q. And then your son came and picked you up?
A. Yes, he did.
Q. Prior to noon, did you ever go into the front of the Murrah
Building?
Florence Rogers - Direct
A. No, I didn't.
Q. Were the seven women who were with you in that meeting --
were they killed in the explosion?
A. Yes, they were.
Q. In addition to those seven women, were any other employees
of the credit union killed in the explosion?
A. Yes. I lost 18 staff members.
Q. 18 total?
A. Yes.
MR. MEARNS: With the Court's permission, Agent
Tongate, I'd like to display Government Exhibit 1092.
THE COURT: All right.
MR. MEARNS: Your Honor, Government Exhibit 1092
consists of two separate charts.
THE COURT: All right. I take it this is being
received pursuant to your earlier understanding.
MR. TIGAR: Yes, your Honor.
THE COURT: All right.
BY MR. MEARNS:
Q. Ms. Rogers, beginning in the upper left-hand corner, I'd
like you just to identify the women who are pictured on that
chart and tell us their positions with the credit union and how
long they had been employed.
A. Kimberly Ruth Burgess was my administrative assistant, and
she had worked for me for a year and a half.
Florence Rogers - Direct
Katherine Finley was my vice president of operations
of 21 years.
Jamie Lee Genzer was a management trainee who had been
with us for two-and-a-half years.
Linda Coleen Housley was a loan officer, and she had
been with us a year and a half.
Robin Ann Huff was a loan officer, and she had been
with me for six years.
Christi Yolanda Jenkins was a teller, and she had been
with me for ten years.
Valerie Jo Koelsch was my marketing director who
worked for me for ten-and-a-half years.
Catherine Mary Leinen was my collection officer who
had worked for me for twelve years.
Tresia Jo Mathes-Horton was a teller who had worked
for me for seven months.
MR. MEARNS: Agent Tongate, if you would show the
second chart.
BY MR. MEARNS:
Q. And if you would again, just starting in the upper left,
identify these nine women. Tell us their positions and how
long they were employed by the credit union.
A. Claudette Meek was my vice president in the lending
department, and she had worked for me for 13 years.
Frankie Ann Merrell was a teller who had worked for me
Florence Rogers - Direct
for three-and-a-half years.
Jill Diane Randolph was my CPA and accountant, who had
worked for me a year and a half.
Claudine Ritter was one of my collection officers and
had worked for me for eight years.
Christine Nicole Rosas was a loan receptionist and had
worked for me for eight days.
Sonja Lynn Sanders was my head cashier who had worked
for me for five years.
Karen Denise Shepherd was a loan officer who had
worked for me six years.
Victoria Jeanette Texter was in charge of our VISA
department, and she had worked for me 13 years.
Virginia Mae Thompson was a receptionist, also; and
she had worked for me for four months.
MR. MEARNS: Thank you, Agent Tongate.
BY MR. MEARNS:
Q. Ms. Rogers, prior to coming to court this morning, did you
put the names of those 18 women on a floor plan, the third-
floor floor plan of the Murrah Building, indicating where their
work stations were?
A. Yes, sir.
MR. MEARNS: Your Honor, we don't intend to display it
at this point, but we would offer 952C.
MR. TIGAR: Subject to our earlier discussion, your
Florence Rogers - Direct
Honor.
THE COURT: Yes. It's received.
BY MR. MEARNS:
Q. Did the credit union ever resume operations in the Murrah
Building?
A. No.
Q. Where did the credit union resume operations?
A. We opened up 48 hours after the bombing in a teller
training facility that was loaned to us by Tinker Federal
Credit Union, about 8 miles from downtown Oklahoma City.
Q. How many of the employees who were working for you prior to
April 19, 1995, continued to work for you after that explosion?
A. Initially, there was only about seven of us that were able
to start with our rebuilding efforts.
Q. That is seven of the original 33?
A. Yes.
Q. How were you able to resume operation with those limited
number of employees?
A. It was difficult. We had a lot of volunteers, some of them
from even out of state that were on the same computer system we
were on; and they flew those young people in to help us.
And -- and as I said, we resumed business in 48 hours.
Q. When did you resume normal operations of the credit union?
A. We were at the temporary location for 42 days. And then we
moved into leased space where the offices are still located in
Florence Rogers - Direct
Bethany, Oklahoma.
MR. MEARNS: I have no further questions, your Honor.
THE COURT: Mr. Tigar.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. TIGAR:
Q. Good morning, Ms. Rogers.
A. Good morning, Mr. Tigar.
Q. My name is Michael Tigar. I'm one of the lawyers appointed
to help out Terry Nichols.
I wanted to ask you first, if I may, a few questions
about the credit union --
A. Okay.
Q. -- and then about some of the things that you saw that day
when you were riding around during those morning hours.
First, credit unions can exist or be set up by any
affinity group; is that right? Any related group of people?
A. Yes, that have a common bond.
Q. Right. And how long have you worked in the credit union
industry?
A. 35 years.
Q. 35 years. Have you always been with a federal-employee-
type credit union, or were you with some others?
A. I was with a Capitol Credit Union for several years as a
vice president, and then I was hired as the CEO at Federal
Employees in 1971.
Florence Rogers - Cross
Q. Now, are you familiar with the fact that there are also
credit unions for farmers' organizations and community
organizations, as well as for people who are associated because
they all work for the same person?
A. Yes. I know a lot of credit union people across the
country.
Q. And you've been to conventions where all these folks meet
together and talk about their common problems; right?
A. Yes.
Q. Seen people from all walks of life all over the country --
A. Absolutely, yes.
Q. -- correct? I mean, farmers, ranchers, federal employees,
people who are members of other organizations, union members,
and so on; right?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, to turn to what you were seeing that day, you said
that you got on a -- on a bus; is that right? And where --
where did you -- where did the bus route take you that day --
A. They were --
Q. -- if you remember.
A. Vaguely. They were -- people were -- had scattered from
the building in kind of all different directions. And this bus
was a kind of a -- a medical bus, and they were going around
different street corners, several blocks around the Murrah
Building site, seeing -- seeing if they could find injured
Florence Rogers - Cross
people that perhaps needed to go to a hospital. So it was a
medical bus of some kind.
Q. And -- and as you rode around the downtown area, there was
just dirt and debris and shattered glass everywhere; right?
A. Absolutely.
Q. And did that have to be cleared off, some of it, in order
for the rescue people to get through? Did you observe that?
A. I have no idea. I did not observe that.
Q. Okay. But you just -- you just saw that it was -- that
this scene was not just confined to the Murrah Building;
correct?
A. No. It wasn't.
Q. But there was -- and that the area that you rode around,
you could -- you could see signs that this had been a -- a very
large event, indeed; is that right?
A. Yes. A lot of chaos going on everywhere. Buildings being
evacuated. Injured running, pretty rampant.
Q. Did you -- after you left that day and -- and your family
knew that you were all right and went home, when's the next
time that you went back to that Murrah Building area?
A. It was almost two weeks later, I met one of the U.S.
marshals and my son down there to go underneath the building in
the parking garage where my car had remained during that time.
Q. So --
A. It was almost two weeks later.
MR. TIGAR: Not till two weeks later.
Thank you for answering my questions. I really
appreciate it.
I have nothing further, your Honor.
THE COURT: Anything else?
MR. MEARNS: No questions. She may be excused.
THE COURT: All right. Agreeing to excuse her, I take
it?
MR. TIGAR: Yes, your Honor.
THE COURT: You may step down. You're now excused.
We'll take our midsession break, here. Not just
midmorning. It's midsession today, since we're going to 1:00.
And so remember that, of course. And if you wish to fortify
yourselves a bit with some snack or fruit or whatever during
this time, of course, you may do so. So -- and of course, you
will follow the cautions regularly given at all recesses: open
minds and closed mouths concerning the case.
And you're excused now. 20 minutes.
(Jury out at 10:41 a.m.)
THE COURT: Okay. 11:02.
(Recess at 10:42 a.m.)
* * * * *
INDEX
Item Page
WITNESSES
Louis Hupp
Direct Examination Continued by Mr. Mearns 8591
Cross-examination by Mr. Tigar
Redirect Examination by Mr. Mearns
Recross-examination by Mr. Tigar
David Darlak
Direct Examination by Mr. Mearns
Cross-examination by Mr. Woods
Joanne Thomas
Direct Examination by Mr. Orenstein
Cross-examination by Mr. Tigar
Kantall Patel
Direct Examination by Mr. Mearns
Cross-examination by Mr. Woods
Redirect Examination by Mr. Mearns
Florence Rogers
Direct Examination by Mr. Mearns
Cross-examination by Mr. Tigar
PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit Offered Received Refused Reserved Withdrawn
142 8664 8664
952C 8679 8680
PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBITS (continued)
Exhibit Offered Received Refused Reserved Withdrawn
2049 8667 8667
2054 8658 8658
2102 8591 8591
DEFENDANT'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit Offered Received Refused Reserved Withdrawn
E126 8625 8625
E61 8618 8618
* * * * *
REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE
I certify that the foregoing is a correct transcript from
the record of proceedings in the above-entitled matter. Dated
at Denver, Colorado, this 14th day of November, 1997.
_______________________________
Bonnie Carpenter
