Opinion ID: 2639434
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Incriminating Statements by Darlene

Text: As noted, the referee found that, prior to December 4, many statements made by Darlene that incriminated petitioner were true because they were corroborated by physical evidence or witness testimony that the referee found credible. [5] Because they are based on substantial evidence and the referee's credibility assessments, we accept the referee's findings that (1) petitioner stated to Darlene that he did not know Lynda, but did know her parents; (2) petitioner stated to Darlene he would eliminate three from the foster home and three more; (3) in speaking to Darlene, petitioner referred to Denise and Debbie as whores, tramps and sluts; (4) the night Denise disappeared, Darlene witnessed petitioner cleaning his gun and sharpening his knife and he said to her he was going to take care of business (the referee rejected as ridiculous Darlene's explanation at the reference hearing that petitioner made this statement in the context of a poker game); (5) the night Debbie disappeared, Darlene witnessed petitioner pull a knife from his car's sun visor, put it in his pants, and say to her he had to take care of business; (6) Darlene observed that petitioner had a deep fingernail scratch on his chest and scratches on his face around the end of June or early in July of 1984, which coincided with the time Lynda disappeared; and (7) Darlene and petitioner saw Debbie at Benham Park the night Debbie disappeared, and petitioner took Darlene home unusually early that evening.