43
	8	- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
	9		               CROSS-EXAMINATION
	10	BY MR. CORGAN:
	11	Q	Now, Mr. Gluba, as I understand it you joined the --
	12	I think as you put it -- the defense team back in February
	13	of this year?
	14	A	I was asked if I would engage in assisting the
	15	defense assisting Mr. Allen at that time.
	16	Q	But those were your words?
	17	A	Yes.
	18	Q	Defense team.
	19	A	Right.
	20	Q	And so at that point you became involved in looking
	21	at various things involved with this, doing analysis,
	22	reading reports, looking at testimony, observing the crime
	23	scene, doing those type things?
	24	A	That’s correct.
	25	Q	And obviously that’s part of your business, correct?


DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
	OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

44

	1	A	Yes, sir.
	2	Q	Not only are you involved as an assistant professor,
	3	but you’re a consultant, and your consultancy work, if
	4	that’s proper linguistic term, and I don’t know if it is
	5	or not, but your consultancy work deals with this area?
	6	A	That’s correct.
	7	Q	And obviously it’s only fair and proper that you be
	8	compensated for that.
	9	A	Yes, sir.
	10	Q	Okay. And as I understand it your standard fee and
	11	the fee that you would charge anyone else is $75 an hour.
	12	A	That’s correct.
	13	Q	Okay. Would you tell us how many hours you have
	14	involved in your work and analysis in this case?
	15	A	About 40 hours before arriving here.
	16	Q	Okay. That would be 40 hours prior to getting here
	17	yesterday?
	18	A	That’s correct.
	19	Q	And then when you’re here -- you’ve been here since
	20	yesterday, testified today. How does that work?
	21	A	The same, counsel.
	22	Q	Okay. So -- I mean, is there a break? I mean, do
	23	you charge only when you’re working or as the 24 hour
	24	clock goes is that $75 for each of those hours or how do
	25	you break that down?
DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

45
	1	A	For the working day.
	2	Q	Okay. So you will be charging, what, I guess eight
	3	hours for yesterday?
	4	A	That’s correct.
	5	Q	And eight hours for today?
	6	A	Or whatever the day may be, sir.
	7	Q	Okay. Let’s say eight hours.
	8	A	Eight hours.
	9	Q	And then I assume on top of that obviously you are.
	10	paid for your expenses?
	11	A	That’s correct. Actual expenses.
	12	Q	And that would be things like airfare?
	13	A	Correct.
	14	Q	Per diem, meals and those type things?
	15	A	That’s correct.
	16	Q	And lodging?
	17	A	Correct.
	18	Q	Now, is there anything I missed?
	19	A	No.
	20	Q	So that would pretty well give us an idea of your
	21	compensation in the case?
	22	A	Yes, sir.
	23	Q	Now, let’s talk a little bit, Mr. Gluba, about what
	24	you’ve actually done and what you’ve had available to you
	25	in rendering your opinions. And if I understand


DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
	OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

46
	1	correctly, and correct me if I’m wrong, in making your
	2	analysis you’ve basically done four things. One, you’ve
	3	looked at the video.
	4	A	Correct.
	5	Q	And I think you’ll agree with me we need to send Mr.
	6	Mason to video school and show him how to run a video
	7	camera. Agree?
	8	A	I agree, counsel.
	9	Q	I mean, obviously that has no evidentiary value, does
	10	it?
	11		          MR. CARLSON: We’d object, Your Honor.
	12	A	Well, certainly is a replication of the work at the
	13	scene at that time.
	14	Q	(By Mr. Corgan) I mean, we don’t get true colors.
	15	mean, I’d be laughed at if I bring that in as the state’s
	16	evidence, wouldn’t I?
	17	A	Perhaps.
	18	Q	Well, sure I would. Okay. Looked at the video, read
	19	police reports, is that correct?
	20	A	That’s correct.
	21	Q	Read preliminary hearing testimony from, the
	22	transcripts?
	23	A	That’s correct.
	24	Q	And have been to the crime scene.
	25	A	That’s correct.

DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

47

	1	Q	Those four things.
	2	A	I also reviewed crime scene photographs.
	3	Q	Okay. Five things. Crime scene photos. But those
	4	five things would encompass the totality of information
	5	available to you as you looked at the investigation in
	6	this case, is that correct?
	7	A	That’s correct.
	8	Q	And if I understand correctly, your first observation
	9	in person of the crime scene was February of ‘91?
	10	A	That is correct.
	11	Q	So not quite a year after the event?
	12	A	Correct.
	13	Q	I mean, we’re talking about a difference from
	14	February to June?
	15	A	Correct.
	16	Q	Now, you -- when you went there in February, how long
	17	did you have occasion to be at the crime scene?
	18	A	About 90 minutes.
	19	Q	I guess in that 90 minutes you did what we would call
	20	a walk through?
	21	A	That’s correct.
	22	Q	I mean, that’s a term that’s familiar with you?
	23	A	Yes.
	24	Q	And certainly that would be part of the look good
	25	police procedure when you go to the scene is to initially


DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

48
	1	do a walk through.
	2	A	Yes, sir.
	3	Q	And that would also be good procedure that as you
	4	incorporated other people in the investigation, other
	5	investigators, it would be important to take them through
	6	a walk through and let them know the situation as well.
	7	Would you agree with that?
	8	A	If they're going to testify about the scene, yes.
	9	Q	Well, they would need to know about it even if they
	10	weren't going to testify about the scene, wouldn’t they?
	11	A	Well, it all depends on who they are counsel. I’m
	12	not quite tracking as to what kind of witness you’re
	13	referring to.
	14	Q	Well, I’m sorry. You haven't been here for the
	15	testimony, but we’ve had testimony that Mr. Mason
	16	initially did a walk through, and you know that Mr. Mason
	17	is with the Bartlesville Police Department.
	18	A	Yes, sir.
	19	Q	And you know that later on we had Mr. Otte and the
	20	Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation involved.
	21	A	Right.
	22	Q	And you know, I think from reading the reports and
	23	preliminary hearing transcript, that Mr. Otte then became
	24	involved as well in an investigative capacity?
	25	A	Yes, sir.

DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

49
	1	Q	So, those two obviously it’s important that they do
	2	the walk through, that they be familiar with the scene and
	3	be able to make the observations that they did.
	4	A	That’s correct.
	5	Q	And your walk through consisted of about 90 minutes,
	6	is that right?
	7	A	That’s correct.
	8	Q	And then you went to the scene one other time?
	9	A	Yesterday afternoon.
	10	Q	And how much time did you spend there?
	11	A	45 minutes to an hour.
	12	Q	And was that basically just to refresh your memory as
	13	to lay out and things that you had observed back in
	14	February?
	15	A	In part, but I also wished to just cement in my own
	16	mind	some things that I had observed in photographs and
	17	the	video.
	18	Q	Okay. Reacquaint you with the scene and help you as
	19	you	prepared to testify to say this was here and that was
	20	there and what you ought to do.
	21	A	Correct.
	22	Q	Okay. So a total of, if my math is close, 135
	23	minutes, a little bit over two hours at the crime scene
	24	itself, is that right?
	25	A	That’s correct.


DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
	OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

50

	1	Q	Now, as you did that at the crime scene was your
	2	focus primarily inside?
	3	A	No. I also inspected the outside, the yard, the area
	4	of the property there.
	5	Q	Can you break that down for me?
	6	A	Well, the yard surrounding the house, the fence lines
	7	in the rear portion of the yard and on the side.
	8	Q	I’m sorry. Bad question. I mean, obviously I know
	9	you break it down that way. I meant time wise. Can you
	10	tell me how much time you spent inside and how much time
	11	you spent outside?
	12	A	Probably about 75 percent of the time inside.
	13	Q	Now, Mr. Gluba, I've got it here somewhere. If I
	14	understand, the latter part of your career with I.N.S. you
	15	were assistant to the director, is that correct?
	16	A	Correct, for policy.
	17	Q	And can I call it a desk job? I mean, is that what
	18	you were stuck with, kind of pushing paper and
	19	administrative responsibilities as opposed being out in
	20	the field on the scene doing what I’ll say, quote,
	21	investigative work?
	22	A	I would agree with that in that I was not in the
	23	field, but I was still engaged in the review of policy,
	24	procedures, standards and that kind of thing.
	25	Q	Sure. But I mean, from an administrative standpoint

DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

51
	1	in that N.I.S., this is our policy, these are the
	2	procedures we think are possible -- or not possible, but
	3	these are the procedures you’re to follow and make sure
	4	those are developed and disseminated?
	5	A	That’s correct. I would, on a rare occasion, review
	6	an investigation also.
	7	Q	When did you last have the opportunity to be involved
	8	in what I’ll say investigatively on the scene?
	9	A	Hands on the fall of 1987.
	10	Q	And what capacity were you serving then?
	11	A	Special agent in charge of the resident agency at
	12	Charleston, South Carolina.
	13	Q	So you were -- Did you go from special agent to
	14	assistant to the director?
	15	A	Special agent in charge, yes.
	16	Q	Okay. I’m sorry. You're going to have help me. Do
	17	you make a distinction between special agent and special
	18	agent in charge?
	19	A	Only in the assignment and responsibilities. All
	20	investigators with the Naval Investigative Service are
	21	special agents. They are assigned by their position,
	22	their rank if you will, to various capacities. So I went
	23	from the title and the position and the responsibilities
	24	of special agent in charge to the resident agency in
	25	Charleston, South Carolina to a special assistant to the

DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

52
	1	 director.
	2	Q	Okay. But assume at some point then you went from
	3	special agent to special agent in charge?
	4	A	Yes, in years past.
	5	Q	Now, if I understand correctly, when one is a special
	6	agent in charge, you’re kind of the boss of that group of
	7	folks?
	8	A	That’s correct.
	9	Q	And have those administrative responsibilities and.
	10	directives?
	11	A	Also supervisory responsibility which includes on
	12	scene supervision in the field on investigations.
	13	Q	I guess it would be somewhat akin in our police
	14	department if we have, as the top in the investigative
	15	division, a lieutenant. That lieutenant is in charge for
	16	the administrative person over the individual detectives?
	17	A	That’s correct.
	18	Q	And is that kind of a proper analogy?
	19	A	I think that’s proper.
	20	Q	But as far as -- well, let me ask it this way. As
	21	far as hands on case assignment, would that fall to you to
	22	say I am -- well, for example, Mr. Otte is designated as
	23	case agent in this case for his agency. As the special
	24	agent in charge, would you find yourself as the case agent
	25	or would you find yourself more like his superior, the


DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

53

	1	inspector who actually had ultimate say as far as
	2	assignment of things?
	3	A	primarily in the assignment, the supervision and
	4	control of the case. On occasion I would have an
	5	investigation assigned to me.
	6	Q	So it’s when we get down to the area of special
	7	agent, and that nomenclature that we’re talking about
	8	hands-on case assignment in the field, is that right?
	9	A	That’s correct.
	10	Q	When did you serve as case agent? What time period?
	11	A	1963 to 1973, and then again in the field, although I
	12	was an agent in charge in Japan, it was a small office so
	13	I had investigative responsibilities until ‘82. Back in
	14	the filed in ‘84 and ‘85 overseas and returned to
	15	Charleston in ‘85 where I remained until the fall of ‘87.
	16	Q	Now, was it during those periods, I believe you said,
	17	that you had assignments and it was your -- it had been
	18	your responsibility, I think you said, to work some 50 to
	19	75 homicides?
	20	A	Would have been during those periods of time.
	21	Q	Okay. And those other four to five hundred that you
	22	told us about, that was in the supervisory capacity, is
	23	that correct?
	24	A	That’s correct, counsel.
	25	Q	Now, this may be a tough one, and if it is help me


DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

54

	1	with it, but can you tell me of those 50 to 75 homicides
	2	you had occasion to work as the special agent assigned to
	3	that, how many of those were situations where, I guess for
	4	lack of a better word, you didn’t have an eye witness or
	5	purported witness to the crime?
	6	A	Probably about 20.
	7	Q	Okay. And by that I mean circumstances similar to
	8	this case where we had at least the allegation of an
	9	unknown perpetrator. So actually we’re talking around 20
	10	cases.
	11	A	20 to 25, yes, sir.
	12	Q	When did those come in your career or would it be
	13	fair to say they were just kind of spread out?
	14	A	They were kind of spread out, counsel.  Couldn’t
	15	really just group them, but they’re spread over that
	16	period of time.
	17	Q	Now, I think you said something, Mr. Gluba, if I got
	18	it correctly, that when we have these -- I believe your
	19	terminology was first responder situations, that in large
	20	part we need to rely on the officers call at the scene.
	21	A	Correct.
	22	Q	And obviously that’s because they’re first there,
	23	they have a grasp of the situation and what needs to be
	24	done at that point?
	25	A	Or at least what they observe at that point, yes.

DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

55

	1	Q	And I guess you would agree with me that as much as
	2	we would like to, that there are some things as a first
	3	responder that we can’t control.
	4	A	As I indicated this morning, yes, sir.
	5	Q	And one example of that in this case, and tell me if
	6	you recall it the same as I do, that before really either
	7	Mr. Grayson or Mr. Davis had an opportunity to finish
	8	their initial assessment of the scene we had the troops
	9	coming in, right?
	10	A	Well, I still thing with two individuals on the
	11	scene, especially Davis, he should have taken charge of
	12	that scene.
	13	Q	Well, but you’ll agree with me, won’t you, that Mr.
	14	Grayson was there attempting to get the defendant away
	15	from the scene, talk to him, Officer Davis or Lieutenant
	16	Davis was attempting to check out the rest of the house
	17	and make sure that there was not a perpetrator in the
	18	house, help with the victim, and before the two of them
	19	were able to finish those primary two things, check for
	20	perpetrator, render aid to the victim, we had the fire and
	21	ambulance people arrive.
	22	A	I’m not clear in my mind that it happened that
	23	instantaneously.
	24	Q	Okay. Obviously if it went in that manner that’s
	25	some things they just flat out can’t control.

DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

56
	1	A	Could be.
	2	Q	And, of course, we know another thing about the scene
	3	that they couldn’t control, and that is whatever
	4	contamination, if that’s a good word, that Stephen Allen
	5	brought to the scene, things he did to the scene prior to
	6	law enforcements arrival.
	7	A	Absolutely.
	8	Q	And, again, that’s something that law enforcement
	9	cannot control and has to deal with.
	10	A	That’s correct.
	11	Q	Now, you’re aware, I guess, and tell me if you
	12	aren’t, but you’re aware that Mr. Allen was at the scene
	13	some period of time somewhere between 20 -- 20 minutes to
	14	30 minutes before law enforcement was summons?
	15	A	Yes, sir.
	16	Q	And obviously we know that he was doing some things
	17	during that time period. You’re aware of that, correct?
	18	A	Yes.
	19	Q	And all of those things would have to do with what
	20	could happen to the scene.
	21	A	That’s correct.
	22	Q	Okay. So, I’m not suggesting that he did anything to
	23	the scene, but he’s there and he moves, he walks, he
	24	talks. That can have an affect on the scene if I
	25	understand what you’re telling us?
DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

57

	1	A	That is correct.
	2	Q	Now, you are aware that prior to taking any items of
	3	evidence that both Mr. Mason and Mr. Franchini took
	4	photographs of the crime scene.
	5	A	I see generalized photographs of the crime scene,
	6	yes.
	7	Q	Okay. I think, if I understand your position, what
	8	would have been better is not only to take those
	9	generalized photos, as you call them, but then to take
	10	more specifics as to each item as it was taken?
	11	A	It's location, identification of where it is by
	12	measurement by a concrete location and photographing it in
	13	place prior to its removal.
	14	Q	Now, you are aware, aren’t you, Mr. Gluba, that as
	15	Mr. Franchini and Mr. Gardella went through and took items
	16	of evidence, that they did some measurements? You’re
	17	aware of that?
	18	A	I’ve not seen a completed sketch or diagram, a
	19	replication of the scene which would indicate that to me.
	20	Q	Okay. You weren’t furnished that?
	21	A	I have not seen a completed crime scene diagram. No,
	22	sir, I have not.
	23	Q	Okay. So if Officer -- well, let's see. Mr. Gluba,
	24	let me hand you what’s been marked as State's Exhibit No.
	25	51.  And I want you -- do you see all those little numbers
DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

58
	1	throughout that?
	2	A	I do.
	3	Q	Okay. Let’s ignore those for a second, okay, and
	4	let's just look at the diagram. Would you agree with me
	5	that that would be a diagram of the Allen home and it
	6	would contain, in various places, measurements as to
	7	different locations and distances?
	8	A	I agree that it appears to be a diagram of the home,
	9	but at this point I can't speak to whether or not it - -.
	10	what the distances and measurements speak to, what they
	11	represent.
	12	Q	I understand I'm getting you cold with that. You've
	13	never seen that, right?
	14	A	I have not.
	15	Q	Okay. So that is not part of the information you had
	16	in forming your opinions as to what was done in this case?
	17	A	I have not seen this.
	18	Q	I understand you haven't seen it, but you've not had
	19	the opportunity, have you, sir, to review that in making
	20	your observations in this case.
	21	A	No.
	22	Q	And certainly that would be an important piece for
	23	you to have as you made your analysis.
	24	A	It would be one piece coupled with other items, yes,
	25	sir.
DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

59
	1	Q	And this would be an example of one of the type
	2	things that you're talking about that is important for law
	3	enforcement to do?
	4	A	If it is complete and thorough and if it is keyed to
	5	identification of the items of evidence as to exactly
	6	where they're found and also recorded in the photographs
	7	which give the - - which would depict photographically what
	8	we're speaking about, yes.
	9	Q	Okay. So with those qualifiers you can say it was a
	10	good idea that they did the crimes photograph -- crime
	11	scene diagram; we hope it's accurate.
	12	A	Well, accurate and also that there is something else
	13	to support this. The lists of evidence items keyed to
	14	this to tell us exactly where they were, where the items
	15	were at the time they were observed, discovered eventually
	16	preserved and packaged and taken away for analysis.
	17	Because without that - -
	18	Q	Well, wait a second. Are you telling - -
	19			MR. CARLSON: Your Honor, I'm going to
	20	object unless he lets the witness finish his answer.
	21	Q	(By Mr. Corgan)  I'm sorry. Were you through?
	22			MR. CARLSON: I thought you were still
	23	talking.
	24			THE WITNESS: No.
	25	Q	(By Mr. Corgan) Can I assume that you’ve not been
DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

60

	1	furnished an evidence list of what was taken and its
	2	location?
	3	A	I have seen the laboratory report of the items of
	4	evidence. What I'm saying is that the two must come
	5	together with the photographs for a full understanding of
	6	what was done there.
	7	Q	Okay. What you've seen is Mrs. Lee's report and what
	8	she put down that was represented to her of where the
	9	items came from. Is that right?
	10	A	What I have is the submission of evidence from the
	11	police to the lab and then the lab results.
	12	Q	Okay. Well, let me just find it. That's the easiest
	13	way. Let's see if you've seen this. Let me hand you,
	14	sir, State's Exhibit No. 52, and ask you to look at that
	15	and tell me if you’ve had an opportunity to see that
	16	before?
	17	A	No.
	18	Q	What would that appear to you to be?
	19	A	A linear list of items -- it's called evidence list.
	20	So it's a linear list, if you will, 1 to 44, of what is
	21	identified as an evidence list.
	22	Q	Okay. Would that be something akin to what you
	23	designate as an evidence log?
	24	A	Or a chain of custody?
	25	Q	Yes.
DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

61

	1	A	Similar.
	2	Q	Okay. Now - -
	3	A	But it's not - - I notice that it's not dated or
	4	signed or does not indicate where this was done, who was
	5	involved. It doesn't say where - - the location where all
	6	of these items of evidence were found. It doesn't say who
	7	did it. It would not tell me that I could trace from the
	8	moment that the evidence was picked up from the floor or
	9	wherever in whose hands the evidence had been carried. In
	10	other words, a chain of custody from the point of origin
	11	of finding to officer so and so to officer so and so to an
	12	evidence custodian and to a laboratory and to an examiner
	13	in the registered mail or whoever, to you perhaps if you
	14	were involved in the process.
	15	Q	Okay. So it needs to be more complete than this?
	16	A	Much more complete.
	17	Q	And we would need to see the reports that went along
	18	with this.
	19	A	This should stand on its own as a chain of custody
	20	if, in fact, that's it purpose.
	21	Q	Okay. If that's its purpose.
	22	A	And it should be its purpose. It should be a
	23	document which provides a chain of custody, hand to hand,
	24	from the point of its origin where it was found, wherever,
	25	to which officers handled it with dates and times that it
DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

62
	1	was released from officer A to officer B and eventually
	2	into a laboratory.
	3	Q	Okay. I'm with you there. But you're not suggesting
	4	that we can just take this out of context, that this has
	5	been taken from a report that tells us how this was
	6	generated and its purpose. We'd need to see that report
	7 	as well.
	8			MR. CARLSON: Objection, Your Honor, asked
	9	and answered.
	10			THE COURT: I didn’t follow your question.
	11	Rephrase your question.
	12	Q	(By Mr. Corgan) Well, obviously, as you said, this
	13	doesn't have names and dates on it, and if this were
	14	attached to a report explaining what it was we would need
	15	that additional information as well.
	16	A	Well, we actually need signatures of the individuals
	17	involved in the handling of the evidence. We need
	18	something much more detailed than this.
	19	Q	Okay. This ought to be signed.
	20	A	It needs a great deal more, counsel.
	21	Q	Okay. Now, if that particular list were generated as
	22	Mr. Franchini and Officer Gardella went to each item of
	23	evidence and wrote down as they did that the items and
	24	their location, that would be proper procedure?
	25	A	Yes, it would.
DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

63
	1	Q	And you have never been furnished or shown anything
	2	like this?
	3	A	No, I have not. Unless I misunderstand your
	4	question, counsel.
	5	Q	Well, you've never seen that item?
	6	A	That item.
	7	Q	Now, let me hand you something that's entitled
	8	evidence and chain of custody. Is that more of the type
	9	items you're talking about, Mr. Gluba?
	10	A	May I just look at it for a moment?
	11	Q	Sure. Take all the time you need.
	12	A	Counsel, it is a list of items, but there again it
	13	doesn't tell me anything about where these items came
	14	from, who obtained them, who handled them, because I go
	15	from one of five to page -- unless I'm missing something
	16	here we go into - - I see a title report here witnesses not
	17	interviewed, and that seems to be the next document behind
	18	this list of items listed as evidence list and chain of
	19	custody. But what this doesn't tell me is who seized
	20	them, who handled them, the dates and the times.
	21	Q	Okay.
	22	A	Unless I'm misinterpreting that document. I do not
	23	see that there.
	24	Q	Well - -
	25	A	And that should be a part of the chain of custody.
DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

64

	1	Q	Well, okay. What about this. Let's just start with
	2	the hammer. Read to me number one, what that says.
	3	A	"Hammer. This item was seized by Agent Jim Otte of
	4	the O.S.B.I. from the attic of the victim's residence on
	5	June 12, 1990. This item was transferred to Agent Dennis
	6	Franchini of the O.S.B.I. and transported to the O.S.B.I.
	7	laboratory on June the 13th."  Is there a signature trail
	8	on this?
	9	Q	Well, are there some things there at the bottom? But
	10	absent a signature, is that what you're talking about?
	11	A	Yes, in general.
	12	Q	And then we go on to item number two. What's item
	13	number two?
	14	A	Roll of paper towels.
	15	Q	And what does it say?
	16	A	It says, "The chain of custody for this evidence is
	17	the same as item number one."
	18	Q	Is that confusing?
	19	A	Yes, it is.
	20	Q	Okay.
	21	A	Are we speaking of another chain of custody? I'm
	22	confused. This would lead me to think there's another
	23	piece of paper, another document, another chain of
	24	custody.
	25	Q	What's item number one?
DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

65

	1	A	The hammer.
	2	Q	Okay. So help me if I'm wrong, as I read number one,
	3	that says Mr. Otte received a hammer, he gave it to
	4	Franchini and Franchini gave it to Tahlequah. And then
	5	item number two is a roll or paper towels and it says the
	6	same as the chain on item number one. That would tell me,
	7	and maybe I'm wrong, that Otte seized the paper towels,
	8	gave those items to Franchini and Franchini took that to
	9	Tahlequah. And is that the type of thing you're talking
	10	about?
	11	A	This is the type of thing, but I would like to see
	12	something more precise with signatures and dates and times
	13	and whatever.
	14	Q	Okay. Obviously our - - whatever form the O.S.B.I.
	15	uses as far as their evidence list and chain is not
	16	exactly what you're accustomed to in N.I.S.
	17	A	And other agencies that I have worked with and
	18	instructing that I have done and that kind of thing, yes.
	19	Q	But you'd agree that there are different ways to keep
	20	those lists and those items and to some extent it is a
	21	matter of personal preference and what you're use to. The
	22	importance is that we can trace where those items were,
	23	where they've been and where they're going to.
	24	A	I will agree in part that we must be able to trace
	25	where the items have come from, where they've gone, who's
DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

66
	1	handled them, but we also need authentication of whose
	2	hands they have gone through, a signature receipt, a
	3	chain, if you will. If one of the individuals involved
	4	were to become deceased or whatever it’s difficult for us
	5	to authenticate whose hands and custody these items have
	6	gone through. Something more precise.
	7	Q	So some more paperwork as to how it has handled?
	8	A	Well, not just paperwork, counsel, but detail.
	9	Q	Okay.
	10	A	Specific detail.
	11	Q	Well, but nonetheless, either this item, the evidence
	12	chain list, or I believe exhibit 52, you’ve not had an
	13	opportunity to review those as you make your analysis of
	14	this investigation?
	15	A	That is true.
	16	Q	Now, I believe you told us that it's important in an
	17	investigation of this type to assign tasks.
	18	A	That’s correct.
	19	Q	And why is that?
	20	A	That avoids duplication, confusion. It limits the
	21	number of persons at a crime scene so that we can control
	22	access, and it also insures accountability for the
	23	supervisor to make certain that certain tasks assigned
	24	have been done. It's much easier to go to one officer, if
	25	you were my investigator, sir, for me to come to you and
DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

67

	1	ask if you had completed a specific task. It’s much
	2	easier for me as a supervisor to control that case to
	3	management, because I have assigned tasks that are
	4	specific. I can go to a person. It controls who may have
	5	done what. It avoids duplication and avoids confusion.
	6	Q	So if Agent Otte was involved in interviewing,
	7	following up leads, that was his assignment; Agent
	8	Franchini and Investigator Gardella were involved in the
	9	taking of evidence, those would be examples of the
	10	differentiation of tasks involved and the things you’re
	11	talking about.
	12	A	That’s right. And in this instances it seems to be
	13	the second phase of the investigation, if you will. My
	14	understanding is these gentlemen came later after some of
	15	the work had been done by the Bartlesville Police
	16	Department at the crime scene.
	17	Q	Okay. But, again, that’s based on your analysis of
	18	transcripts and reports?
	19	A	And also the viewing of the video.
	20	Q	Viewing of the video. But as far as what was done
	21	and how it was done, you’ve never talked with this
	22	gentlemen right here, have you?
	23	A	Only momentarily on the telephone.
	24	Q	Okay. Or this gentleman.
	25	A	I have not had the privilege.
DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

68

	1	Q	Okay.  As far as what they did, how they did it, why
	2	they did it in a certain manner, we have to rely upon or
	3	you had to rely upon the information furnished to you
	4	through the video tape, crime scene photographs, viewing
	5	of the crime scene, reports and testimony.
	6	A	That is correct. Their testimony.
	7	Q	And apparently at least in two instances you’ve not
	8	been furnished with all reports of information.
	9			MR. CARLSON: Objection. Asked and
	10	answered, Your Honor;
	11			THE COURT: Sustained. It’s been covered.
	12	Q	 (By Mr. Corgan) Now, as you reviewed the reports,
	13	Mr. Gluba, are you aware that Lieutenant Davis was
	14	involved in directing officers in the field in as far as
	15	searching the area around the house?
	16	A	Yes, sir.
	17	Q	And certainly that is something that should be done
	18	and was proper to be done in this case and as an example
	19	of a neighborhood type search that you suggested that
	20	should be done.
	21	A	If it’s done thoroughly and detailed enough.
	22	Q	Right. But -- so, if I understand, you’re not saying
	23	that they did the wrong thing in that regard; you just
	24	have to look at how well they did it?
	25	A	How well it was done and if more should have been
DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

69
	1	done.
	2	Q	But, again, you’ve not had a chance to talk to Mr.
	3	Grayson, Mr. Davis, Mr. Cline, Mr. Remington, Chief
	4	Holland, any of the officers involved in the search?
	5	A	Have not. I relied on those reports, which if
	6	complete and thorough should tell me everything that was
	7	done.
	8	Q	Well, now, you know, and I think you’ll agree with
	9	me, won’t you, Mr. Gluba, that officers's reports
	10	sometimes leave something to be desired as far as getting
	11	everything down on paper?
	12			MR. CARLSON: Objection, Your Honor,
	13	argumentative.
	14			THE COURT: Overruled. Go ahead.
	15	A	Would you repeat please?
	16	Q	(By Mr. Corgan) Sure. You know, I made it a hard
	17	question. You would agree with me that many, many
	18	instances those field officers, those guys at the scene,
	19	have got a lot more stored up here in their head,
	20	observations they made, things they know, than what they
	21	put on paper?
	22	A	Counsel, if that the case is managed properly the
	23	supervisor should ensure that those reports are as
	24	thorough and detailed to equip you the prosecutor and
	25	everyone else in the system with every detail that they
DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

70

	1	can extract from that officer.
	2	Q	Mr. Gluba, I agree with what you’re saying about
	3	reports, but let me - - I think my question was clear. If
	4	it wasn’t I’ll try to make it clearer. But wouldn’t you
	5	agree with me from your experience being involved in crime
	6	scenes, dealing with officers that are first responders,
	7	that in many, many, many, many instances what those
	8	officers have up here and what they know, they do not
	9	always put down in their reports?
	10			MR. CARLSON: Objection, Your Honor, asked
	11	and answered.
	12			THE COURT: You may answer.
	13	A	I agree.
	14	Q	I mean, that’s the problem we face all the time,
	15	right?
	16	A	Very well may be.
	17	Q	Well, you know it is, don’t you?
	18	A	Sure.
	19	Q	Sure. And I wouldn’t be the first D.A. to get after
	20	a patrol officer and say, golly, why didn’t you put that
	21	in your report.
	22			MR. BUCHANAN: Judge, Mr. Corgan cannot
	23	testify. That’s leading.
	24			THE COURT: Sustained to the form of the
	25	question.
DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

71

	1	Q	(By Mr. Corgan) Now, you’ll agree with me, Mr.
	2	Gluba, that trace evidence at crime scenes may or may not
	3	be found.
	4	A	I don’t agree with that.
	5	Q	We always find trace evidence?
	6	A	There is something there to be found if it is looked
	7	at properly.
	8	Q	Okay. Can we date trace evidence?
	9	A	I can’t be that general. You’re going to have to
	10	give me a specific incident.
	11	Q	Okay.
	12	A	Give me an example please.
	13	Q	Well, let’s take this case for example. And since
	14	we’ve picked on the court reporter, let’s say that we find
	15	her hair at the crime scene. Okay. Now, at that point do
	16	we know anything more than her hair was at the crime
	17	scene?
	18	A	Counsel, that’s a wide open question because we’re
	19	going to subject that to analysis which may tell us a
	20	great deal.
	21	Q	But let’s start with the principle that we find her
	22	hair. It’s been identified as her hair.
	23	A	Okay.
	24	Q	Now, just from that would you agree with me we can’t
	25	determine when that hair got there?
DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

72
	1	A	No.
	2	Q	And that’s what you’re talking about as far as
	3	further analysis?
	4	A	That’s correct.
	5	Q	Now, in dealing with trace evidence, we have a
	6	further problem when we’re dealing with a scene where
	7	people are there - - how do I put this - - have been there a
	8	lot before. Would you agree with that?
	9	A	Can you - - I’m a little confused.
	10	Q	Okay. Let’s - - Let me see if I can do better.
	11	Well, let’s take my office for example. And I’m talking
	12	about my physical office on the second floor. Obviously
	13	my fingerprints ought to be all over that place. I mean,
	14	we would guess that, right?
	15	A	Right.
	16	Q	Let’s say I’m a suspect in a crime that happened in
	17	that office. Okay?
	18	A	Okay.
	19	Q	Now, can we - - we want to put me there at the scene
	20	of the crime, and one of the ways we want to do that is by
	21	fingerprints, okay? And we find that sure enough my
	22	prints are there, but can we, from that trace evidence,
	23	tell me when I was there and if I was there at the time of
	24	the crime?
	25	A	That’s difficult for me to answer. If your secretary
DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

73
	1	had just sat a cup of coffee down and you handled it at
	2	that moment and she later can tell us that cup of coffee
	3	went in there at exact time, then we could time your
	4	presence there. But if you’re talking about fingerprints
	5	elsewhere, on your desk, on your chair, in your bathroom
	6	or wherever, of course not. There’s not a clock or
	7	calendar on the.
	8	Q	So trace evidence in and of itself may or may not aid
	9	us in an investigation?
	10	A	Depends on what it is.
	11	Q	Would you agree with that?
	12	A	Yes.
	13	Q	Okay. Now, I want to ask you these - - I think we’ve
	14	got a photograph somewhere of the books. I don’t know,
	15	but you remember that scene, right?
	16	A	I believe so. The books?
	17	Q	The books down on the floor. And as I understand
	18	your opinion of that to be that it appeared to you that
	19	there had been a struggle there?
	20	A	Could be.
	21	Q	Could be?
	22	A	That is correct.
	23	Q	Could be a struggle?
	24	A	Movement.
	25	Q	Could be a set up?

DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

74
	1	A	perhaps.
	2	Q	I mean, we can’t rule that out, can we?
	3	A	No, we can’t rule it out. We have to look at all
	4	aspects.
	5	Q	But if we’re looking at the books, one explanation is
	6	a struggle, one explanation is a set up, correct?
	7	A	Might be two among many --
	8	Q	Okay.
	9	A	-- explanations.
	10	Q	Okay. But those are two. Those are two. Boy, I
	11	don’t know what to do about this screen door. You’ve read
	12	the reports, haven’t you?
	13	A	I have.
	14	Q	And I guess you know that Mason - - I’m sorry. I
	15	messed up. That Gardella and Franchini tested it. You’re
	16	aware of that, aren’t you?
	17	A	I am.
	18	Q	And what did they find.
	19	A	They said they couldn’t open the door. All I know is
	20	what I was able to do when I visited there in February.
	21	Q	Right. In February you got it open, right?
	22	A	I did.
	23	Q	Okay. Now, you’re not suggesting, are you, sir, that
	24	either Mr. Franchini or Mr. Gardella made that up?
	25	A	Absolutely not.  I’m not suggesting anything. I’m

DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

75

	1	merely saying what I was able to do.
	2	Q	All right. You point out that some, what, eight or
	3	nine months later when you tugged on it it opened?
	4	A	Not someone.  All I’m testifying to is that when I
	5	was there in February I tugged on the door and it opened.
	6	Q	Okay. After they had, obviously.
	7	Q	Yes.
	8	Q	Now, Mr. Gluba, you said something on direct, and I
	9	want to make sure I got this down right, and help me with
	10	the phraseology, Something was said about a hammer and
	11	being consistent and then to doing something. Would you
	12	repeat that for me?
	13	A	I don’t recall the context.  If you can refresh my
	14	memory perhaps I can.
	15	Q	Well, I believe Mr. Carlson asked you something to
	16	the extent about well, if you received information about
	17	it not being consistent would you go out and look for
	18	another weapon. Does that - -
	19	A	Okay. I remember.
	20	Q	Okay. Tell me what you meant by that.
	21	A	I would continue the investigation throughout the
	22	house, throughout the yard, the neighborhood or whatever
	23	to make certain as to whether or not we could locate
	24	another items that could have been used as a weapon.
	25	Q	Okay. Now, do you make any type of distinction
DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

76
	1	between an injury produced by a certain object being
	2	consistent versus the injury being typically
	3	characteristic? From your experience are those different
	4	or the same?
	5	A	Well, I’m not qualified to speak because to do that
	6	you need a forensic pathologist, you need someone who
	7	really knows, and I understand Mr. Baden is going to
	8	testify and he’s one of the best in the world. I’m not
	9	qualified. I’m not a forensic pathologist.
	10	Q	Oh, you know Dr. Baden.
	11	A	I know of him, yes.
	12	Q	Okay. I guess you don’t know Dr. Himphill?
	13	A	No, sir, I do not.
	14	Q	So you can’t tell us about his qualifications?
	15	A	No, sir.
	16	Q	But if he is competent in his field, and we hope he
	17	is, you wouldn’t quarrel with his conclusions?
	18	A	Based on what I know, no.
	19	Q	Now, if I understand correctly, in your 20 plus years
	20	you have never lost a tape?
	21	A	Lost a what? I’m sorry.
	22	Q	A tape.
	23	A	No, sir.
	24	Q	Have any of your subordinates ever done that?
	25	A	I’ve never had the occasion of lost evidence on a


DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

77

	1	criminal investigation. Either myself or one of my
	2	subordinates.
	3	Q	Never ever? N.I.S. has never ever lost a tape?
	4	A	That’s not what you asked me.
	5	Q	Okay. I’m sorry. Tell me what potion of N.I.S.
	6	we’re talking about that has never lost a tape.
	7	A	I have never lost a tape, colleagues that I have
	8	worked with in the same office or those subordinates under
	9	my supervision have never lost a tape.
	10	Q	Would you agree with me that the loss of a tape as
	11	spilling coffee at a crime scene can both have an effect
	12	on the results?
	13	A	Yes, it can.
	14	Q	And certainly that’s unfortunately something that
	15	happened to you, right?
	16	A	That’s right.
	17	Q	And that could be somewhat akin - -
	18	A	But that cup of coffee was not evidentiary value.
	19	The tape is important to that case.
	20	Q	But what effect would that coffee have as it spilled
	21	onto the trace evidence?
	22	A	Well, fortunately it was outside. It was on my way
	23	in. But I don’t think we’re talking about the same thing.
	24	I think we’re talking apples and oranges. The loss of a
	25	tape or an item of evidence is something significant,

DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

78
	1	because that is something that should be safeguarded.
	2	Q	Okay.  As should the scene. You agree with me that
	3	hindsight is always 20/20?
	4	A	Sir, in everything we do from football on Sunday
	5	afternoon to other things also.
	6	Q	And I bet you’d agree with me as we look back at
	7	crime scenes we always scratch our head and say, gee, you
	8	know, I bet there’s something else I could have done.
	9	A	Perhaps that’s human nature.
	10	Q	And, gee, maybe I should have done this. We always
	11	worry about that.
	12	A	Correct.
	13			MR. CORGAN: Thank you, sir. That’s all I
	14	have.
	15	- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

LH 2000