Opinion ID: 2639434
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Evidence Admitted at the 1994 Reference Hearing

Text: As recounted in detail in our opinion in the automatic appeal ( People v. Cox, supra, 30 Cal.4th at pp. 929-930, 135 Cal. Rptr.2d 272, 70 P.3d 277), Joanna testified at trial in 1985 that she accompanied petitioner and Denise to a wooded area near Placerville. She heard Denise screaming and saw her running in the nude, her hands behind her back, with petitioner in pursuit. Petitioner caught up with Denise, pushed her down, and stabbed her. Joanna then ran to a road, flagged down a passing car, and got a ride back to Placerville with a person named Joe. Joanna recanted her trial testimony on January 16, 1992, but the circumstances surrounding her recantation were suspect. In 1990, Joanna separated from her husband, Allen Dwyer. The two became embroiled in a bitter custody battle over their daughter. In March and April of 1990, Dwyer, Anita Hooser (Dwyer's mother), and Laura Lawrence (Dwyer's friend) executed signed declarations, prepared by the State Public Defender's Office, that stated Joanna told them she had lied at trial. Dwyer further claimed that Joanna told him she was passed out in a park at the time she claimed to have witnessed the murder. On April 27, 1990, Joanna executed a responding declaration denying she ever told Dwyer, Hooser, or Lawrence that she had lied at trial; she admitted that she originally had lied to police shortly after the murder because she was afraid they would think she was involved in the murder if she said she was a witness; she added that her trial testimony was true. Joanna stated that Dwyer's allegations stemmed from the custody dispute and the fact she had filed a child abuse claim against Dwyer.
In September 1990, Marilyn Mobert, an investigator with the State Public Defender's Office, armed with the Dwyer declaration, arrived at Joanna's house unannounced and, in front of Joanna's daughter, accused Joanna of having lied at trial and threatened her with a perjury charge. She told Joanna that a witness would place Joanna in a park in the late night hours of June 12, 1984, which would show that Joanna's trial testimony about witnessing the murder was a lie. (No such witness ever came forward.) Mobert then told Joanna that she would not go to prison and lose her children if she told the truth. Mobert suggested that there was a solution; Joanna could hire a lawyer who could arrange a grant of immunity. Joanna could then safely go to court, recant her trial testimony, receive no punishment and keep her children. Joanna testified she was so upset by Mobert that she burst into tears. Immediately thereafter, Joanna phoned El Dorado County Sheriff's Sergeant Bill Wilson in a panic. Joanna told him that she did not want this case to interfere with her custody dispute. Sergeant Wilson thereafter told his wife that Joanna might recant her trial testimony. His fears were realized. On January 16, 1992, Joanna, in the presence of her attorney, formally recanted her trial testimony after she had been granted immunity.
Dr. Frank Dougherty, a psychologist, conducted a portion of the interview of Joanna that took place on January 16, 1992. Joanna told Dr. Dougherty she did not see petitioner kill Denise. She claimed she had lied about witnessing Denise's murder because she felt ... pressure whether it be [from her] own self or from the fact that she felt she had to say something significant. She asserted she had not seen petitioner on June 12, 1984, the night Denise was murdered. Joanna claimed to remember an incident in which a cement block was thrown through the windshield of a police car (see People v. Cox, supra, 30 Cal.4th at pp. 928-929, 135 Cal.Rptr.2d 272, 70 P.3d 277), but after that point she was not sure what she did for the next ... hour or so, but recalled that she ended up sleeping at Bruce Nesthus's house. She said she was not frightened when she was with Nesthus and did not hide behind him when cars drove by. She said she made up the little details of the murder, like throwing up once she got out of petitioner's car at the murder scene, as I went along. Joanna also stated that in 1987, after the trial was concluded, she had a conversation with Sergeant Wilson in which she told him that she had lied at trial about getting a ride back from the scene of the murder with a person named Joe. She added that she may have told Sergeant Wilson that she lied about seeing Denise get stabbed, but she had heard Denise scream. Sergeant Wilson, she said, told her that these details were not significant. Dr. Dougherty pointed out that Joanna told him, back in November 1984, that on the night of Denise's murder, she had seen Denise at the Stancil's Toyota dealership and near the tunnel underpass. Joanna replied that she made that up. Dr. Dougherty asked why she made that up, given that she had not yet told him she was a witness to the murder. Joanna replied: I don't know. I don't really have a good reason for it. When asked why she told Fay Harnage and her husband, El Dorado County Sheriffs Detective Erol Harnage, that she knew something about the case when she now claimed she knew nothing, Joanna replied: I ... I really don't know the answer to that, except that I was a very confused teenager at the time and ... ah ... I ... I don't have a good explanation for it.
As more fully explained in our opinion in the automatic appeal ( People v. Cox, supra, 30 Cal.4th at pp. 931-932, 135 Cal. Rptr.2d 272, 70 P.3d 277), on two occasions prior to trial, Joanna led Dr. Dougherty and El Dorado Sheriffs deputies, Detective Harnage and Sergeant Wilson to the scene of Denise's murder. The first time, on November 2, 1984, Joanna directed them to Ferrari Mill Road as far as the intersection known as Four Corners, where she became nonresponsive. On November 6, 1984, they returned to Four Corners and Joanna, who had started to cry, recognized a tree stump painted with yellow paint and told them to go straight ahead but, after they had gone about a half-mile, said they were on the wrong road. They returned to Four Corners and Joanna pointed to the road on their left, which was the road leading to where Denise's remains had been found. During trial, Joanna returned to Four Corners with Sergeant Wilson. She told him to drive straight ahead but after they had gone about 75 yards she told him to return to the intersection and directed him to the right. After they had gone about 150 yards, she again had him return to the intersection and take the road to the left, which was the road leading to where Denise's remains had been found. When they reached the area where Denise's body had been found, she asked Sergeant Wilson to stop the car. She exclaimed, This is the spot, and began to cry. During the January 16, 1992 interview in which Joanna recanted her testimony, Dr. Dougherty asked Joanna how she was able to give directions to the murder location. Joanna said: We drove up there, and the only reason why I did know was that I, somehow I ... I knew that it was off of Ferrari Mill Road. She continued: And so I was able to show you that was where it was. And I don't know if I read that in the paper. There's a possibility that maybe the bodies had been found there ... or ... ahm ... somebody maybe had said that to me. But I think it was through the paper. Dr. Dougherty asked Joanna how she knew how to get to Ferrari Mill Road, adding that he did not know how to get to that location. She replied: I didn't really know. Joanna continued: I didn't really know, but ... since I had found Debbie's clothes approximately, I don't know, a few miles around that area, I assumed that it was in the same area. And I was looking for the road. When asked how she knew to get to the Sly Park area, Joanna replied: Ah, I had found Debbie's clothes in that ... in a similar area. I'm not sure if it's the same road but called Camp Creek which is up Sly Park, same area. Later, Joanna was asked if it was just a coincidence that she began crying when they reached the scene of the murder. Joanna replied: I have no idea how I did that, I have no idea. In fact, Joanna claimed she learned the location of the body was on Ferrari Mill Road, Not long before they ... they had taken me out there. I, in fact, maybe it had been the day before.

On direct examination at the reference hearing, Joanna made several claims that were inconsistent with the 1985 trial evidence, her 1985 trial testimony, and her 1992 recantation. Joanna testified that she did not recall seeing Placerville Police Officer Phillip Dannaker upon her return to Placerville on October 30, 1984, and said she spoke to Fay Harnage about a week or a week and a half after her return and not, as she had testified at trial, on the day of her return. Joanna testified that she was concerned when the El Dorado County Sheriffs deputies wanted her to take them to where she claimed Denise was murdered because they would find out she was lying. But she had read in the paper that Ferrari Mill Road was where the bodies were found and she knew probably where it was, knowing it was past the second dam and knowing where I'd found Debbie's clothes, that it was probably nearby. Joanna claimed she had specific knowledge of Ferrari Mill Road because of two newspaper articles in the Mountain Democrat, dated August 13 and 22, 1984, that mentioned where the girls' skeletons were found. Specifically, the August 13 article stated that female skeletons were found within three quarters of a mile of each other off Ferrari Mill Road, which runs off Mormon Emigrant Trail (Iron Mountain Road) near the second dam and Jenkinson Lake. The August 22 article stated that dental charts determined that skeletal remains found off Ferrari Mill Road Aug[ust] 4 were those of Lynda and Denise. Joanna claimed she was familiar with that area because [t]hat was the area near where [Debbie's] clothes were found. When the referee pointed out to Joanna that the area where Debbie's clothes were found was several (actually 12) miles away from where Denise's body was located, Joanna hesitantly replied: Well, it was stillit was several miles, but it was near comparative to it being out in the country out there. She claimed not to have the faintest idea where the bodies were found on Ferrari Mill Road itself. Joanna asserted that, contrary to her trial testimony, petitioner never requested anal intercourse from her. She stated that, contrary to her trial testimony, Joe never gave her a ride off the mountain, but that Joe was a real person by the name of Joe Shamblin. Joanna stated that when Sergeant Wilson, prior to petitioner's jury trial in 1984, told her they thought they had found Joe, she lied to Sergeant Wilson and told him that that was the wrong Joe because the Joe who had given her a ride had moved to Reno, Nevada. Joanna testified that on June 22, 1985, during trial, Sergeant Wilson, without warning, told her they needed to go to the murder scene. Once they got to Four Corners, Wilson told Joanna to take him to the murder location. Joanna knew the first two roads she directed Wilson to drive on were incorrect simply because Wilson was very agitated. As she knew there was only one road left, Joanna said she lied when she said, I knew this was the road all along. She knew where to stop on this road because Wilson was silent the whole time on this road, but he just was completely silent, so she knew she must be near the right place. She said she was lying when she pointed out to Wilson different areas where she did things and where she saw things the night of the murder. Joanna testified that she lied in 1990 when she signed the declaration stating that her trial testimony was true. She claimed, however, that her 1992 recantation was truthful.
Joanna testified that, for a period of a week or two weeks after she found Debbie's clothes, she checked the Mountain Democrat newspaper for articles on petitioner's case and learned about Ferrari Mill Road from two articles, dated August 13 and 22, 1984. She agreed neither article gave directions to Ferrari Mill Road. Joanna volunteered that the only reason she was able to find Ferrari Mill Road was because she saw a road sign. She said she had never noticed the road before November 1984. Once on Ferrari Mill Road, she guessed which direction to go when the road forked before they reached Four Corners. Joanna claimed her clothes were not soiled or dirty at any time when she was with Bruce Nesthus. She claimed she never told Fay Harnage I was there. Nor was she hysterical when she told her story to Fay Harnage; she was just talking about the case to her. She agreed, however, that Fay Harnage was a complete stranger and she met her by accident. Joanna also said she lied when she said she recognized the tree stump with the yellow markings. Joanna was reminded that in her 1992 recantation statement, she had acknowledged that after telling Darlene that she found Debbie's clothes, Darlene replied that she and petitioner had just been to Camp Creek, even though Joanna had not mentioned that Camp Creek was where she found the clothes. Joanna was then confronted with her reference hearing testimony that she did tell Darlene she found the clothes at Camp Creek, and Darlene gasp[ed] because she and petitioner had just been there. Joanna said she could not recall which version was truthful. Joanna said she did not recall telling Officer Dannaker on August 12, 1984 that she had been drinking with Denise, that she had walked with Denise to the Locust Street underpass, had watched Denise walk through the underpass towards the foster home and, at that same time, had seen petitioner drop off Darlene at the foster home. (See People v. Cox, supra, 30 Cal.4th at p. 929, fn. 2, 135 Cal.Rptr.2d 272, 70 P.3d 277.) Joanna agreed, however, that if she made that statement to Officer Dannaker, she would have been telling him the truth.

In February 1988, Kevin S., Darlene's brother, signed a declaration in which he claimed that in the summer of 1984, Darlene told him she witnessed the murder of one of the girls and her job was to fold clothes and clean up after the murder. In 1988, Sallie Sanders executed a similar declaration, wherein she claimed that in 1984 Darlene told her she witnessed a murder. In response, Darlene executed her own declaration on April 15, 1988, in which she said that in 1984 she was having a very hard time with her feelings about petitioner because she believed he killed the three girls. That summer, she found a skirt in petitioner's trunk that looked like it belonged to Denise or Debbie. There were stains on it that could have been blood. Petitioner denied the clothes belonged to Denise or Debbie and denied that the stains were blood. Darlene said that the only clothing she ever handled or folded was the clothing she found in the trunk, and she was not present when any of the girls were killed, nor did she ever tell anyone that she witnessed any such event.
On October 23, 1990, Tom Elliot and Marilyn Mobert, investigators for the State Public Defender, made a cold call on Darlene at her residence in Rancho Cordova. At the reference hearing, Mobert testified that her assignment was to acquire any information that would cast doubt on the trial testimony of Joanna and Darlene. Mobert stated that this was the first time she met Darlene. She added that she had reviewed Darlene's April 15, 1988, declaration prior to the interview. During the interview, Darlene told the investigators, in essence, that the 1984 murders were part of a satanic cult ritual. One week later, on October 30, 1990, Mobert returned to Darlene's residence. She brought a tape recorder and a six-page declaration prepared by a defense attorney that memorialized the October 23 interview. Darlene signed the declaration prior to the tape-recorded interview. In the declaration, Darlene claimed that in August 1984, she told the trial prosecutor, Ron Tepper, that she was with petitioner at a campsite on North South Road the night Debbie disappeared. Darlene claimed that petitioner drugged her, tied her arms and legs and put her in the backseat of his car. Joanna and Debbie were in the front seat and they drove into the woods. Joanna pulled Debbie from the car and orally copulated her. Debbie was secured to an altar and nine men had sex with her. Afterwards, petitioner asked Joanna for a knife. He cut open Debbie's stomach, pulled out a fetus, and the members of the group ate the fetus. Petitioner cut Debbie's throat and all members of the group drank her blood. Darlene said she passed out and woke the next day. Three days later she lost control of herself and eventually was sent to a psychiatric unit. She added that all three girls were pregnant when killed, and all three were killed as sacrifices in satanic rituals. Joanna was the bait to get the girls into the car. Darlene said she married petitioner in September 1984 so she would not be the next sacrifice. Darlene claimed petitioner threatened to kill her the day before he was arrested, but she ran away from him. Darlene claimed she lied at trial, with Ron Tepper's permission, in order to protect her family. Mobert testified that she met with Darlene again on November 9, 1990, to do some clean-up type questions. Her next visit with Darlene, she said, was in Reno, Nevada, on April 1, 1993. Mobert stated that she was accompanied by a defense attorney and their visit was unannounced. During this interview, Darlene told Mobert that the satanic story was more than likely a dream and now she wanted to tell the truth, that petitioner was not responsible for the murders. Mobert acknowledged that Darlene had a low IQ and was susceptible to suggestion. On December 21, 1993, Mobert, accompanied by a defense attorney, interviewed Darlene regarding Darlene's claim that petitioner did not commit the murders. Mobert denied discussing the subject of immunity with Darlene during this interview. Darlene, however, did mention that she was afraid she would lose custody of her children if she testified at the reference hearing that petitioner did not commit the murders. Mobert was recalled to the witness stand the following day. She testified that she now remembered that the subject of immunity for Darlene arose at the December 21, 1993 interview. Mobert added that the subject of immunity was also raised by Darlene during an April 1992 interview that took place in Placerville. Mobert added that on a date after December 21, 1993, she was taking Darlene and Mark Wilson (Darlene's husband at the time) back to Reno after a trial preparation session, and Mark Wilson informed Mobert that Darlene would not testify unless she received a grant of immunity. Prior to testifying at the reference hearing, Darlene received immunity from the El Dorado District Attorney's Office for any false testimony she might have given at petitioner's preliminary hearing and jury trial. At the reference hearing, Darlene recanted significant portions of her trial testimony.
On November 9, 1984, and on December 4, 1984, Darlene spoke to El Dorado County Sheriffs deputies Sergeant Wilson and Detective Harnage. The interviews were tape-recorded. Transcripts of three tape recordings from the November 9, 1984, interview and the transcript from the one tape recording of the December 4, 1984, interview were admitted into evidence at the reference hearing. These tapes and transcripts had not been introduced into evidence at the 1985 jury trial.
Present during this interview were Darlene, El Dorado Sheriffs deputies Sergeant Wilson and Detective Harnage, and Darlene's mother and stepfather, Shirley and Gerald W. Darlene said that the night Denise disappeared, petitioner dropped her off at the foster home about 11:00 p.m. Joanna came home the next day and said she had seen Denise walking through the tunnel the previous night. She said petitioner never talked to her about Denise, except for one comment shortly after Denise's disappearance. Darlene told petitioner that Denise was gone, and he replied that Denise knew better than to spend time with Joanna. Sergeant Wilson pressed Darlene for more information and promised to protect her. Darlene said she was petrified of petitioner and that he had married her so she would not talk to the police. The sheriffs deputies told Darlene that petitioner was the last person to see Lynda and Denise alive. Darlene stated that petitioner knew Lynda and her parents.
Joanna was present during this second taped interview. Sergeant Wilson informed Darlene that Joanna had given them a whole lot of information and Joanna was going to tell her what she saw. Joanna asked Darlene why she said to her, the night of August 12, that it was gonna all be over, and [petitioner] would be arrested. Darlene replied that she did not know why she said that. Sergeant Wilson asked Joanna to tell Darlene what happened after petitioner took Darlene home the night Denise disappeared. Joanna said she was not able to tell Darlene because she did not want to upset her. Wilson then told Darlene that Joanna saw what petitioner had done to Denise. Darlene said she did not know anything. When her mother pressed her for information, Darlene replied, I don't know nothin', Mom. I swear to GodI didn't know nothin'[petitioner] wouldn't tell me. I tried to get it out of him. He wouldhe would just jump on my case ... if I talk[ed] about Debbie and Denise. Darlene said that on August 12, she led Placerville police officers to where she thought the bodies were because she and petitioner camped in that area and she had the feeling he did it. (See People v. Cox, supra, 30 Cal.4th at pp. 940-941, 135 Cal.Rptr.2d 272, 70 P.3d 277.) Darlene agreed she had said, [petitioner] did it. Sergeant Wilson told Darlene that petitioner could not be arrested until she told them something. Her mother asked Darlene how many more 13- and 14-year-old girls would have to be buried before petitioner was put away. Detective Harnage and her mother told Darlene that petitioner was sick and Darlene, by cooperating, could help him. Sergeant Wilson praised Joanna for coming forward and told Darlene that Joanna looked so good because they had helped her. He wanted Darlene to be protected in the same way they protected Joanna. He explained that Darlene, like Joanna, was entitled to witness funds, and that she could use the money to buy herself clothes or get her hair done. Sergeant Wilson reiterated that it was not safe for Darlene because people in town were after petitioner. Joanna stated that she and others talked about beating up petitioner on Halloween. Darlene said petitioner had more guns again and, if he were bothered, the police would have to bring out the SWAT team. Detective Harnage reiterated that Darlene was the last piece to the jigsaw puzzle. Sergeant Wilson explained that, like Joanna, maybe Darlene knew something but didn't want to remember it. When asked why she told people at the foster home that Debbie was not coming home, Darlene said, I had a feeling there was something goin' on, because she had never seen [petitioner] act so funny before. Sergeant Wilson continued to insist that petitioner must have told her something. She said he did not.
With Joanna no longer present, Sergeant Wilson informed Darlene that [y]our mom told us what you told her, but said they wanted to hear the information from Darlene herself. Darlene agreed that petitioner knew Lynda, and that he kept guns and knives in his car. Darlene added that a week or two before any of the girls were missing, petitioner said he would eliminate ... three girls in the foster home and eliminate three more. Darlene said he never brought up that topic again. Darlene stated that petitioner kept one gun under a quilt in the back of his car, another gun under his seat, a knife above the sun visor on the passenger side, and handcuffs underneath the quilt. Petitioner told her Debbie was next or some way he put it, and that was [a]fter the two ones have missed, have gone. She told the deputies that she was afraid of petitioner and had nothing more to add.
On December 4,1984, El Dorado County Sheriffs deputies Sergeant Wilson and Detective Harnage again interviewed Darlene. Darlene's stepfather was present. Sergeant Wilson asked Darlene if she recalled everything that I told you at the house today about what could happen, and, things like that and offered her immunity from prosecution, adding: So, don't be scared about going to jail, because I don't think that you have done anything that you can go to jail for, but we wannawe have to make sure. Sergeant Wilson then asked, Why don't you tell everything that you know about Denise? Darlene informed them that petitioner, at the Exxon station, had indeed admitted that he killed Denise and that he intended to kill Joanna but she ran away. Darlene said this conversation took place [b]efore he got a hold of Debbie but, when prompted, agreed it occurred a day after Debbie disappeared. Darlene said he picked up Denise and Joanna to go to a party but instead took them to the woods. He said he grabbed Denise, stabbed her and strangled her, took off her clothes, and laid her body by a log. Darlene stated that petitioner picked up Lynda, told her he was going to take her to a party, and pretty soon he takes her to North South Road, where Denise is, and he says he did the same thing as to Denise. Took all her clothes off, and everything and threw them away, and they were both in the same places as Debbie and Denise. Petitioner said he left Lynda's body close to Denise. Darlene added that petitioner first said he took off Denise and Lynda's clothes, handcuffed them, tied their feet with his hiking rope, had sex with them while they were alive and then stabbed them. She said petitioner learned to tie weird knots in the Cub Scouts. Petitioner told Darlene he was paid $150 to kill Denise and Debbie, and was paid $120 to kill Lynda. Darlene said petitioner told her he seen [Debbie] at the park and he was waiting for her to get done with the party and he seen her walking, so he pulled up, asked her [if she wanted] a ride up to the house and he took her up to the . .. same place. Petitioner added that he picked up Debbie after he dropped off Darlene, and he put Debbie's body somewhere further away from Lynda and Denise. He told her he threw Debbie's clothes off the bridge. She said petitioner married her so she could not testify against him and he would get [her] if she testified against him. She said she was too scared to have told the deputies this earlier. Sergeant Wilson asked Darlene if it worried her when he said she could be arrested if she withheld information. She replied yes. Sergeant Wilson told Darlene the threat of arrest [m]ade you start thinking about it. He added that she did not do anything wrong, but if she had done something wrong, that would be different, and they would have to talk about immunity. Darlene said petitioner told her he brandished a knife to get Denise and Joanna in his car. She then backtracked and said Denise made Joanna get in the car. She said that petitioner had contracts on many girls, including Joanna. Shirley W. arrived. She confirmed that petitioner had ended his relationship with Darlene on November 7, 1984. Darlene stated that petitioner finally told her about the murders because he already had a contract on me. When asked why he wanted these girls dead, Darlene said that petitioner told her if you have to kill these people ... the devil will not take their soul. She said that petitioner believed in devil worship. Darlene, contrary to her earlier statement, now said petitioner put Lynda's body close to Debbie's and Darlene's bodies, [b]y a log. She said petitioner never mentioned Ferrari Mill Road. She said she found Debbie's unicorn key chain underneath the front seat of petitioner's car while they were cleaning the car after Debbie's murder. Petitioner said, now you know, and that is when he decided to tell her everything. Darlene said petitioner told her to put the key chain back among Debbie's belongings at the foster home and be quiet about it. The sheriffs deputies later found the key chain among Debbie's belongings. It had no keys on it.

As noted, Darlene testified under a grant of immunity for any perjury she may have committed at petitioner's preliminary hearing and jury trial. She recanted most of her trial testimony. She said that petitioner never told her three would be eliminated from the foster home and three more. On the night of Denise's disappearance, petitioner was cleaning his gun and sharpening his knife and said he had to take care of business, but that phrase referred to a poker game, as he sometimes gambled for weapons instead of money. Taking care of business, she emphasized, did not mean petitioner was going to kill anyone. As to the night of Debbie's murder, Darlene now said that petitioner did not pull a knife from his car's visor and say he had to take care of business. Darlene said she did find Debbie's unicorn key chain in petitioner's car, but that incident occurred before Debbie was murdered, not a day or two after Debbie's disappearance. She said she made up the key chain story because it linked Debbie to petitioner's car. She said petitioner did not confess his crimes to her at the Exxon station, and never told her at any time that he murdered the three girls. After petitioner moved out of the residence he shared with Darlene in early November 1984, Darlene had one contact with sheriffs deputies that took place at the Placerville Police Department. She said she kept repeating that she did not know anything, but everyone refused to accept her answers. It made her very upset that they were accusing [petitioner] of something he didn't do. Joanna told her that she, Joanna, saw petitioner kill Denise. Darlene said everyone told her she was next and offered her protection. The sheriffs deputies informed her that Joanna was in witness protection. Darlene said she believed she would have to tell them about petitioner to get the same help. Darlene stated that after the November 1984 interview, the sheriffs deputies would not leave [her] alone. Her parents told her she would wind up in prison. The sheriffs deputies accused her of being part of a conspiracy. Finally, in December 1984, she gave a statement implicating petitioner because she wanted them to get out of my face. All of the details she provided about the murders from the December 4 interview she had learned from the detectives, Joanna, or the newspaper. The sheriffs deputies stopped harassing her after she told them of petitioner's confession.
Darlene said she loved petitioner when she testified at the jury trial, and denied he had left her for another woman in November of 1984. She said petitioner was innocent and she was pressured into lying. She denied camping with petitioner on North South Road. But when confronted with her trial statement that she camped on North South Road with petitioner five, six, or seven times, she admitted that was true. She admitted seeing a knife, guns and handcuffs in petitioner's car. Darlene claimed she did not know what time petitioner took her home the night Denise was murdered. That night, after petitioner dropped her off at the foster home, she smoked a cigarette on the hill and saw Joanna wave down petitioner and talk to him. Darlene said that Joanna never got in his car. She said that she did not see Denise at that time. Darlene said that petitioner never said he knew Lynda's parents. When confronted with her contrary jury trial testimony, Darlene said she was referring not to petitioner, but to her stepfather, because he knew Lynda's parents. She said her stepfather asked her to lie about this incident. Darlene agreed she was at Benham Park with petitioner the night Debbie disappeared. She saw Debbie drinking in the park. Darlene left the car and went to use the bathroom. Petitioner did not stay in the car, but was sitting on a picnic bench when she returned. At the jury trial she said he did stay in the car. She explained this inconsistency: Yes. He was sitting in the car because we were getting everythingwe went and was sitting on the picnic bench. At the jury trial, she made up the story about petitioner pulling a knife from his visor and saying this is a good night for business. When asked where did that detail come from, she replied, From the top of my head. When asked what was the purpose of it, she said, I have no idea. Darlene stated that, on August 12, 1984, Placerville police officers not only took her to the area where she and petitioner camped (Camp Creek) to find Debbie's body, but [t]hey [also] took me on Ferrari Mill Road showing me [possibly] where Debbie and Denise were at. When asked why she testified at the jury trial that she had never been on Ferrari Mill Road, Darlene said she was afraid to admit this fact at trial. Darlene confirmed her preliminary hearing testimony that petitioner had scratches on his face and chest in June or July 1984, which was around the time Lynda was murdered. The scratches looked like fingernail scratches, and the scratch on petitioner's chest was long and deep. [1] She added: But it doesn't explain why he got the scratches. Darlene claimed she lied at trial because she was threatened by her mother and stepfather, was threatened by the El Dorado County Sheriffs deputies when the tape recorder was turned off, was interrogated for 10 to 12 hours in a little room, and was not allowed to go to the bathroom. She also claimed she was escorted to the bathroom by a female sheriffs deputy because they didn't want [her] running off. Sergeant Wilson later testified that Darlene was never denied a bathroom break and the interview took three to four hours to complete. Darlene explained that her remark to sheriffs deputies, on the second November 9 tape, that after Debbie's disappearance she had never seen [petitioner] act so funny before, meant only that petitioner was acting funny in a humorous way. Darlene agreed that she said to Sergeant Wilson, on the second November 9 tape, that petitioner told her three girls would be eliminated from the foster home and then three more, but she claimed she never actually heard petitioner make that remark, and offered five versions: First, she said she heard it from Sergeant Wilson. Then she said she heard it from Joanna. Then she said Joanna had heard it from Sergeant Wilson. Then she said her mother specifically told her to lie and say that she, Darlene, heard petitioner say it. She also stated that the number one reason she told that lie at trial was because Sergeant Wilson told her to say it. Darlene testified that her stepfather told her to say that petitioner had sharpened his knife the night Denise was murdered, and her stepfather also encouraged her to make up story lines after story lines, just like writing a book. She claimed she lied at trial because of threats from her parents and the sheriffs deputies. When the tape recorder was on, she said, they would tell her she was not a suspect, but when they turned it off, they would say the opposite. She said she was booked and fingerprinted sometime in November 1984. Sergeant Wilson later acknowledged that Darlene was photographed and fingerprinted in accordance with department policy even though she was not a suspect. He added that she was not booked. Darlene admitted she was never put in any locked facility. Darlene denied ever telling Barbara Rugg that she was afraid petitioner would find out she talked to the police, and that it's all going to be over with, [petitioner's] going to be arrested. She denied telling Placerville Police Officer Dannaker that she had visions of the girls being murdered. She denied telling her mother that she did not kill Debbie, petitioner killed Debbie. She claimed petitioner kept handcuffs in his car because someone once broke into his car, and if somebody broke into his car again petitioner was going to handcuff them to the door of his car. Darlene claimed that the statement in her 1988 declaration, that her parents never forced her to say anything, was a lie because she was still in fear of [her] parents, even though they lived in a different state. She thought her mother would put her in prison by making up a story that she was involved in the killings, but then she stated she was on good terms with her mother throughout this period. Darlene stated that the death of her stepfather in August 1992 prompted her to come forward because while he was alive, she feared what he would do if she recanted. His death, she said, took away that fear. Darlene acknowledged that, on October 23, 1990, she spoke to State Public Defender investigators Thomas Elliot and Marilyn Mobert about petitioner's involvement in the murders. She said she gave them false information because she was too afraid to talk. When asked why, if she was too afraid to talk, she said anything, Darlene replied, I have no reason. Darlene stated that petitioner was never involved in the occult or satanism. She added that in 1990, she thought her satanic version of events actually had happened. However, a few days after she signed the October 30, 1990 declaration, Darlene realized she had made a mistake because This [version] was never true. This was a dream. This was a nightmare.
At the 1994 reference hearing, Kathy Erbe testified that prior to trial, she had several meetings with the Crespins. She said Linda Crespin told her that (1) petitioner did not commit the murders and was being framed; (2) it was a cult murder; and (3) it was a Charles Manson-type murder and petitioner was the leader, but he had not done the actual killings. Kathy Erbe also stated that Joe Crespin had told her husband, Steven Erbe, that the girls had been offered as sacrifices on an altar and were cut from their throats to their vaginal areas. Erbe also said that Linda Crespin believed a person named Kip Miller was involved in the murders, and that she (Erbe) passed the information along to Sonia Miller, Kip's mother. Erbe stated that she gave all of this information to trial prosecutor Ron Tepper and district attorney investigator Ernie Birtwell. She claimed that Tepper told her he was not interested.
In 1988, Linda Crespin executed a declaration that refuted Kathy Erbe's statements. She stated that she told Erbe that she was distressed and that the killings were like a serial killing or something like a Manson killing, but she never stated that petitioner was the leader of, or that he had any involvement in, a cult. She said that petitioner told her he was being framed, not that she believed he was being framed. Crespin stated that Erbe brought up the subject of Kip Miller and that she (Crespin) did not know Kip Miller nor any facts about his involvement. She added that she never told Erbe any details about the case. Crespin reaffirmed that her trial testimony was true, and the only item she wondered about was whether petitioner actually said the word eliminate. At the 1994 reference hearing, Crespin affirmed the substance of her 1988 declaration. She added that she now believed that petitioner did not use the word eliminate in 1984, but instead said something to the effect that girls like Lynda should be done away [with] or pass[ed] off or avoided. She told the referee that she did not know the exact word.