10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 STATE OF ILLINOIS IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 17TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COUNTY OF WINNEBAGO THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Case No. 08 CF 447 Plaintiff, vs. DIANE CHAVEZ, Defendant. REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS at the hearing of the above-entitled cause before the Honorable JOSEPH G. McGRAW, Judge of said Court, on the 13th day of August, 2013. APPEARANCES: MS. KATE KURTZ and MS. NENYA HARRIS, Assistant State's Attorneys, on behalf of the People; MS. STEPHEN RICHARDS and MR. SAMI AZHARI, Attorneys at Law, on behalf of the Defendant. Sandra Brassfield, CSR 17th Judicial Circuit Rockford, Illinois License No. 084-00329110 11 12 13 14 15 16 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 PEOPLE'S WITNESSES NAME DAVID LEE Direct Examination by Ms. Kurtz Cross-Examination by Mr. Azhari Redirect Examination-by Ms. Kurtz SCOTT HULTZ Direct Examination by Ms. Kurtz Cross-Examination by Mr. Richards BRIAN KLUS Direct Examination by Ms. Harris Cross-Examination by Mr. Richards Redirect Examination by Ms. Harris JASON BAILEY Direct Examination by Ms. Kurtz DEFENDANT'S WITNESSES DIANE CHAVEZ Direct Examination by Mr. Richards Cross-Examination by Ms. Kurtz PEOPLE'S REBUTTAL WITNESSES TORRY REGEZ Direct Examination by Ms. Kurtz DAVID LEE Direct Examination by Ms. Kurtz SCOTT MASTROIANNI Direct Examination by Ms. Kurtz Certificate of Shorthand Reporter . . . PAGE 38 66 98 105 411 117 121 129 130 148 196 232 245 246 29510 at 12 13 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 21 22 23 2a 3 (Whereupon, the following proceedings were heard outside the presence of the jury. MS. KURTZ: Judge, we have a couple issues to address. Do you want me to do it without Mr. Richards? THE COURT: We can wait for him. Where is he? MR. AZHARI: He just stepped out briefly Judge. He is here. I'll go get him THE COURT: All right; go get him (Whereupon, Mr. Azhari stepped out of the courtroom momentarily.) MS. KURTZ: Judge -- THE COURT: We're back on the record Everyone is present, including the defendant. Her attorneys are present. We're outside the presence of any jurors. Yes, Ms. Kurtz. MS. KURTZ: Detective Olson is out of the country and so he's not being called. However, Detective Lee -- in talking to Detective Lee about some of the evidence that was found, there was an evidence report. It's marked K420. It was Detective Olson's evidence report. That had not previously been10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 4 tendered to counsel, and I've given it to counsel this morning. It just lists -- it is an evidence report. It is not a police report so to speak, and it just lists where that bank statement was found, which is in the lower apartment. So Mr. Richards now has that. I just wanted to make that a record. The other issue is -4 THE COURT: Do you acknowledge receipt of that? MR. RICHARDS: No, I do acknowledge receipt. And since we think it supports our position, we're not objecting to it. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Yes; what else? MS. KURTZ: Did the Court have time to go over defense's jury instructions? THE COURT: I did. And I didn't have the cases at my fingertips, so I'm having the law librarian pull those for me right now. MS. KURTZ: Okay. Without getting into all my objections to them, I do intend to get a little further into -- certainly Detective Lee was going to testify that he was present when a search warrant was executed and that those bank statements were located.10 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 THE COURT: Okay. MS. KURTZ: However, based on where I see the defense is going, I also intend to put on Detective Bailey. Detective Bailey actually -- and I turned over that report. He wrote -- he authored 1 think it's Dot 24, but I don't want to guess. He authored Dot 24 of the reports where he says he wrote the affidavits. That was turned over to counsel. THE COURT: What kind of affidavits did he write; for the search warrant? MS. KURTZ: Correct. But I did not turn over the affidavits. And for the record, although this has previously been discussed and discussed with this counsel, the way that discovery -- previous to me having this case, it's my understanding that an entire set of discovery was turned over to Mr. Buh, and that when the election was made on the records-tampering case he returned most of that discovery. When I took over the case, I took an entire set of the discovery and had it numbered K-1 through in the hundreds. I turned over an entire set to the Court. I went through an entire set. I did a memo stating what I turned over and then gave that to the Court. And the Court went through it and agreed with10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 6 me. In fact, the Court thought maybe I -- the Court would have turned a little less over than I did turn over. THE COURT: Right. MS. KURTZ: And then I did also though tender in discovery a list of what I didn't turn over to counsel. I did that for Mr. Buh and then I redid that for Mr. Richards. I did not turn over the affidavits because they contained -- they still contain information in the murder investigation. I, however, do intend to call Detective Bailey, and I intend to ask him if he was assigned to do the affidavits and that he relied on information given to him by Detective Lee. I want to front that, because I have not turned over the affidavits. I don't think -- I still don't think they're relevant. They were given Detective Bailey's report where it says he wrote the affidavits. However, I want to make that clear and see what Court and counsel's position is, and I would rather do it now than when I call Detective Bailey THE COURT: Okay. Any problem with that approach?10 at 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 7 MR. RICHARDS: Well, I guess I just don't want to be surprised by information that I haven't seen in writing, because I haven't seen the affidavits THE COURT: Okay. Are you looking at it right now? MR. RICHARDS: I'm looking at it right now MS. KURTZ: Not the affidavits. MR. RICHARDS: No, I'm looking at the report. So that's the information I have to go on since I don't have the affidavits. THE COURT: Okay. MR, RICHARDS: So basically he says that "on the 8th" -- I think this is a relevant portion -- "to begin the process of creating a search warrant at 1113 and 1111 Grant Avenue, Rockford, as well as search warrants for van and search warrant for flash drive" -- and it says "See attached search warrants, complaints and updates for details." fter completing the search warrants I spoke with Winnebago County Assistant State's Attorney Margie O'Connor for review of the search warrant documents. After the documents were reviewed Detective Regez and I met with Judge Pumulia and read for authorization of the warrants. At 4:00 o'clock he10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 reviewed and signed the aforementioned search warrants." So If that's the substance of his testimony that he prepared the search warrants for 1113 and 1111, I just don't have a problem with that. I mean that's what happened What I am wondering is if I'm going to be surprised by something else like this was a big deal because I didn't know who lived in 1113 or 1111 or this hindered me in some way or hampered me in some way, because I don't know how that would be, and I have nothing to go on. So if he's going to testify to something in his affidavit that's not in here, I guess I have a problem, because I need to see the affidavit. MS. KURTZ: I am prepared to turn over the affidavits should the Court require me to do so, only the affidavits for 1111 and 1113, not for the van and not for the flash drive. They have nothing to do with this case. I don't -- I mean, he would say what I said, which is "in writing the affidavit he relied on the information given to him by Detective Lee." Detective Lee is going to testify about his10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 conversations with the defendant that's been the subject of a motion to suppress. I can actually -- I'm going to hand the Court the affidavits. MR. RICHARDS: Just for the record, I have no -- unless this is going to come into this case in some way, and I don't think it is, I have no problem with not seeing the affidavits for the van and the flash drive. THE COURT: All right. I reviewed the affidavit, and I'm still not sure what the significance of it is. MS. KURTZ: I guess I don't understand what you mean, “what the significance of it is." THE COURT: Okay. This hasn't been produced, correct? MS. KURTZ: Correct. THE COURT: All right. And why is it you want me to look at it today? MS. KURTZ: Because I intend to call Detective Bailey to say that he prepared the affidavits for the search warrants at 1111 and 1113 Grant. And in preparing those affidavits he can rely on information from other police officers, and it has to be reliable information. And he relied on the10 at 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 10 information provided to him by Detective Lee. THE COURT: That's it? MS. KURTZ: Yes, which is why I did not think that this was discoverable. But because I have now seen the defendant's jury instructions where they're talking about warrantless searches and certain things that they're asking for to be given, which I'm going to object to. THE COURT: Yeah. MS. KURTZ: I want to be clear -- THE COURT: Okay; I see. You're saying there was a warrant, And the warrant was obtained pursuant to normal police procedures; is that what you're saying? MS. KURTZ: Yes, and that they are relying on the information that's given to them, because she is giving a false address. Because part of their argument, it has to materially affect the investigation. THE COURT: Okay. MS. KURTZ: I don't think it is discoverable, but I'm trying to avoid an issue... THE COURT: Okay. MR. RICHARDS: Your Honor, may I respond? THE COURT: Yeah; uh-huh.10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ey MR. RICHARDS: First of all, as to the facts of the search warrant and executing the search warrant, we like that. We want the jury to know that so we're happy with it. The point about the instructions, as to her refusing to let them come in or refusing to give them consent to search -- and I definitely think that they're going to testify she refused to let them come into 1113 and possibly that she refused to consent to search, although that's not clear from their reports. I just don't want the jury to think that she is guilty of obstructing justice for refusing to let them come in or otherwise exercising her Fourth Amendment right. THE COURT: That's not charged. MR. RICHARDS: It is not charged, and I just didn't want them to convict her on that basis and to clear that -- THE COURT: I wouldn't let them argue that her reluctance to give them access constitutes obstructing. It's the false statements that's charged MR. RICHARDS: Yes. THE COURT: Okay. MR. RICHARDS: So that's not -- that's not10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 12 an issue. Now, I'm still not sure how the State is going to prove that her false statements, even if they were false and even if they were intentional, obstructed them. But, you know, I mean -- THE COURT: That's why we're here. MR. RICHARDS: That's why we're here. THE COURT: Okay. MR. RICHARDS: So I don't have -- I guess my only concern is, is there something in the affidavit he is going to testify to that I don't know about? Because I haven't seen the affidavits. THE COURT: Well, I don't know what the discovery is so, I mean, I can't answer that question for you. But, I mean, what's pled they have to prove. So whether it's in the affidavit or not is beside the point. I mean, putting something in an affidavit, that someone said I lived here, not there, doesn't make it so. You know, the affiant's recitation of what he was told by Ms. Chavez, you know, him repeating it to a third party, is not proof of that fact. MR. RICHARDS: Yeah, I understand. I guess I'm sort of confused because I guess maybe -- I'm10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2. 22 23 24 13 guessing in the affidavit he said something like, you know, "She said that he doesn't live at 1113, but we don't believe her because [X]; therefore, you know -- therefore, give me the warrant." And that's all fine The only thing I have in discovery about the affidavit is what I read to you; that when he got the affidavits, that he presented them and he got his warrant for 1113 and 1111. THE COURT: But be that as it may, I understand the nature of your concern. But even if he told the judge or put in his affidavit "I don't believe her statement was true and here is why," the content of that affidavit or the preparation of the affidavit doesn't make that fact more probably true or not true. They still have to present to this jury whatever evidence they have that her statement was untrue and that it was intended to impede the investigation The fact that they communicate that to a judge to get a warrant doesn't make that fact more likely true than not true. Do you see what I'm saying? So even if they put that allegation in an affidavit to get a search warrant, it doesn't advance the case one way or the other here today, right? MR. RICHARDS: I guess, you know, if you10 ci 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 a4 are assuring me that there is nothing in -- and I just ask you to keep in mind when he testifies -- if there is nothing in the affidavit I need to know about in terms of impeaching him or, you know, or whatever -- I mean, I guess I have to rely on Your Honor's reading of the affidavit that that's not relevant. THE COURT: Yeah, I didn't see anything MS. KURTZ: I'm not asking Detective Bailey to testify to the content of the affidavit. TI have said and I will say again, all I'm going to ask him is “Were you assigned to prepare the affidavits? Did you prepare these affidavits? And in preparing them, I mean, do you have to have, you know, do you have to have information that is reliable information and can that be given to you from a police officer? And did you rely on the information given to you by Detective Lee?" The only thing from the affidavit is that he says "I personally spoke with Detective Lee"; that's it. Other than that, he didn't put that in his police report but he wrote the affidavit. The content of the affidavit is irrelevant. THE COURT: Yeah, I think so too. All right. Bring in the jury.10 cn 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 15 THE BAILIFF: Yes, sir. THE COURT: Thank you. What I do is I do little introductory comments to the jury about how it's going to go. Are you doing the opening, Mr. Richards? MR. RICHARDS: Yes. MS. KURTZ: I would just say for the record that in the grand jury transcript of Detective Regez, they also told the grand jury that they relied on the information - or they wanted information about where Wanke lived for purposes of the search warrant. So that information has been turned over. THE COURT: Okay. MS. KURTZ: And I just want to direct their attention to that as well. THE COURT: Okay. MS. KURTZ: Judge, I would make a motion to exclude witnesses. THE COURT: Any objection? MR. RICHARDS: We join. THE COURT: Okay. Each party is responsible for notifying their witnesses of the Court's order. I met with the law librarian for those cases. Have you decided if they were jury instruction10 ca 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 16 cases or just propositions of law? MR. RICHARDS: They were just propositions of law. THE COURT: Okay. MR. RICHARDS: We would object to the citation unpublished THE COURT: It can be instructive even if it's not authoritative; wouldn't you agree? MR. RICHARDS: Well, here is the thing I'm appreciative of this issue since I recently did a case in Minnesota where there is a rule that's unpublished opinions, but that's persuasive but not -- and they cite them as persuasive and we give copies. We don't have any such rule. I think the rule here is they can only be used for res judicata or collateral estoppel so I wouldn't object. I mean, obviously nowadays everything -- you could go and look on the Internet and find it and you might find an instructive and I couldn't do anything about it. But on the other hand -- well, put it this way: I did see unpublished opinions which I felt were favorable to me which I didn't think of citing, but I will pull them up THE COURT: Okay.10 a1 12 13 14 1s 16 uy 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 17 (Whereupon, the following proceedings were heard in the presence of the jury.) THE COURT: Thank you, ladies and gentlemen You may be seated. Good morning. How is everybody doing today? Hearing no objections, I assume that means you're all fine All right. Now, I told you yesterday before you left that you weren't to do any independent investigation or you weren't to watch any press, radio, television programs or do any searching on the Internet, not to speak to anybody about the case nor let anyone speak to you. Have all of you followed my instructions? If so, say yes. (Whereupon, all jurors answered yes.) THE COURT: All right. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, we're about to begin the trial of this case. This is where you do your work. You evaluate the evidence and you determine the facts of the case. You will listen to the testimony. You will look at any exhibits there might be And you will receive some instructions of law from the Court. And you will retire and deliberate at the end of the case and apply the law to the facts and in that way you will reach your verdict.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2. 22 23 24 18 Now, I'm going to tell you the most important thing I'm going to tell you this morning So is everybody with me? You should give careful attention to the testimony and evidence as it is received and presented. I'm going to repeat myself. You should give careful attention to the testimony and evidence as it is received and presented. Why am I saying that twice? Because it's important. On television, you know, we oftentimes allow our mind to wonder and think...ah, if it's important I can TiVo it...or if it's a sporting event there will be instant replay, right? You know, I mean, I do that myself. I'm kind of dealing with two things at the same time. I'm letting my attention be divided. It isn't like that here. Things happen in real time. Things are said, expressions, gestures and nuances, and if you're not being attentive that moment is gone. You can't get it back. And although I have a court reporter who is preparing a transcript, she was here until we closed yesterday and she will be with us all day, and she doesn't have time to necessarily prepare a transcript that you could read. Oftentimes things are10 ul 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 in either not necessarily a readable format. They're in sort of a shorthand format. It is a computer program. So she is not actually creating a document that you could just, you know, take back with you into the jury room at some point. I think you all have notes. And I would ask you to be attentive. If you want to use your notes, fine; if you don't, that's fine too. I'm not going to be keeping track of who is using notes and who isn't. It is strictly up to you. But my point is that when you watch a dramatic presentation on television you hear that music swelling in the background like, oh, boy something is about to happen. It isn't like that here and oftentimes -- or sometimes the testimony might be out of order due to witness availability or maybe there is a legal reason why a certain witness has to testify before another witness. And so you might even be scratching your head like...how does this fit into the pick picture; what's the significance of this... trust me, I'm not going to let them present anything that's not relevant; okay So if it's coming in, it's coming in for a reason. If the reason isn't readily apparent, just10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 20 kind of make a little note, okay, store away for future reference or something like that. And then when it comes time to deliberate you can go back and check your note and go...oh, now I see why that was presented or I see why that was important. Pay close attention. Keep an open mind. Stay alert. Like I said, we'll take breaks about every 90 minutes, more or less. Don't jump to any conclusions. You only hear one witness and you think... oh, yeah, now I know what the case is about...well you know, you may or you may not. But wait until you hear everything. Wait until you receive the instructions of law. Now, when you go back there with Al to take a break or over the noon hour, whatever it might be, you can't discuss the case. You can't discuss the testimony you have heard. So police each other. Don't let one of your fellow jurors say...hey, what did you think of that guy or what did you think of that witness or her testimony...you cannot do that. You have to wait until the very end when you have all the evidence in. Then it's time to say what did you think of this witness or that witness and so forth. We will wrap up today. That's my10 41 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 21 expectation. There may or may not be media coverage in the courtroom. But as I told you yesterday, just ignore it if they do come in. They can't film you or anything like that, so just put it out of your mind entirely if they should be present. Now, as I mentioned the other day, if there is an objection to a question, for example, I have to rule on that objection. That's the attorneys drawing my attention to the fact there is a legal ruling that has to be made. $o if there is an objection to a question and that question -- and I sustain the objection, the question is not answered because I don't allow it to be answered. You're not allowed to speculate as to what the answer might have been if the person had been allowed to answer the question. You can't even speculate as to why the question was asked. Again, I expect you to police one another, you know, in that regard. You get back there; don't let one of your fellow jurors say...gee, I think he would have said this or she would have said that...that is completely out of bounds; that's improper The evidence is what comes in, not what10 a. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 22 doesn't come in. So if I sustain an objection, you can't speculate about what the answer might have been You can't even speculate about why the question was asked. That's out of bounds entirely All right. As I said, we'll do our conferences right up here for the most part, if not exclusively. You have the right to take notes. I think you all have notebooks. Again, it's strictly up to you to use those notes or not to refresh your memory. You can doodle. You can do anything you want. I'll never see them. My bailiff will never see them. When the case is over they go from those three-ring binders right into the shredder. So if you want to do a caricature of me, I'll never see it It's up to you. However, let's say there is some question you've got, something that's nagging you... gee, I really want to know that and I don't want to forget that...and you want to jot it down to make sure you bring it up to your fellow jurors later, that's fine too. You don't even have to show your notes to your fellow jurors if you don't want to, or you can. You can say...I think he said this; I wrote this down10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 23 or, no, I don't think he did...the recollection of a juror just because they took notes is not necessarily better than a juror that didn't take notes. My point is this: Use them if you want; you don't have to use them. It's your call 100 percent of the way Now, we're at the part of the trial called opening statements. Each side has an opportunity to make an opening statement. An opening statement is not evidence. But it's important nonetheless because it gives the attorneys an opportunity to tell you what they expect the evidence will be, what they expect the testimony to be or what they expect the evidence to be. It's a chance for them to summarize the facts that they expect will be shown to you or proven to you. They can also highlight issues that they think you're going to need to focus on. They might say...okay, here is why we're here; this is the thing you need to decide, so pay attention to this, this and this...that's their job. Somebody has compared an opening statement to like a movie trailer or like an overview of some kind, a preview of what the evidence is going to be. Now, not only is the opening statement not evidence --10 a. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 24 the evidence is what comes from the witness stand -- but it's also not an instruction of law. I will give those to you at the end. But the attorneys might make a reference to something they think they have to prove or they think the other side has to prove, so they may comment on the law in an attempt to help you understand your role or your duty or the challenges or issues. But I will give you the law at the end of the case. It's not what they say in the opening statement. Okay. The State has the burden of proof. That's why they get to go first. The defense doesn't have to make an opening; they can. And that's why it's in the order that it's in. Okay. I think I've covered everything. Ms. Kurtz. MS. KURTZ: May we approach? THE COURT: Yes. (The following proceedings were heard at sidebar by use of a listening device provided to the court reporter.) MS. KURTZ: I'm sorry, I think that you need to read People's 1 and 3 before we -- THE COURT: 1 and 3?10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. KURTZ: Except that's not the one I have. I may need to give you a different copy. There is one -- THE COURT: 1.018? MS. KURTZ: 1.01A, and there is one about the media. THE COURT: All right. Give me that one Okay. Thank you. MS. KURTZ: Thank you (Which were all the proceedings had at the sidebar.) THE COURT: All right. There are a couple instructions that I am supposed to read to you that I didn't read to you. In this case, as I mentioned we've allowed the media to film or photograph the proceedings. This is permitted by supreme court rule and is subject to various restrictions. And a policy for extended media coverage: The policy regarding cameras in the courtroom is very strict and the Court closely monitors every provision In general, the policy permits the media to film and photograph the courtroom setting, the participants in the trial and any person who might be in the audience The policy does not permit the news media10 a. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2i 22 23 24 26 to film or photograph any of you as jurors or the jury panel as a whole in the courtroom and outside the courtroom. The presence of cameras does not make this case more important than any other. All trials are equally important to the Court and the involved parties. You should not draw any inferences or conclusions from the fact that cameras are present at this particular trial, or I should say if they're not present. The news media is generally able to choose which portion or portions of the trial they wish to attend. Therefore, their attendance may be periodic from day to day. Also for legal reasons the news media may not be permitted to film and photograph certain witnesses. You're not to concern yourselves with the reasons why witnesses are filmed and photographed and others are not. Whether a particular witness is filmed or photographed is not any indication as to the value or weight of the -- weight to be given to that witness's testimony. You should ignore the presence of any cameras. If you find at any time that you are distracted or unable to concentrate because of the10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 27 cameras, please notify me or my bailiff immediately. I have given the one about not doing any electronic research. Anything else? MS. KURTZ: No, sir. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you, Ms. Kurtz. Are you ready to proceed? MS. KURTZ: Yes, sir. THE COURT: All right. You may address the jury. MS. KURTZ: Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, Your Honor, counsel, on February 6, 2008, the Rockford Police Department was called to investigate the murder of Gregory Clark, a local attorney. During the course of their investigation on that cold snowy day, it led them to Richard Wanke as a possible suspect. Several hours after Mr. Clark was killed they went to 1113 Grant Avenue to find Mr. Wanke, where they believed he lived. When they arrived at 1113 and knocked on the door -- in fact, looking at the building, there is actually two outside doors. The one to the left is to 1113 and the one to the right is 1111. It's a duplex, an upstairs and downstairs. Downstairs is 1111; upstairs is 1113.10 a. 12 13 14 15 16 ay 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 28 They went over to the 1113 door, and they knocked on it. And it was Diane Chavez, this defendant, that answered the door. It was very cold It snowed a lot that day. They asked if they could speak to her inside. She chose not to. She said she would talk to them there. They asked her who lived there. She said "No one," just her. “Well, what about in the building does anyone else live in the building?" "No." At that point Detective Lee noticed a sign on the door, something about knocking, the door bell not working and then with the name at the bottom "Richard Wanke." So Detective Lee pointed out the sign and asked this defendant about Richard Wanke "Well, does he live here?" It was at that point the defendant said "Well, he does maintenance for me. Well, he lives at 1111." The detectives asked if she wouldn't mind talking to them some more. She agreed, and she agreed actually to go down to the Public Safety Building to speak with them. She chose to ride along with them. And when they got down to the Public Safety Building this defendant maintained and persisted in her lie that10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 29 Richard Wanke didn't live at 1113. She chose, as it was her right, not to let them search her residence. She did not have to. But they needed to know where Richard Wanke lived. And she continued to lie to them. She continued to give them false information about his residence. Later on that evening the police officers did obtain a search warrant. And in going through the residence at 1111 and 1113 they noticed some things. And one was that there was no sleeping quarters in 1111, no food in the kitchen; all that was in 1113 1111 appeared to be more of a storage area where they did find a bank statement with both the defendant and Mr. Wanke's name and the address of 1113. This defendant chose to talk to the Rockford police officers. She chose to give them false information about a murder investigation that they were conducting, after they explained to her what they were doing and the seriousness of it. Ladies and gentlemen, in Illinois that is called obstruction of justice. And we will ask that you listen to all the evidence, and after doing so return verdicts of guilt as to both counts against10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 al 22 23 24 30 Diane Chavez. THE COURT: Thank you, Ms. Kurtz. Mr. Richards. MR. RICHARDS: Ladies and gentlemen, you have just heard the State's allegations in their case But to understand what's going on here, we have to go back in time a little bit, more than we normally do so in a case like this. Because you see, the allegation here is basically that Diane Chavez lied about Richard Wanke living at 1111. I will tell you right now that she did not, because Richard Wanke did live at 1111. But in order to understand how this came about, you have to go into their relationship, how it began and how it progressed over the years. First of all, Diane Chavez is an employed person who worked first at Prairie State Legal services in the '80s and '90s, then eventually she started working for DCF -- DHS as a caseworker. She also had another activity during the '90s. She ran a store called the Peace Store -- that's P-e-a-c-e -- which is a non-profit store which basically sold goods coming from impoverished countries and then used the money to go back to the countries without making a10 1. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 31 profit. So basically sold items or fair-trade items in other words, to benefit people in other countries who would normally not get a market for their goods. In the course of doing so there was a volunteer who came by to help her. His name was Richard Wanke. And he was a guy, I think as you will see and you will hear, very good with computers. That was his thing; fixing computers, programming computers setting up computer systems, that was what he did And on a volunteer basis he helped the Peace Store set up their computer system, and that's how she got to know him. And the two of them began a romantic relationship in the mid '90s, lasting until 2000. Now, during the '90s Diane was living at 11 -- 1109 Grant Avenue, just a building next door to the duplex at 1113, dash, 1111, At some point, as she was living there she -- first of all, she started having a romantic relationship with Richard Wanke. She started living with him, But then there came a time in 1997 when the owner of 110 -- 1109 who is also the owner of 1111-1113 decided to sell, and the properties came up for sale She looked at the property 1113-1111 and decided this10 ul 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 32 would be a good property to buy. And you will hear that she had a number of properties. She purchased properties; she rents them out. She had people do maintenance on them and so forth. Initially she moved in, bought this apartment or this house, and the original idea was that she and Richard Wanke would live at 1113 together as a couple and that they were going to rent out 1111. And that's what they did; they rented out 1111 to a man named Stanley Campbell. Now, you will see from the pictures and everything else that this is set up as a duplex. 1113 has a kitchen. 1111 has a kitchen. 1113 has a bathroom. 1111 has a bathroom. There are separate gas and electric meters. They are set up to be different apartments, in either situation where you could rent out both of them or you could live in one and rent out the other, as people normally do all the time. Now, during the time that Diane Chavez knew Richard Wanke he had various legal troubles and got into trouble for different things, mostly involving accusations of stealing things, stealing computers, et cetera. And several times during the relationship, a10 a. 12 13 14 1s 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 33 couple of times, he went away to prison. Now, the relationship as a physical relation- ship ended in 2000. It was no longer a romantic relationship. Diane did for a certain period of time allow Richard Wanke to stay with her in 1113. You also have to know a little more about Richard Wanke because this will be important later on. Richard Wanke is a guy with some problems, legal problems mental problems, a guy who is sort of obsessive You will see that both Diane and Richard Wanke have a habit of collecting things, not a horrible problem but some people might call them hoarders. For example, in 1111 Richard collected computers, loads of computers -- you will see pictures of them -- for sale, to fix up, whatever, but he stuffed the whole place with that sort of thing Richard Wanke also had odd sleeping patterns. He had insomnia. He didn't sleep in beds very often. He could sleep on the floor. He could sleep in a sleeping bag. They all had habits -- and you will see this also in photographs -- they were different in terms of their food preferences. Diane liked Mexican10 ce 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 34 food. Richard Wanke liked vegan food. So both kinds of foods were there. Now, Diane allowed Richard Wanke to live as a roommate in 1113 for a while, and 1111 was just being used as storage, as a work area. There was working computers there, and also because Wanke would sell computers out of the downstairs place. But in October of 2006 Diane decided she had had enough. She was scared. He has legal problems. She didn't want to be living in the exact same place with him. So the relationship was maintained. He was her tenant. In lieu of paying rent he would do maintenance on her various properties. But he lived downstairs at 1111. He got gas and electric bills in his name and paid those bills for 1111. He lived downstairs. They had separate meals. They did not sleep together He was at 1111. And, in fact, long before Diane Chavez ever spoke to the police, ever had that conversation with them on February 6th of 2008, when asked under oath at a prior proceeding "What's the arrangement?" She said "I live at 1113. He is my tenant at 1111." So the first thing you have to decide in10 1. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 35 this case is was this a lie. Because if the truth is that Richard Wanke lived at 1111, that's it; there is no case. This whole case is premised on the theory that Diane Chavez lied, and she didn't. There is going to be no proof beyond a reasonable doubt that she did lie. But before you get too close on this issue, I would like you to keep in mind what else the State will have to prove. Remember they're saying -- there is two counts; one, they're saying Diane Chavez lied to prevent the investigation of Richard Wanke as a suspect in the murder. And they're also claiming that she lied to prevent the investigation of herself as a suspect in the murder That was the second count that was read to you. MS. KURTZ: Objection. THE COURT: Approach (The following proceedings were heard at sidebar by use of a listening device provided to the court reporter.) THE COURT: What's your objection? MS. KURTZ: It's charged as prevent -- or obstruct the prosecution, and he is saying investigation. MR. RICHARDS: I will correct that.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 36 THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. (Which were all the proceedings had at the sidebar.) MR. RICHARDS: Sorry, I said investigation What I should have said was prosecution. Two counts: One, that she lied to prevent or impede the prosecution of Richard Wanke as to the murder -- Wanke as to the murder. Second, that she lied to prevent investigation of herself. Well, first of all, there is going to be no evidence that who lived in 1111 as opposed to who lived in 1113 had THE COURT: (Interrupting) Prosecution MR. RICHARDS: In the prosecution; that there will be no -~ there will be no evidence, we suggest, that the issue of who lived at 1113 and who lived at 1111 had any bearing on the prosecution of Richard Wanke for the murder or Diane Chavez for the murder. You will hear that, in fact, Diane Chavez refused, as it was her right to do, to let them come in or to let them search either property. And that, in fact, she went to the station and she spoke to them voluntarily for a long period of time, and that the police went and got search warrants for both10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 37 properties. Both properties were sitting there while she was in custody. They were sitting there while Richard Wanke was in custody. And the police went, properly got a search warrant and properly searched. And we will suggest to you -- you will see photographs of the search. We will suggest to you that the police missed clear evidence that, in fact, Richard Wanke was living at 1111 and that he was not living at 1113. But either way, they searched both properties. They found what evidence they could. And their investigation was not impeded -- or their prosecution of either one was not impeded one bit by whatever Diane Chavez told them about who lived at 1113 and who lived at 1111. So we would suggest to you at the end of the case there is going to be not only no proof beyond a reasonable doubt, there is going to be no proof, no evidence whatsoever to support these charges. And you will be fully justified in finding not guilty as to both. Thank you. THE COURT: Thank you, Mr. Richards. All right. Ms. Kurtz, call your first witness.10 1. 12 13 14 15 16 ay 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 38 MS. KURTZ: JI call Sergeant Lee. THE COURT: Raise your right hand, sir. DAVID LEE, was called as a witness and after having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: THE COURT: Please be seated right there. Make sure you speak into the microphone; okay. Proceed. DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. KURTZ Q. Sir, can you tell us your name, please, and spell your last name for the court reporter? A. David Lee, L-e-e. Q. Where do you work? A City of Rockford Police Department. Q. How long have you worked for the Rockford Police Department? AL Over 18 years now. Q. And what's your current rank? A Sergeant. a. And currently as a sergeant what unit are you assigned to or what do you do?10 a. 12 13 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 39 A I am in patrol right now in the Field Services unit. Q. How long have you been a sergeant? A. For eight months now. Q. And prior to that what did you do? A I was a detective. a. How long were you a detective? A. Eight years -- or just about eight years; just shy of that. Q. Sergeant Lee, on February 6th of 2008 you were the rank of detective; is that correct? A, Yes. Q. And what were you working that day? A. I was working in the Violent Crimes Unit Q And at about 2:00 o'clock p.m. did you receive a call from your sergeant? A, Yes. Q. And what were you assigned to do? A We were assigned to go to St. Anthony's hospital to check on the status of a shooting victim. Q. Did you go to St. Anthony's? A, Yes. a. When you got there, what information did you learn?10 aL 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 40 A We learned that the victim, Greg Clark, was deceased. Q Over the course of the next several hours was a suspect developed? A Yes. Q. And who was that person? AL Richard Wanke. Q. In regards to Wanke, were you and other detectives instructed to do anything that evening? AL Yes, we were assigned to go to 1113 Grant Avenue. a. Why were you assigned to go there? A. We were assigned to go there to do surveillance and check for a vehicle. a. Now, that day, February 6, 2008 -- can you tell us, what was the weather like that day? A. It had snowed all day. There was a large snow- storm that came through that day and very cold out Q. And those were the conditions during the day and that evening? A Yes. Q. When you went to 1113 Grant Avenue first of all, is that in the City of Rockford, County of Winnebago and State of Illinois?10 a. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 41 A, Yes, it is. Q. Can you describe the building at 1113 Grant Avenue? A, Yes, it's best described I guess as a two- family residence. 1113 Grant Avenue is on the ~~ the door to that, the entrance to that is at the northwest corner of the residence. The front faces west. That would be the upper apartment. 1111 Grant is the other entrance on the west side, front, and that is at the southwest corner of the house Q. And are those entrances distinctly marked 1113 and 1111? aA Yes, and 1111 would be the lower apartment; yes. ° So 1111 occupies the lower half of the building; 1113 occupies the upper half? A Yes. Q. Now, what time did you go over there? A At about -- I guess it was 5:55. Q What were the lighting conditions like at that time? A It was dark out. o. And did you then conduct surveillance at 1113- 1111 Grant? A. Yes.10 1. 12 13 14 15 16 ci 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 42 MS. KURTZ: May I approach? THE COURT: Yes, ma'am. BY MS. KURTZ: Q. Sir, I'm going to hand you what's been marked People's Exhibits -- and the exhibit numbers are on the back -- 1, 2, 3 and 4. Do you recognize what's depicted in People's 1 through 4? A Yes. Q. And do People's 1 through 4 show the building at 1111 and 1113 Grant Avenue? A. Yes, it does. Q. Do People's 1 through 4 fairly and accurately depict 1111 and 1113 Grant Avenue as you saw it both in the evening hours of February 6th and later on on February 7th in the early morning hours, 2008? A. Yes, they do. MS. KURTZ: Judge, I would ask to admit and publish. THE COURT: Any objection? MR. AZHARI: No objection. THE COURT: All right. Go ahead. MS. KURTZ: May I approach? THE COURT: Yes. BY MS. KURTZ:10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 43 Q I will start with People's Exhibit 1. That's a little bit better. Can you tell us what we're looking at in People's Exhibit 1? A That's the front of 1113-1111 Grant Avenue. Q And which side is which entrance when you're looking at this? A. The left side would be 1113 Grant and the right side would be 1111 Grant. Q. And then this is People's Exhibit 2. It's a little bit clearer of a picture. But is that showing us the same thing? A, Yes. Q Are you able to see the entrance to 1113 here very well? A, No. Q Okay. So the entrance to the building on the right side is 1111? A Yes. Q. And People's Exhibit 3, what does this show? AL That's the entrance to 1111 Grant. Q And where is it -- I can't see in this photo Are you able to see in this photo where it says 1111? A No. Q And where would that be?10 1. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 44 A On top of the door. Q. And People's Exhibit 4, what does this show? A. 1113 Grant. Q. And this is marked in the photograph; is that right? A Yes. Q You arrived there around 5:55 p.m.; is that correct? A Yes. Q. Shortly before 7:00 p.m. did you attempt to see if anyone was at either residence? A, Yes. Q. What did you do? AL We went to the residence there and knocked on both doors, front and back, trying to get an answer at the residence. a. Who were you with? AL Detective Regez. o. And when you say both doors, tell me exactly which door and if you got an answer. A. We went to both 1111 and 1113, and we ended up getting an answer at 1113 Grant. Q. Did you get an answer at 1111? A. No.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 45 Q. When you went to 1113, who answered the door? A Diane Chavez. a. And do you see that person today here in court? A Yes. Q And can you point to that person and describe something she is wearing? A She is wearing the blue jacket and sitting between counsel there. MS. KURTZ: I would ask the record reflect an in-court identification of the defendant. THE COURT: It shall. BY MS. KURTZ: a. When this defendant answered the door initially, what did you say to her? A. We asked her if we could come inside and speak with her. Q. And what did she say? A. She told us no; that she was fine speaking with us outside. a. Did she come out to speak with you? A Yes. a. Did she leave the door open? A. She shut the door behind her. Q. Did you then speak with her outside?10 1. 12 13 14 15 16 aq 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 46 AL Yes. Q. So when we're looking at People’s Exhibit 1 where were you then standing? Is there a place to stand to talk with her outside or did you come all the way down? A We were down on the sidewalk and she was on the, I guess the top step of the porch there. Q. Okay. When she came outside to speak with you what did you ask her initially? A Um, we asked her who lived with her at the residence. Q. And what was her response? AL She said nobody did. Q. Did you ask specifically about the building? A Yes, I asked her who -- in the entire building, did anybody else live there, and she said no Q. At that point was there anything that drew your attention? AL There was a sign on the door that had the name Richard Wanke on it. MS. KURTZ: May I approach? THE COURT: Yes. BY MS. KURT Q I'm going to hand you what's been marked10 al 12 13 14 is 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 People's Exhibi A. Yes. Q. And what A That is Q. Which do A. The door 1113 Grant Aven Q. And when to her? A Yes, Ia Q. And does and accurately it on February A. Yes. Ms. publish. THE MR. THE be admitted and BY MS. KURTZ: a. What doe AL It says Richard Wanke." a7 t 5. Do you recognize that? is People's Exhibit 5? the sign that I saw on the door or? -- that would be the screen door to ue. you saw that sign did you say anything sked her about the name “Richard Wanke. People's Exhibit 5 -- does that fairly show how the sign looked when you saw 6, 2008? KURTZ: Judge, I would ask to admit and COURT: Any objection? AZHARI: No objection. COURT: All right. Go ahead. It shall published. s the sign say? "Knock loudly; door bell does not work10 aL 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 48 Q. When you -- tell me about the conversation where you mentioned this to her then. A When I pointed that out to her, she said that Wanke did -- or Richard Wanke did maintenance work for her. Then she said he lived in the lower apartment, 1iii. a. Did you ask her again if anyone else lived there at 1113? AL Yes. Q. And what was her response? AL She said "No." Q. Did you ask the defendant where Wanke was? AL Yes. We asked her if she knew where he was at, and she responded by saying that he was around there somewhere. Q. Did you ask if she knew where he had been? AL Yeah, we asked if he had been in her residence or if she knew where he had been. She told us that he had no reason to be in her apartment, that he hadn't been in there; that he was strictly a tenant and lived at 1111. a. Did you ask her about searching her residence? A. Yes. Q What did she say?10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 49 A She told us we could not search her residence Q Did you tell her that you wanted to talk to her more? aA Yes. Q. Tell me about that. A We asked her -- we explained to her that we wanted to speak to her more about Richard Wanke. We asked her if she would come down to the Public Safety Building to speak with us, and she agreed to do that Q At this point had you given her any other information about why you wanted to talk to her? A No. Q. Had you given her anything, any information about what this was regarding? A. No. Q. Did she agree to come to the station with you? A Yes. Q. How did she do that or how was she going to get there? aR Well, we explained to her that she could either ride with us or go on her own, and she agreed to ride with us. Q. Did she have to go back inside for any reason? A Yes.10 a. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Q A Tell me about that. 50 She said she wanted to get her coat. And at that point we asked her if one of us or somebody could accompany her inside the residence and she said no And she went inside the residence and shut the door Q. A Q A Did she come back out? Yes. How long? It was a few minutes later she came back out with her coat. Q And then what happened? And then we transported her to the Public Building. How did she get to the Public Safety Building? It was in an unmarked squad car. In fact, that day how were -- were you dressed are today? No How were you dressed? In plain clothes. And you said it wan an unmarked Yes. Was that a cage car? No squad car?10 a 12 13 14 15 16 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Q. Was she handcuffed? AL No. Q. What time did you get to the Public Safety Building? A It was about ten after 7:00. Q. And where did you take the defendant? A To Interview Room No. 8. Q. Was that at about -- what time did you get there and take her to Interview Room No. 8? A, About 7:10. Q. Did you offer her anything to eat or drink? A Yes. Q. And -- AL She declined at that time. Q. What time did you begin speaking with the defendant at the Public Safety Building? A, At about 7:40 p.m. a. And that was in Interview Room No. 8? A Yes. Q. Who were you with? A Detective Regez. Q When you began the interview with this 51 defendant with Detective Regez, how did you initially begin it?10 1. 12 13 14 15 16 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 52 A. We began the interview by obtaining personal information, name, date of birth, work, employment and phone number. Q. Did you ask her for her phone number? A, Yes. Q. Did she give that to you? AL No. Q. Did you ask for any number she had? AL We asked her if she had a cell phone number and she told us she didn't believe in cell phones. Q. And she refused to give you a home number? A, Yes. Q. After you obtained her personal information did you talk to her about why she was there? A Yes. Q. Tell me about that conversation. A We asked her if she knew why she was there. She told us that she assumed that it had to do with Richard Wanke's attorney, Greg Clark, being shot. She told us that she saw it on the news. And she heard a blue van was involved and that she owned a '98 Dodge van. Q Prior to the defendant making those statements had either yourself or Detective Regez mentioned Greg10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 53 Clark or the shooting or the van? AL No. a. After the defendant told you why she thought she was there, what was said to her? A. Um, we just -- we explained to her that she needed to be truthful with us; that it was a serious investigation. Q. Was the defendant asked about her relationship with Wanke? A Yes. Q. What did she say? AL She said that he was strictly a tenant. She said that she had no personal relationship with him. She said that he -- in exchange for her allowing him to live in 1111 Grant Avenue he did maintenance work for her on her properties. Q. Did you ask her what time she got home from work and whether or not she had seen Wanke that day? A. Yes. We asked her at what time she got home She said it was around 4:15 that afternoon. She said Wanke was not there at that time. She said that he arrived home at around 4:30 p.m., and then she saw him outside shoveling. a. Did you ask her about the clothing he was10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 54 wearing that day? A Yes. Q. What did she say? A. We asked her if she knew what he was wearing And at that point she told us she wasn't going to tell us anything about Richard Wanke; she would only talk about herself. Q. When she said that what was -- what was your or Detective Regez' response to her? A. We explained to her, you know, that it was a serious investigation; that Greg Clark had been killed; that we were just doing our jobs, and we were just trying to obtain information about what occurred. Q. Is this the first time that the fact that Mr. Clark had been killed was mentioned? A. Yes. Q. Did you tell her whether or not you had any information about Wanke's relationship with Clark and why you wanted to speak to him? AL Yeah, we explained to her that we had information that Richard Wanke was upset with how Greg Clark handled his case. Q. And what was her response to that? A. She said that Richard never complained one10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 55 time. She said he didn't blame anybody else. She said that he was found guilty, and he didn't complain about that; that he was awaiting sentencing that Friday and that she wasn't sure how she was going to get along without him. Q. What did you say to her? A. We explained to her that we had heard differently, um; that Richard -- that we heard that Richard did not...was upset with how Clark handled his case. Q. And what did she say? A. Um, she asked us if we had ever dealt with Greg Clark, and we told her no. She explained to us that he was very controlling. She said that he didn't deserve to die, but -- she didn't feel he deserved to die, but he could be very controlling. Q At that point did you tell her that you believed that Wanke was involved in the murder? A. Yes, we told her that we definitely believed that Richard Wanke was involved in the murder. Q. And what was her response? AL She told us that she had information that would prove that Richard didn't do it. a. What did you say?10 ql 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 al 22 23 24 56 AL We explained to her if she had information that could clear his name, that we would like to have the information so we could verify the information Q. And what did she say or do? AL She told us she wasn't going to give us that information because we would use that against him. Q. At this point did you take a break? A. Yes. 2. It was about 7:55? A. Yes. Q. Did you again offer her anything to eat or drink or see if she needed anything? AL Yes, we asked her if she needed anything to eat or drink or if she needed to use the bathroom. Q. Did she take you up on any of those offers? AL Yes, she requested to use the restroom, and she was allowed to do so. Q. About ten minutes later, 8:05, did yourself and Detective Regez resume the interview of this defendant? A. Yes. Q. What did you talk to her about then? AL Just spoke with her about her work schedule that day, where she was at. Q. Did you also ask permission to search her10 11 12 13 14 is 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 57 residence? AL Yes. a. And what was that conversation; what was her response? A We asked her if we could search her residence. She told us we could not. We explained to her that we would go through the process of seeing if we could obtain a search warrant for the residence. Q. What did she say? aA She said she didn't believe that we had the right to obtain a search warrant. And at that point she told us she wanted to speak with a state's -- MR. RICHARDS: (Interrupting) Objection. THE COURT: Approach. (The following proceedings were heard at sidebar by use of a listening device provided to the court reporter.) THE COURT: Who is handling this? MR. AZHARI: I am. THE COURT: What's the objection? MR. RICHARDS: I think there is (unintelligible). Tf that was not what was coming out, then I withdraw it. MS. KURTZ: She asked to speak to the10 1. 12 13 14 15 16 ay 18 19 20 al 22 23 24 58 state's attorney. Ms. O'Connor then came later and talked with her, and it goes to show -- MR. RICHARDS: (Interrupting) We have no objection then; withdrawn. THE COURT: Proceed. (Which were all the proceedings had at the sidebar.) BY MS. KURTZ: Q. Sergeant Lee, I'm sorry, you said that she asked to speak with somebody and you were cut off. So if you could go back to that answer where you were at. A, Okay. She explained to us that she didn't believe we had the right to obtain a search warrant. She said that she was -- she requested at that time to speak with a state's attorney to see if we had the right to obtain a search warrant. Q. Did you guys take another break? AL Yes. Q. Was that at about 8:30? AL Yes. a. Did you again offer her anything to eat or drink? A. Yes. a. Did she accept?10 ql 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 59 A No, she declined. a. About 9:10 did you check on her? A Yes. Q. And what happened then? A, I again asked her if she needed anything, and she requested to use the restroom, which she was allowed to do. Q. At about 9:50 did you bring in an assistant state's attorney to speak with her? AL Yes. Q. Tell me about that. A. Yes. Myself, Detective Regez and it was Assistant Deputy State's Attorney Margie O'Connor went into the interview room with her. Assistant Deputy State's Attorney Margie O'Connor explained the process that if we were able to obtain a search warrant, then we would be able to search her residence. Q. And what was her response to that? A She told us at that time again -- she said that she had information that would prove Richard was innocent. And we explained to her that if she had that information, then we ask that she provide it to us. And she told us that we weren't qualified to have that information and we could get that information in10 ql 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 60 discovery. Q. What did that mean to you? AL That meant that -- "in discovery," that means the person has been charged, and that information is turned over during the process before trials. Q. Did you end your interview, this portion of the interview, with the defendant at about five after 10:00 that night? A Yes. a. And at about 10:05 was she moved from Interview Room No. 8? A. Yes. a. And to where? A. To Interview Room No. 1 Q. During the entire time that you and Detective Regez were with this defendant, did you ever yell at this defendant or threaten her? A No. a. Did you ever place your hands on her in a threatening manner or any manner? AL No. Q. Later on well, after speaking with this defendant, did you relay the information that she had given you to another detective, Detective Jason Bailey?10 lL 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 61 A Yes, I did. ° And what was Jason Bailey's role at that point in the investigation? A, He was in the process of obtaining a search warrant. a. And that's the purpose -- one of the purposes for which you talked to Detective Bailey and relayed the information from your interview with the defendant? A. That's correct. Q. In the early morning hours did you return to 1111 and 1113 Grant Avenue, Rockford, Illinois? AL Yes. Q. And was that during the execution of the search warrant? A. Yes. Q. Can you describe -- well, when you went into 1111 and 1113, can you describe just generally both apartments? AL Um, well, in 1111, the lower apartment, there were computers set up that were running in like the main room when you walked in. But as far as living space, it looked more like it was used for storage There was no bed set up in that residence in the bedrooms. Each of the bedrooms were full of boxes.10 11 12 13 14 us 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 62 The kitchen, there wasn't any food in the refrigerator or anything like that. It was just -- it looked like it was a work space more than -- it didn't look like it was being lived in, as far as sleeping there. a. How about 1113? A. 1113, the upstairs apartment, yeah, they had a bedroom with a bed. There was I think in the main room, other area, there was some type of bed out in that area. And they had the fridge and food in that area. Q. In terms of tidiness versus being cluttered how would you describe 1111 and 1113 Grant? A. Um, as far as each of them -- well, they were both untidy. Like I said before, 1111 appeared to be a storage, what was used for storage. MS. KURTZ: May I approach? THE COURT: Yes. BY MS. KURTZ: Q. While you were in -- well, I'm going to show you what's been marked as People's Exhibit 8. Do you recognize that? AL Yes. Q. And what is People's -- what is shown in People's Exhibit 8?10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 al 22 23 24 63 A That's a picture of a bank statement. I guess it's on a computer desk in the lower level living room area or main area. Q. Is that something that you saw when you were in 1111 Grant Avenue? A Yes. Q And that was photographed and then -- MS. KURTZ: May I approach? THE COURT: Yes. BY MS. KURTZ Q I'm going to show you what's been marked 9A. And do you recognize People's 9A? A Yes. Q. And what is it? A. That's the bank statement that's in the picture there. It has the -- it's addressed to or the address of Richard E. Wanke and Diane Chavez with the address of 1113 Grant Avenue. Q And People's Exhibit 8, does that fairly and accurately depict the bank statement when you first saw it in the lower apartment, 1111 Grant Avenue? A Yes. Q. And People's Exhibit 9A, is that in the same or substantially the same condition as when you saw it in10 ut 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 64 1111 Grant Avenue? AL Yes. Q. And the bank statement, what bank is on there? A. U.S. Bank. Q. And who does it say it's a bank statement for? AL Richard Wanke and Diane Chavez. Q. And is there an address that it was sent to? A. Yes, 1113 Grant Avenue. MS. KURTZ: Judge, I would ask to admit and publish 8 and 9A. THE COURT: Any objection? MR. AZHARI: No objection. THE COURT: It may be admitted and published. MS. KURTZ: May I approach the witness? THE COURT: Yes. BY MS. KURTZ: a. This is People's 8. And can you -- it might be a little difficult, but when you're looking at People's 8, can you just tell us what we're looking at and where the bank statements are? AL The bank statements are right below the monitor. I guess that's a computer monitor above it, and it's in the middle of the screen on the desk10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 65 there. Q. Okay. And People's 9A -- and this is People's Exhibit 9A with the names Richard Wanke and Diane Chavez and 1113 Grant Avenue; is that correct? A That's correct. Q The entire time that you were with the defendant -- so from the time that you met her in the doorway of 1113 Grant Avenue down to the Public Safety Building -- that whole time you were in the City of Rockford, County of Winnebago and State of Illinois, correct? A, That's correct. MS. KURTZ: May I just have a moment? THE COURT: Yes, ma'am. MS. KURTZ: I don't have any other questions. MR. RICHARDS: May we approach? THE COURT: Yes. (The following proceedings were heard at sidebar by use of a listening device provided to the court reporter.) MR. RICHARDS: I would like a bathroom break just for me. THE COURT: For you? MR. RICHARDS: Yes.10 al 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2i 22 23 24 66 THE COURT: Go ahead. MR. AZHARI: Do you want me to wait until he comes back or do you want me to start? THE COURT: I would like you to go ahead. MR. RICHARDS: I will stay. (Which were all the proceedings had at the sidebar.) MR. AZHARI: Judge, permission to reposition the podium. THE COURT: Sure; go ahead. MR. AZHARI: Thank you. CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. AZHART Q. Good morning. It's Sergeant Lee, right? A. Yes. Q. Good morning. A. Good morning. Q. So we established earlier that you were a detective on February 6th of 2008, correct? aA. That's correct. Q. The day that this investigation was going on? A. That's correct. a. Okay. And you were called to start your10 aL 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 67 investigation at about 2:00 o'clock? A. That's correct. Q Okay. And you were told that there was a suspect in a potential murder case, right? A That's correct. a And throughout the course of your investigation you went to the property at 1113, correct? AL That's correct. Q. Okay. And that was at approximately what time did you first go there to conduct surveillance? AL That was around 5:55. Q. So 5:55, and you spoke to Ms. Chavez at about 7:00 p.m., correct? AL Shortly before there, yes. Around there, yeah Q. So were you at the property throughout that whole time, 5:55 to 7:00 p.m.? AL No. Q. Where were you? AL Where were we at? Q. Correct. Between when you went to conduct surveillance at 5:55, where did you leave to go? A. We were on John Street - or Court Street just to the I guess north of John Street. Q. Was that in plain view of the property?10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 68 A No. Q. Okay. And when did you come back to the property? A, Um, about I guess 6:40. Q. And you were there for 20 minutes before you approached the door? A. No; during that time we approached the door. Q. And you made contact with Ms. Chavez at 7:00 o'clock? A. Shortly before there, yes. Q. Okay. So what were you doing for the 20 minutes then? That's what I'm trying to get at. A. I don't recall, I mean, we went there and we approached the residence. We were knocking on the doors. We eventually got an answer. a. And it took you 20 minutes to get an answer? AL It didn't take 20 minutes, no. Q. Okay. So at that point it was you and Detective Regez, right? Is that how you say it? AS Regez. Q. Regez. And it was just the two of you? AL There were other detectives there, yes. Q. At the property or in your car? AL At the property.10 1. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 69 Q. Okay. And who were the other detectives at the property? AL I believe it was Detectives Posley, Harris And I believe Chief Lindmark and Sergeant Whisenand were there. Q. And sergeant who? AL Whisenand. Q. So there were four othere people and then you and Detective Regez? AL Yes. a. And you were the last ones to arrive? A, As far as at the residence? a. Right. A, There was people that -- when we were doing surveillance, there was surveillance on the residence there, and we were doing surveillance on the vehicle Q Okay. Let me get this straight. So between 5:55 and 7:00 p.m., the four people that you named, they were conducting surveillance on the residence? A. No. Q. So was there anyone conducting surveillance on the residence between 5:55 and 7:00 p.m.? A, Yes. Q Who was that?10 a. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 70 AL Detective Sims I believe. Q. Okay. So he would know if somebody left the property or went into the property? A, Yes. Q. And to your knowledge did he observe anyone entering or leaving the property? AL Uh, we were advised during that time that an individual began walking down John Street from the property. Q. Okay. Do you have any idea who that individual was? Was there a name for that individual? AL Who -- he was later identified, yes. a. Who was that? AL Richard Wanke. Q. Okay. And that was before you approached the property at 7:00 p.m.? A Yes. Q. Okay. And do you know if that individual that was observed go into the property? A. No. Q. Okay. And you eventually -- you and Detective Regez, was it just you two that knocked on the door? A Yes. Q So there were no other detectives or the four10 a. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 71 people that you listed, they weren't there when Ms. Chavez stepped out? A. They were in the front area toward the front sidewalk. a. And was it the four of them that were still there? A Yes. Q So at that point it was six police officers from the Rockford Police Department that were there? A, Yes. a. And Ms. Chavez? A, Yes. Q. Okay. And she was speaking directly to you and Detective Regez? A, Yes. Q. Okay. And you said you were knocking on the doors. Did you announce yourselves as with the Rockford Police Department before she stepped out? A I don't recall if we did or not. Q Okay. $o you don't know if you knocked and she stepped out or you knocked and announced yourself and then she stepped out? A Well, we knocked; she didn't just open the door.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 72 Q. I understand that. I'm asking you if you knocked and announced yourselves as police department with the police -- AL (Interrupting) I don't recall if we she asked She did step out though. Q. Okay. But you don't know when you announced who you were? AL When she came out, yes, we told her we were police officers. Q. Okay. And at that point you asked her -- you were asking her a series of questions, right? A Yes. Q. And it was conversational in nature? A Yes. Q. And she never at any point told you that she didn't want to speak to you, right? A. That's correct. Q. Okay. There's nothing in your report to indicate that she was either combative with you or rude to you or anything, right? A. That's correct. Q. She answered the questions you asked? A. out there? Q. Right.10 1. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 73 A. Yes. Q. Okay. And she wasn't being uncooperative or anything, was she? A No. Q. Okay. And she didn't deny the request to speak to you, right? AL That's correct. Q. Okay. And she wasn't required to speak to you at that point, right? AL That's correct. a. Okay. And you eventually asked her if Richard Wanke lived at the property, right? A. That's correct. Q. Okay. And the purpose of that was so that you could maybe get some evidence for the investigation correct? A. Well, we asked her who, if anybody, else lived there. Q. Right. But, I mean, the purpose of that question was as a part of your investigation, right? A That's correct. Q. And that was for you to maybe get evidence into a potential murder, right? AL That's correct.10 ql 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 14 a. Okay. And you didn't tell her that that was the purpose of you asking that question, right? AL No. a. So at that point, to you, she had no idea why you were asking her that question? A. I don't know. MS. KURTZ: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained as to the form of the question. MR. AZHARI: I'll move on, Judge. BY MR. AZHARI: Q. And you were speaking to her -- she was on the porch and you were on the sidewalk, right? AL That's correct. Q. So you were outside? A. Yes. Q. And you asked to go into her property? A. Yes, if we could speak with her -- Q. (Interrupting) I'm sorry? A. If we could speak with her inside, yes. Q. Right. And she denied that request? A. That's correct. a. But she was speaking to you outside? AL Yes.10 ql 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 75 Q. Okay. And you wanted to speak to her inside because you wanted -- did you indicate you wanted to search the property? A We indicated that we wanted to speak with her inside because it was so cold outside. Q. Okay. $o you didn't give any indication as to why you wanted to go inside? A We asked if we could speak with her inside because it was cold outside. Q Okay. And she was not required to allow you into her house, right? A No. Q. Okay. And at no point did you ever mention that you wanted to search the residence as for a potential investigation? A, Yes. Q. You did? A, We asked her. Q Okay. And she voluntarily came with you to the Public Safety Building, correct? A yes. Q. Okay. And at the point where, when you -- after she already declined your request to step inside, she voluntarily acquiesced to your request to10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 16 go to the Public Safety Building, right? A. Yes, she voluntarily came to the Public Safety Building. Q. Right. So she went back inside to get her coat, right? AL Yes. a. And you again asked if somebody could escort her -- I think on direct you used the phrase, maybe accompany her into her house, right? AL Yes. Q. Why would someone have to accompany her into her house to find a coat? A. Because it's an officer safety issue. I'm not sure what her involvement is at that point. We want to go inside to make sure that we're not in any danger at that point. a. Okay. But she wasn't a suspect, right? A. At that point, a suspect in the murder? Q. Right. A. We had information that Richard Wanke lived at 1113 Grant Avenue. We didn't know what might be in there. Q. Okay. But there was no indication that he was in there, correct?10 a1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 A Q 77 At that time? Right. He wasn't in there at that time. Right. And you had no indication that he was there is what I'm asking you A Q Q That he had been in there or was in there? That he was in there at that moment. At that moment, no, he wasn't in there And did you know he wasn't in there? Yes. You knew that he was not there? At that time we were talking with her? Right. Yes. And Diane Chavez was not a suspect in the investigation, correct? A Q That's correct. So where is the officer safety issue that you had to accompany someone into their own home to get a jacket? A Because we had information that Richard Wanke lived at 1113 Grant Avenue. Q But if he lived there but he wasn't there, what's the safety issue?10 aL 12 13 14 1s 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 78 A Because at that point it's officer safety -- it's prudent to use officer safety. I mean, I don't know...just asking her to accompany her in there -- she can deny our request at that point, which she did. But that would be the reason we wanted somebody to accompany her. Q Okay. So she is not a suspect, but you wanted to go in there to help her get a coat because of safety issues with the police officers, right? A That's correct. Q. Then she stepped out with her coat? A Yes. Q And you offered her either the option of driving with you or separately, correct? A, That's correct. Q. Okay. And she chose to come with you in your squad car? A. That's correct. Q. Okay. And that would give an opportunity for further conversation in the car, right? AL Yes. Q. I mean, if she drove separately you wouldn't be able to talk to her or any more, right, while you guys are driving to the Public Safety Building?10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 79 A Okay. Q So it subjected her to further conversation with you and Detective Regez, right? A Not about this issue, no. Q It would give the opportunity for further conversation, right? A, Yes, it could. Q Okay. And I've got to bring this up -- there was talk on direct that, you know, when she stepped out, she closed the door behind her when she came out of her apartment, right? A, Yes. a. Well, it was cold outside, right? A. Yes. Q Did you find that unusual that she would close her door on a cold day? aA No. Q Okay. $o then she stepped back in to get her coat and she closed the door, right? A That's correct. Q I mean, she didn't leave it open, because it was cold outside, right? A That's correct. a. It wasn't because she was trying to deny you10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 80 access to her residence, was it? MS. KURTZ: Objection A. I don't know. THE COURT: Sustained. BY MR. AZHART: Q And before you got to the Public Safety Building and during the conversation, she indicated that -- you stated on direct that she stated that no one lived in the building, right? A That's correct. Q Okay. And when you guys -- when you and Detective Regez were talking to her, were any of you taking notes of the conversation? A Not at that point, no. a. Okay. Do you have anything that you could take notes with? A I didn't have anything at that point, no Q. Did Detective Regez have anything to take notes with? AL No. Q. Could he have taken any -- could you guys have taken anything to take notes with? I mean, is that common when you are conducting an investigation to maybe write some things down?10 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 81 A Usually when you're out in the field, not always. It just depends on the situation Q. Okay. Well, you're a detective, right? A. Yes. Q. You've been with the department for years? AL Yes. a. And you're trained to maybe take notes of things that you do maybe to refer to refresh your memory? AL Yes. a. Okay. And in this case you actually prepared a supplemental report, correct? AL That's correct. Q. And the purpose of those reports is to maybe look back at them in case you forget certain details, right? aA. That's correct. Q. And to memorialize certain important elements of the case, right? A. That's correct. Q. And never in your career as a police officer did you ever take any, maybe a little notepad and a pen with you out into the field to take notes about something to refresh your memory later to know an10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 82 important detail? A I have done that, yes. Q. Okay. But you could have done that here, right? AL I didn't have a note pad with me at the time Q. Okay. $o you didn't memorialize the conversation, Do you recall exactly what you asked her when you asked her if anyone lived in the building? A. Yes. Q. That was the exact question word for word? A Lived in the entire building, yes. Q. Okay. And there is nothing in writing that you can show anyone that would memorialize -- that memorializes that conversation, right? AL My report. Q. That's in your report? A Yes. Q. Okay. Eventually she agreed to come to the station, right? AS Yes. Q. And you got there about 7:10? A Yes. ° And the interview started 30 minutes later right? A. Yes.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 83 Q. Okay. So she waited there voluntarily? AL Yes. Q. She was free to leave at any time? A Yes. Q. And she chose not to? A That's correct. Q And when you were speaking with her, were you ever speaking to her alone? A, No. Q. So it was you and Detective Regez, right? A, Right. Unless at times when I checked on her at the interview room, just asked her if she needed anything. Q. Okay. There was nothing substantive about the investigation? A, No. Q. Okay. And there was talk on direct that you didn't mention anything about the underlying issue that you were investigating, right? A Prior to going into the interview room? Q. Right. A That's correct. a. And she knew about it before you mentioned it? A. (No response.)10 ca 12 13 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 84 ° Did she know about what you were investigating before you had mentioned it? A, Well, when we started speaking with her and asked her about that, she said she did. Q. Okay. Was there any kind of publicity about what you were investigating? Was it on the news or TV or anything? A Apparently it was, yes. Q Okay. And at some point you began this investigation, and you again asked her if you could search her home, right? A Yes, during the interview. Q. Okay. That wasn't the first time that you asked her if you could search her home, right? AL Right, that wasn't the first time. ° Okay. Why did you ask her again if she already declined your request? A, Just asked her if we could Q. Okay. And you took another break at 8:30, so that makes an hour and 20 minutes that she is there voluntarily, right? A Yes. Q Okay. And at 9:10 you checked on her. So she was still there?10 ul 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 1g 20 21 22 23 24 Q 85 Yes. Was she in a room that was locked? No. So she was free to leave at any time? Yes. Okay. And she never asked to leave, right? She did not. Okay. And you asked her about whether Richard Wanke lived at 1113, right? A Q. A Q Regez? A. Yes. And she said no? That's correct. who asked her that; was it you or Detective During the interview process both of us had asked her that. Q You asked her at different times the same question? A Yes. Q. Okay. And the answer was the same? A. Yes. Q Okay. And just to make clear, did you take any notes during this interview? A Yes.10 aL 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 86 Q. Okay. And were they handwritten notes? A, Yes. Q. And you eventually typed them up in your report? A Yes. Q. And that's a supplemental report? aA yes. Q. Okay. And is that the report dated -- it looks like it's supplemental report July 22, 2008. Does that sound accurate? AL No, it would have been before that. That might have been the date that they approved it. a. Okay. But that's what I'm referencing is the supplemental report that you drafted A. Yes. a. Okay. So when you use the term "Did he live at 11132" what did you mean by "live"; like did you mean he resided there and slept there every night or that he slept there half the time and slept at 1111 half the time? What did you mean by that? MS. KURTZ: Objection THE COURT: Basis? MS. KURTZ: Relevance to the question Well, may we -- THE COURT: I'm overruling the relevance10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 87 objection. What did you mean when you asked her the question; go ahead and answer that. THE WITNESS: Could you ask the question again? BY MR. AZHARI: Q. I'm sorry? AL Could you ask the question again? Q. Oh, sure, as best as I can. What did you mean when you asked -- when you used the word "live at 1113," I'm just curious as to what you meant by that. A Did he live with Diane Chavez at the upper apartment with her. Q. Sleep there every night seven days a week, 365 days a year; that's what you meant by that? AL Yeah, reside, other than being a maintenance man, other than being a tenant, other than not having a personal relationship with somebody; yeah, that he lived there with you. Q Okay. Just so I can understand what you meant by it too. Obviously we know there is two different apartments, correct? AL Yes. Q Okay. So if -- let's say you spent half the time at 1111 and half the time at 1113, is that to you10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 88 living at 1113 or 11 -- MS. KURTZ: (Interrupting) Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. Disregard. BY MR. AZHARI: a. And this conversation was not recorded, correct? A That's correct. Q. Because it wasn't required to be? AL That's correct. Q. Okay. But your department had the capability of recording that, correct? A We do, yes. Q. Okay. And you chose not to? A We're not required to. ° Okay. Eventually you relayed this information to Detective Bailey? A Yes. Q And there was a search warrant executed, correct? AL That's correct. Q And the search warrant was executed at what time; do you remember? Was it like 3:00 or 4:00 in the morning? A Yeah, it was earlier that morning on the 7th. Q Did Diane Chavez ever leave the Public Safety10 ul. 12 13 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 a9 Building? AL No. MS. KURTZ: Objection. THE COURT: Basis? MS. KURTZ: Relevance. THE COURT: Sustained. BY MR. AZHARI: a. At the time that you left the property when you took Diane Chavez to the Public Safety Building, were there any officers still at the property? AL Yes. a. Did they stay there until the execution of the search warrant? AL Yes. Q. To your knowledge, did anyone enter or leave the property? AL No, they did not. Q. Okay. So Diane Chavez never entered the property? AL That's correct. MR. AZHARI: Just a moment, Judge. Judge I have premarked these pictures as defense exhibits, and I'll show them to counsel in a minute. THE COURT: All right.10 aL 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 90 BY MR. AZHARI: Q. And just so I'm clear, Officer, did you go back to the property for the execution of the search warrant? AL Yes. Q. Did you go into the property? A. Yes. Q. Did you go into both 1111 and 1113? AL Yes. MR. AZHARI: For the record, I'm showing opposing counsel pictures of Defense Exhibits 1 through 13. BY MR. AZHARI: Q. I'm handing you -- MR. AZHARI: Judge, may I approach the witness? THE COURT: You may. BY MR. AZHART: Q. I'm handing you what's been marked as Defense Exhibits 1 through 13. If you want to take a minute and flip through those and let me know if any of those look familiar to you A (Witness complies.). a. Do those look familiar to you?10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 91 A Yes. Q. What are they pictures of? A. The lower apartment. Q. 1111? A Yes. Q Okay. And are they a clear and accurate representation of the way that apartment looked on February 6th -- I'm sorry, the early morning hours of February 7, 2008? A Yes. MR. AZHARI: Judge, permission to admit Defense Exhibits 1 through 13 into evidence and publish to the jury? THE COURT: Any objection? MS. KURTZ: No. THE COURT: All right. They shall be admitted, and you may publish them MR. AZHARI: Thank you. BY MR. AZHARI: Q. Can you see that picture from where you're sitting? A Yes. Q Okay. And that is what's been identified as Defense Exhibit No. 5; okay. Now, is that the10 qi 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 92 computer that you saw at 1111? AL Yes, that's in 1111 a. And did you use that computer? AL Did I use that computer? a. Yeah. AL No. Q. Do you know if it was a fully functioning computer? A. I don't know. a. Okay. And did you search the apartment when you were there? Did you conduct any search or was that somebody else doing that? A. Yes, I assisted in the searching a. Okay. And if you look on the kind of bottom right-hand side, you see there is a magazine there correct? AL Yes. Q. And it looks like a PC World magazine? AL Yes. Q. Okay. Did you happen to pick that magazine up? AL No. Q. So you don't know who it belonged to? A. No. Q. You don't know if it belonged to Richard Wanke?10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 93 A No Q. You don't know if it was addressed to 1111 as opposed to 1113? AL I don't know, Q. So you don't know the address on that, correct? A. No. Q. Okay. And you did not check the computer to see if it was used by anyone recently? AL Not at that time, no. a. You didn't check to see if it belonged to Richard Wanke? A. I don't think we had access to the computer at that time. We were doing a search warrant for the residence, not for the computer Q. Okay. Did you check the desk to see if there was anything there that would indicate that anyone lived at that property, other than just determine there was a desk there with a computer and some other things that were on it? A. That's correct. MR. AZHARI: I'm publishing what's been entered into evidence as Defense Exhibit No. 8. BY MR. AZHARI: Q. Do you know what that's a picture of?10 a. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 94 A. It looks to be the closet. Q. Do you know what was in the closet? A. No. Q. You didn't search the closet? AL I didn't search the closet. Q. So you don't know what these two items on the left-hand side of Defense Exhibit 8 are? A, No. Q. Okay. MR. AZHARI: I am showing, publishing Defense Exhibit No. 10. BY MR. AZHARI: Q. That's a picture of the bathroom, correct? AL Yes. Q. Okay. And did you use the bathroom? Do you know if the water was running there? AL No. Q. Do you know if the toilet worked? AL No. Q. Okay. So it could have been a fully functioning bathroom? AL Yes. Q. That somebody could use? A. Yes.10 1. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 95 Q Okay. And there was electricity in the apartment, correct? A. Yes. a. So there was power and it had running water to your knowledge, right? A, I didn't check the water, but there was power Q. I'm sorry? A. There was power, yes. Q. Okay. MR. AZHARI: May I have a quick moment Judge? THE COURT: All right. BY MR. AZHARI: Q. And there was also a kitchen, right? AL Yes. Q. Okay. MR. AZHARI: I'm publishing what's been entered in as Defense Exhibit No. 11. BY MR. AZHARI: Q. You indicated there was nothing in the kitchen that would indicate that somebody was living there? A. I indicated there was no food or anything like that, that's correct. Q. As we can see from the picture, there is10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 al 22 23 24 96 glasses there, correct? A. That's correct. Q. And it looks to be like some bowls and mugs there? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And it's not the tidiest kitchen. As you said, both apartments were rather messy, right? A. Yes. Q. But there were some items there that could have been used on a regular basis, right, to eat or drink? AL Yes. Q. Okay. And I'm showing you one more picture that's been marked -- or entered as Defense Exhibit No. 4, What is that a picture of? AL One of the -- I guess one of the bedrooms there Q. What makes you think it's a bedroom? AL Because it was a bedroom. Q. Okay. And is that a sleeping bag over here? A. It appears to be a sleeping bag, yes. Q. Okay. And do you know if somebody had been sleeping in that sleeping bag? A. No. a. So you don't know if anyone had been using that? A. No.10 ut 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 97 Q Was there -- I will strike that. Did you look for any other items that would have had an -- that could have had an address on it, magazines, other pieces of mail, some take-out menus that were mailed to the house, anything like that? A I didn't personally, no. Q. Okay. And it was mentioned that bank statement It was a U.S. Bank statement, correct, if I can recall? AL Yes. Q. Did you contact U.S. Bank regarding that account? A No. Q. So do you know when that account was opened? A. No. Q Do you know who the primary holder on that account was? A No. Q. Okay. Do you know if the upstairs of 1111 and 1113 had separate meters for gas and electric? A I don't know. Q. Do you know if they were powered by the same company, whether it was ComEd or Nicor for both of their utilities? A I don't know. Q Did you contact the utility companies to10 aL 12 13 14 15 16 ay 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 98 determine who was paying the bills at either place? A. No. MR. AZHARI: Nothing further, Judge. THE COURT: Any redirect? MS. KURTZ: Yes. REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. KURTZ Q. Sergeant Lee, what time did you get to the area of 1111-1113 Grant? A. It was I believe -- the first time? Q. Yes. AL Around 5:55 p.m. a. Okay. And when you said you were at Court and John, is that near that Grant address? Can you just kind of tell us the layout of the neighborhood, where you were and what you were doing? AL We were doing surveillance. That's a block to the east of 1111-1113 Grant Avenue. So we were approximately a block -- I think we were maybe in the middle of that block on Court Street south of John, so it's a block to the east of the address there. And we were doing surveillance on a vehicle at that time Q. How many detectives were in the area doing10 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 99 surveillance? A. There were one, two -- at least seven of us; maybe eight. a. Is everyone conducting surveillance of the same thing? AL Yes. Q. And that was the vehicle? AL And the residence, yes. Q. And at 6:40 why was your attention -- at that point why is your attention on the residence? AL At that point? Q. Yes. AL Well, because we had stopped Richard Wanke, and then we went to the residence at that point to see who else might be there. Q. Richard Wanke had actually been taken into custody at that point; is that correct? AS That's correct. Q. And that's how you knew he was not inside the residence? A. That's correct. Q. Were you present when he was taken into custody? A. Yes. Q. Was a gun located on him?10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 100 A No. Q. Detective Lee, was there a gun -- well, was there a gun used in Mr. Clark's murder? AL Yes. a. And no gun was located on Mr. Wanke? AL That's correct. a. So was a gun found at the scene of the murder? A. No. Q. When counsel asked you about an officer safety issue with Ms. Chavez going in the house, how is the fact that no gun was found -- how is that relevant to that question? A. Well, the information at that time that we had was that Richard Wanke lived at 1113 Grant Avenue. The fact that she was at that residence, that's the reason why officer safety issue. If -- he had been developed as a suspect and the fact that the information we had at that time; if he had been in that residence there could be a gun in there and that's why we wanted to accompany her inside Q. And if Ms. Chavez goes in the house without you present, you don't know if she could obtain a weapon any weapon or a gun? A. That's correct.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 101 Q It was her decision to ride in the squad car with you; isn't that correct? A That's correct. Q. You gave her an option to drive herself if she chose to come; isn't that correct? A. That's correct. Q. Defense counsel asked you about not taking notes when you were talking to Ms. Chavez. As you previously described, what had been going on? what were you doing? A Well, we were doing surveillance initially And then we went up to the residence just to knock on the door to find out who was there Q. And Wanke was taken into custody, correct? AL That's correct. Q. It would not be common to have a note pad on you as you are taking someone into custody, correct? AL That's correct. Q. Defense counsel asked about officers staying at the property -- well, let's talk about that. So when you and Detective Regez approach 1113, you stated that there are four other people there, Deputy Chief Lindmark, Sergeant Whisenand and two other detectives correct?10 lL 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 102 A That's correct. Q. Where are they in proximity to where you are? A. They are away from the front porch area. I don't remember how far, but it was closer to the front sidewalk that runs along the property line I guess Q. So the public sidewalk, not the walkway to the house? AL That's correct. Q. And after you and Detective Regez left 1113 with Ms. Chavez, you stated that other detectives stayed there; is that correct? A. That's correct. Q. Were they inside the residence? A No. Q. And what's the purpose of them staying there? A. To make sure that nobody -- at that point -- at that point they were going to begin the process of obtaining a search warrant. And they were there to make sure that nobody came in or left the residence. Q. Counsel asked you about checking the computer to see if it's working. And you said something about no access to the computer. A search -- or to search a computer you would obtain a separate search warrant; is that correct?10 1. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 103 AL That's correct. Q And the search warrant you had was not for the contents of the computer? A, That's correct. a. You stated that you did not record your conversation with Ms. Chavez because it wasn't required. What does that mean? A Well, it means -- state law in murder investigations, a suspect is required to be video recorded. But if you're not a suspect, you're not required to be recorded at that time. MS. KURTZ: No other questions. THE COURT: Anything else in those limited areas? MR. AZHARI: No recross on that, Judge. THE COURT: Thank you, Sergeant. You may step down. (Witness excused.) THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to give you your morning recess for about 15 minutes. Please go with my bailiff. Don't discuss the case Thank you. (Whereupon, the jury was excused for a recess.)10 1 12 13 14 15 16 uy 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 104 (Whereupon, the following proceedings were heard outside the presence of the jury.) THE COURT: All right. Take about 15 minutes. Anything we need to put on the record before we recess? MS. KURTZ: No, sir. MR. RICHARDS: No. THE COURT: Okay. Take 15 minutes. (Whereupon, a recess was taken.) THE COURT: Thank you. You may be seated. Mr. Winstead is getting the jury. MS. KURTZ: I have three more witnesses; two are business records and the last one is Detective Bailey. I think those will be relatively quick. It is 11:30. But if we could -- just timingwise so that they're done, if we can go a little into the noonhour. THE COURT: I am fine with that. MS. KURTZ: Thank you. THE COURT: Okay. (Whereupon, the following proceedings were heard in the presence of the jury.) THE COURT: Thank you. You may be seated. Call your next witness. MS. KURTZ: We call Scott Hultz.10 ql 12 13 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 ar 22 23 24 105 THE COURT: Raise your right hand SCOTT HULTZ, was called as a witness and after having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: THE COURT: Please be seated. Make sure you slide all the way forward and speak directly into the microphone. Thank you. DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. KURTZ Q. Sir, can you tell us your name, please, and spell your last name for the court reporter? A. Scott A. Hultz, H-u-1-t-z. Q. Where do you work, sir? AL Illinois Secretary of State. Q. What do you do for the Illinois Secretary of State? A I am with the court liaison section. a. How long have you been with the Illinois Secretary of State? A. Twelve years. Q. And can you tell us what's the nature of the business of the Secretary of State of Illinois?10 ut 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 106 A. The Secretary of State's office is the keeper of all driving and vehicle records. Q. Can you tell us specifically what and what's the process of keeping those records? AL When a person goes into a driver's facility or to renew or obtain an Illinois driver's license or a vehicle registration or a sticker or a state identification card, all that information is collected and kept by the Secretary of State's office. Q. For what period of time are those applications kept? AL Um, by paper they are kept, and then they are sent down to Springfield, which they are then put on microfilm and kept forever. Q. When someone comes in to obtain a driver's license or a state ID, how does an employee of the Secretary of State go about doing that? A. That individual is then supposed to show three forms of identification. a. So what would they be? A. It could be a credit card with a signature on the back of it, a birth certificate, a Social Security card, U.S. mail, or like utility bills with the address on it that they then record and input into the computer.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1q 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 107 Q. Okay. And then after they do that, what does the employee of the Secretary of State do? A. An application is then printed. They asked certain questions of the individual, and then the individual signs it and then it's processed. a. And are -- is that process using that application and obtaining the forms of ID, is that done in the normal and ordinary course of business? A. Yes. Q. And the information that is obtained and kept on the form that is the -- well, it's important that it's accurate, and that's also done in the normal and ordinary course of business to verify that with those three forms of ID; is that correct? A. Correct. Q. What happens after the form has been prepared or used? A. Then the information is inputted into the computer and then a picture of the individual is taken and the driver's license is -- or state ID card is produced. Q. And all of those forms or applications that are used to obtain either a driver's license or a state ID are used and kept in the normal and ordinary course of10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ar 22 23 24 108 business; is that correct? A Yes. Q. Were you -- or was the Secretary of State recently served with a subpoena requiring the production in court today of all application forms of Richard Wanke obtained by the Secretary of State? A. Yes. Q. And what procedure was followed in response to the subpoena? A Once that subpoena was received down in Springfield, the information was gathered and then it was forwarded on to my boss who then forwarded it on to me. Q. And did you bring something today with you in response to that subpoena? A. Yes. MS. KURTZ: May I approach? THE COURT: Yes. BY MS. KURTZ: Q. I'm going to hand you a packet that's been marked People's Exhibit 7, It's stapled together. Do you recognize that? A Yes. Q And what is People's Exhibit 7?10 ql 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 109 oA. It is the certified information that was required by the subpoena. Q. And what does it mean that it is certified? A. That it is a true and accurate copy of what the Secretary of State's office has. Q. And the first page is what? A. The first page is actually the subpoena itself. a. And the second page is? A It's the certification. a. And what does the rest of the packet contain? A. The rest of the packet contains certified driving abstract and then copies of the renewal for driver's licenses, the applications. Q. For which person? A Richard Wanke. a. And People's Exhibit 7, that entire packet has been certified by the Secretary of State as accurate and true copies of records kept by the Secretary of State, correct? A. Correct. Q. And when going through the records that you produced for us, are there -- well, are there addresses of Richard Wanke that were given to the Secretary of State?10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 110 A. Yes. a. And can you tell us what those are? AL Um, on four of the applications it's 1113 Grant Avenue, Rockford, Illinois. And then on one of them it is 928 South Sixth Street, Rockford, Illinois. Q. And what timingwise -- or what's the date on that one? A. On that one it is April 3rd of 1999, Q. For the South Sixth Street address? A Correct. a. And the other applications which list the 1113 Grant Avenue, Rockford, Illinois, address, are they before or after in time? A. After. Q. After in time? AL Correct. MS. KURTZ: May I approach and retrieve the exhibit? THE COURT: Yes. BY MS. KURTZ: Q. I'm sorry -- and I'm going to hand this back to you for one second. Contained in here, is there also a date of birth listed for Richard Wanke and that address?10 11 12 13 14 15 16 7 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 111 A. Yes. Q. What's that? A. 5-25-61. Q. Thank you. MS. KURTZ: May I retrieve the exhibit? THE COURT: Yes. MS. KURTZ: I don't have any other questions. THE COURT: Cross. MR. RICHARDS: A couple questions. CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. RICHARDS Q. Mr. Hultz, first of all, when somebody applies for a driver's license, you said that they can bring in different forms of identification, correct? A Correct. And the minimum that is required is two, right? It's now three. Now three? Yes. Okay. Has it always been three or was there a when it was two? There might have been a time when it was two.10 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 112 That, I'm not one hundred percent sure on. Q. And the three pieces of identification, one could be a birth certificate? A. Correct. Q. And you said that -- what was the others? AL You could use a Social Security card, proof of residency, which would be mail or a utility bill showing the address that you are residing. a. Okay. The first time you apply for a driver's license do you need to bring proof of residence? A. Yes. Q. Okay. So that would have to be something like a bill addressed to you in your name, correct? A. A utility bill or U.S. mail, correct. Q. Now, the driver's license, once you apply for it, usually it expires on your birthday, right? A. Yes. Q. And it's usually valid for four years? AL Correct. Q. So, for example, if my birth date -- I have a birth date of February 24th of 1956, Then every four years on my birthday from the time I first apply, that's when I have to renew the license, correct? A. Correct.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 113 . Now, is there any requirement that if your address changes during the course of the four years you have to get a new license? A. You are required to change that address with the Secretary of State's office. And whether you get it on the address -- or I'm sorry, on the driver's license or not, that is up to that individual. Because that would cost $5 to have that changed on the driver's license itself. Q Right. So the Secretary of State doesn't have any way or doesn't regularly monitor to see if people have changed their addresses and they should be getting in and getting a new license with the new address, do they? A No. Q And it would be up to the individual, if they wanted to make a correction during the course of the four years, to make the change, correct? A Correct. Q. Now, when you do renew the license, you don't have to bring in new proof of residence, do you? A As long as there are no changes on that driver's license or your status. Q Right. In other words, let's say I applied for10 11 12 13 14 1s 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 a4 a license let's say in 2003 and I changed my address, but then I apply for a renewal in 2007, bring the old license; is anybody going to say "You need to show proof that you're still living at the same residence"? A They are going to ask if there have been any changes to the driver's license. Q And if you say no, is there any way of checking to see if you changed your residence, in fact? A No. Q. And nobody, in fact, does check? A. No. Q Now, these licenses -- I just want to start with what I think is the most recent, and you will correct me if I'm wrong. MR. RICHARDS: May I approach? THE COURT: Yes, sir. BY MR. RICHARDS: Q I'll approach with what's been previously marked as State's exhibit -- MS. KURTZ: BY MR. RICHARDS: Q (Continuing) -- 7. On this first -- let me just do the one. There is one that has the expiration date of 5-26-07. Do you see that one?10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 11s THE COURT: Mr. Richards, could you stand back so you're not obstructing the view of the jurors? MR. RICHARDS: Yes. BY MR. RICHARDS: Q. Is that the application that has the most recent expiration date, you know, that is most furtherest in time or is there something more recent than this? A, That's the most recent. Q. So, in other words, the last record you have of Richard Wanke applying for a license would be, for renewing his license, would be the date of 5-25-2004; is that fair? A Yes. Q. Okay. So you have no record of him applying for a license -- and, by the way, when you got the subpoena, this was for all the records as to his driver's license, correct? A. Correct, applications and -- Q. Right. So, in other words, when you checked your records, you didn't find any application from Richard Wanke later than 5-26 of 2004, did you -- of 2003, did you? A. Not that I'm aware of. That's just the10 1 12 13 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 2i 22 23 24 116 information that I was sent. Q. Okay. So if he had -- well, put it this way: If he had changed his address in October of 2006, what you're saying is he should have gone and got the address changed on the license expiring of 5-26-07, correct? A. correct. Q. But you and the Secretary of State would have no way of knowing whether he did so or not? A. No. MR. RICHARDS: One moment. THE COURT: All right. MR. RICHARDS: That's it, Your Honor. THE COURT: Anything else from this witness, Ms. Kurtz? MS. KURTZ: No, sir. THE COURT: Is he free to go? MS. KURTZ: Yes. THE COURT: All right. You may step down, sir. Thank you. (Witness excused.) THE COURT: All right. Call your next witness. MS. HARRIS: The State would call Officer10 qi 12 13 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 a7 Klus. THE COURT: Raise your right hand, sir. BRIAN KLUS, was called as a witness and after having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: THE COURT: Please be seated right there Officer, slide the chair all the way forward and speak directly into the microphone; okay THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. THE COURT: Proceed. DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. HARRIS Q. can you please state your first and last name and spell your last name for the Court? A It's Brian; last name is Klus, K-l-u-s. Q. And where are you employed? A. Winnebago County Sheriff's Department. Q. And how long have you worked for the Winnebago County Sheriff's Department? A. Twenty-one years. Q. Okay. And what's your current position? A. I'm a corrections officer.10 a. 12 13 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 118 Q And what is the purpose of the Winnebago County jail? A We hold individuals who have been arrested until they go to trial; some are sentenced. Some bond out and we just... Q. Okay. In February of 2008 what department were you working in within the jail? A I was working in the booking office. Q. And what were your duties while working in the booking office? R I would book in the individuals that had been arrested and brought to the jail. Q. And can you just explain to the Court and the jury, what does the booking process entail? R We call the individuals up to the booking counter. We verify who they are before we start. We ask their name, date of birth, Social Security number to make sure we have the right individual. Then we go through and start asking like physical desciptors height, weight, scars, marks, tattoos. Then we go through and get address and continue on with emergency contacts. And then once we get all the personal information done, we go on and book in the charges that they're brought to jail on.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2l 22 23 24 11g Q. And does the jail have any type of program where they are maintaining this information? A. Yes, we use the program that's called the Offender Trak. Q And how long are these records saved in the Offender Trak? A. As far as I'm aware, they're in there forever Q. Now, is the procedure that you just described with regard to booking people into the jail conducted in the ordinary and regular course of business in the Winnebago County jail? A. Yes, it is. Q. And are the records that you put in the computer system called Offender Trak kept in the ordinary and regular course of business? A. Yes, they are. Q. Now, Mr. Klus, did you book someone by the name of Richard Wanke into the Winnebago County jail on February 7th of 2008? A, Yes, I did. Q. And did you follow the process that you just previously explained to the Court regarding booking the suspect? A Yes.10 ql 12 13 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 2l 22 23 24 120 Q. And when booking Mr. Wanke into the county jail did you learn his birth date? A. Yes, I did. Q. And what was that? A. It's 5-25-1961. Q. Okay. Also in booking Mr. Wanke did you learn his address? AL Yes. Q. And what was that? AL He gave the address of 1113 Grant Avenue in Rockford. Q. And did you document that address in the Offender Trak computer system? A. Yes. MS. HARRIS: Your Honor, may I approach the witness? THE COURT: Yes, ma'am. BY MS. HARRIS: Q. Officer Klus, I'm showing you what's been previously marked as People's Exhibit No. recognize that? A. Yes. Q. And what is that? Do you A. It's a screen shot from our computer that shows10 a. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 a. 22 23 24 121 the different booking screens that we use. Q. And it is a screen shot of who? A. Of Richard Wanke. Q. And does that screen shot, is it a fair and accurate photocopy of how the screen looked on Offender Trak on February 7th of 2008? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And does the exhibit show a photo of Mr. Wanke? A. Yes, it does. Q. And does the exhibit also show the address that Mr. Wanke gave to you on February 7th of 2008? A. Yes, it does. MS. HARRIS: If I can just have a second. Your Honor, may I approach the witness to retrieve it? THE COURT: Yes. MS. HARRIS: I have nothing further for this witness, Your Honor. THE COURT: All right. Any cross for this officer? MR, RICHARD: May I have that? CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. RICHARDS10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 122 Q. Officer Klus, your job is to book people into the jail, correct? A. Correct. Q. Okay. Is that your steady job like you do every day of the week or no? A No, I don't do that every day. There is many different positions in the jail that we work and we get rotated through them Q. Okay. Let me just clarify: Are you on the booking for like a week, a month or six months? A. It depends on who the supervisors are. Some supervisors like to keep you down there for a long period of time. Some supervisors rotate you through regularly. Q. Okay. In this particular case you said that you, the date that you -- let me just ask again. What was the date that you booked him, Mr. Wanke? Was that on February 7, 2008, or do you remember? A I don't recall at this time. I would have to look at the paper. a Okay. Well, let me show you what's been previously marked as People's 6. MS. HARRIS: Yes. THE COURT: 710 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 123 MS. KURTZ: THE COURT: All right. Go ahead. BY MR. RICHARDS: Q. Just show me where it lists the date. A, Right there (indicating). Q. Oh, okay; I see. So this was -- he was booked on February 7th of 2008, correct? A. Yes. Q As of February 7th of 2008, how long had you been assigned to the job of booking inmates in? A I don't recall at this time. Q Well, after February 7th of 2008, how long did you remain at that position? A. I have no idea. a. Weeks, months, days; not a clue? A. I don't know. That was five years ago. Q Okay. Well, let me just ask you this: When you are assigned to the booking like on a regular day that's all you do that day, booking, right? A. Not necessarily. If we're needed somewhere else, they'll ship us to help somewhere else if need be. Q On an average day how many people would you book into the jail?10 41 12 13 14 15 16 47 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 124 A That, I -- I have no answer to that. I don't know. Q. Well, could it be as many as ten? A. It could be. If it's a busy day, ten. a. As many as 20? A. Ten, twenty, thirty in a day. If it’s a slow day, ten. Q. Okay. So it could be as many as 30 in a day? A. It could be. Q All right. And this is kind of a routine task; you're just booking people in as they come, correct? A Correct. Q. All right. And do you have any present memory of booking Richard Wanke in, like do you have a visual memory of this or is this something that you are just going by the record? A I'm just going by the record. Q Okay. So in terms of that, when you enter information from people, you ask them questions and they give you information, correct? A Correct. Q One piece of information would be their name, right? A Correct.10 1 12 13 14 15 16 aq 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Q 125 Now, the people you're booking in, sometimes they give you false names, correct? A Q A Q gives don't might That's correct. And you ask for the date of birth, right? Yes. Sometimes they give you false dates of birth? Yes. And you ask for the address, right? Correct. Sometimes they give you false addresses? Correct. Okay. You have -- it's not your duty at that to check to see the accuracy of the information? I don't understand. I understand. In other words, if somebody you information like to book them in, right, you necessarily -- you don't then say...gee, there be something wrong with this; I've got to check; let me run some background to see if it's wrong...do you do anything like that? A It would depend on the situation. If they - sometimes we do, yes. Q. Okay. And actually sometimes people refuse to give you information, right?10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 126 A That is correct; uh-huh. Q And do you do some procedure, like let's say somebody is refusing -- they just won't give the address or whatever -- you check your records to see if you can find an address? A, If they've been there before, we will look at previous records for their address. We will compare it with what's on the police report that we've been given. Q Okay. So in the case of -- in the case of Richard Wanke, it is possible that he refused to give you an address and you looked through previous records to get the address of 1113 Grant Avenue, correct? A Could you repeat that? Q. In the case of Richard Wanke, it is possible that he refused to give you the address and you put the address on by looking at previous records, is it not? A No, that's not how we would do it. Q Well, I understand. You said to me that if somebody refuses to give an address AL (Interrupting) Correct. Q. (Continuing) -- you would check to see if you could find an address by some other means, correct?10 11 12 13 14 15 16 aq 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 127 A Right, we would. But we would not enter it in until the individual is cooperative with us and is willing to answer the questions; we don't book them in. Q Okay. So you said you won't book them in. You mean you won't process them into the jail until he answers that question? A. Until they cooperate with the booking process they will usually either sit in the booking area until they cooperate with us or we'll put them in a segregated housing unit until they cooperate with us. a. Okay. Did you check any of the -- did you check any records to see if Richard Wanke had been put into a segregated housing unit? A No. Q You said, and correct me if I'm wrong -- you said sometimes you will look for an address on the police report, for example? A On the charging documents that they give us. Q. On the charging documents they give you? A. Correct. a. Do you have copies of those charging documents? AL With me right now? Q. Yes.10 aL 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2. 22 23 24 128 A No. Q. Okay. Have you ever looked at the charging documents you were provided with when you booked Richard Wanke in? RK Yes; we have to. That's where we get our charges from. Q All right. And who prepares the charging documents? A, The arresting police agency. Q Okay. And you don't know exactly how the arresting police agency gets the address that they put on a charging document, do you? A No, I don't. Q When you book -- when you book somebody in, do you look at any identification he might have with him? Let's say they have an identification, a driver's license or something like that. A Yes, we'll do that. Yes; uh-huh, we do that a. All right. A. Yes. Q. So, for example, if Richard Wanke gave you a driver's license with the address of 1113 Grant Avenue, that might be a source to put in his address, correct?10 ql 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 129 A Correct. Q. Okay. A But he would have -- Q. (Interrupting) I understand. You're saying that he would have to confirm it through you otherwise you wouldn't book him in? A. Correct. Q And -- MR. RICHARDS: Just one second. Nothing further. THE COURT: Anything further for this officer? MS. HARRIS: If I can just have a second Your Honor. REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. HARRIS Q Officer, just to clarify: You previously testified that if a suspect or an individual being booked in refuses to give you any cooperating information, such as address, date of birth, you hold off in booking them until they're cooperative? A Correct. Q. Now, on that day of February 7, 2008, was10 1 12 13 14 15 16 uy 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 130 Richard Wanke cooperative? A. I don't recall. Q. Do you have any knowledge of whether he refused to give you any address? A. No, I don't. Q. But obviously you inputted an address? A Correct. Q. So is it safe to say that at some point in time you received a residence information from him? A. Correct. MS. HARRIS: Nothing further. MR. RICHARDS: Nothing else. THE COURT: Officer, you may step down, Thank you. (Witness excused.) THE COURT: Call your next witness. MS. KURTZ: Detective Bailey. JASON BAILEY, was called as a witness and after having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: THE COURT: Please be seated. Move your chair all the way forward and use the microphone, please.10 qq 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 131 Go ahead. DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. KURTZ Q Sir, can you tell us your name, please, and spell your last name for the court reporter? A. Jason Bailey, B-a-i-l-e-y. Q. Where do you work, sir? A. I am a detective with the City of Rockford Police. Q How long have you been with the Rockford Police Department? A Eighteen years. a. How long have you been a detective? A Ten Q Detective Bailey, on February 6, 2008, were you assigned to assist in the investigation of the murder of Greg Clark? A. Yes. a. And as part of your duties that night were you asked to create -- or write up a search warrant? AS Yes. Q. Detective Bailey, in your years as a Rockford police officer how many search warrants have you10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 132 written? A. Um, it would be in the hundreds, a couple hundred. QO. Can you tell us just briefly what are the components of a search warrant? A. Basically it's just laying a foundation of facts, um, either based on, you know exposure personally or on reliable information to establish probable cause. Q. And where did you -- well, where do you put that information; what's it called? A. An affidavit. Q. Are there any other documents that go along when you are creating a search warrant? A Yes, you type the affidavit, which again establishes the probable cause. And then you have a complaint for the search warrant and then the actual search warrant itself. Q. And when you're talking about the affidavit the information for probable cause, you said it had to be reliable information. What do you mean by that? A Um, again, information that is either from a reliable informant, a police officer or just information that I gathered myself or experienced10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 133 myself. Q. And it's important that to the best of your information the -- or to the best of your knowledge the information in the affidavit is accurate? A. Yes. Q. In creating -- did you do a search warrant for 1111 Grant Avenue in reference to the investigation into the murder of Greg Clark? AL Yes. Q. Did you also do a search warrant for 1113 Grant Avenue in reference to the murder investigation of Gregory Clark? A. Yes. Q. And in -- you typed the affidavits? A. That's correct. Q. In typing those affidavits did you speak to Detective Lee? A. I did. Q. Did you rely on the information that Detective Lee gave you in creating the affidavits? A I did. MS. KURTZ: I don't have any other questions MR. RICHARDS: No questions. THE COURT: All right. You may step down.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 134 Thank you. (Witness excused.) MS. KURTZ: May we approach? THE COURT: Yes. (The following proceedings were heard at sidebar by use of a listening device provided to the court reporter.) MS. KURTZ: Subject to the admission of exhibits, we rest. I don't know if you want them to take their lunch break and deal with things. THE COURT: I will let them go to lunch and we will stay here for a while. MS. KURTZ: Okay. (Which were all the proceedings had at the sidebar.) THE COURT: All right. Ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to give you your lunch break. We will resume at 1:30 p.m., We'll be working part of that time in your absence on a couple of matters. So we'll be working while you're enjoying the fresh air outdoors, have a little lunch hopefully. Don't discuss the case. Don't let anyone talk to you. Please go with my bailiff. Thank you. (Whereupon, the jury was excused for a10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 135 luncheon recess.) (Whereupon, the following proceedings were heard outside the presence of the jury.) THE COURT: All right. You may be seated. We're outside the presence of any jurors. MS. KURTZ: Judge. THE COURT: Yes. MS. KURTZ: I have agreed to extend Detective Regez' subpoena for the defense. I would like, however, to let him go. He has been here all morning. I would like to let him go for lunch. Since I have agreed to continue it, I just want to put on the record that I'm letting him go but he'll come back at 1:30. MR. RICHARDS: Thank you. THE COURT: All right. Thank you. MS. KURTZ: Also, Charles Smith and Sam Cornn are out there. I am not going to call them. But in talking to counsel this morning, he would like to have their subpoena continued until this afternoon, as he may call them. I don't know if you want to bring them in and let them go for lunch as well. I can assure the Court that Mr. Cornn is less than pleased with being10 ql 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 136 here and has sent numerous emails to myself and the advocate, so I think it's best for the Court to admonish him if he has to come back. THE COURT: Do you want Mr. Cornn back here at 1:30? MR. RICHARDS: I want him, the possibility of that, despite his displeasure. THE COURT: Have the gentlemen come in, and I will continue their subpoenaes until 1:30. MS. KURTZ: Do you want an order for that? THE COURT: No, I will tell them, MS. KURTZ: Judge, this is Mr. Smith. THE COURT: All right. Mr. Smith? MR. SMITH: Yes. THE COURT: Your subpoena is continued until 1:30. We're taking a lunch break here. We're actually not taking a break; we're working, but the jury is taking a lunch break. MR. SMITH: Sorry I can't help. THE COURT: See you at 1:30. MR. SMITH: Okay. THE COURT: Thank you. All right. Mr. Cornn. MR. CORNN: Hello.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 uy 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 137 THE COURT: I let the jury go to lunch. We're not going to lunch; we're working. But you need to come back at 1:30. Your subpoena is continued until 1:30. MR. CORNN: Okay. THE COURT: All right. See you at 1:30. Thank you, sir. All right. MS. KURTZ: Thank you. THE COURT: You welcome. All right. What do you want to do first? MR. RICHARDS: Your Honor, we would like to make a Motion for Directed Verdict first. I know the State hasn't formally rested but they are about to, subject to the admission of the exhibits. THE COURT: Let's be a little bit more orderly. I know you're chomping at the bit there. MR, RICHARDS: All right. THE COURT: As far as the exhibits, let's take care of those first. MS. KURTZ: Judge, I believe that People's 1 through 5, 8 and 9A have all been admitted and published. THE COURT: Okay.10 a. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 138 MS. KURTZ: I would move to admit 6 and 7. THE COURT: Okay. Any objection? MR. RICHARDS: None. THE COURT: All right. They're all admitted. I will make a note; 6 and 7. Now, 6 hasn't been published and 7 hasn't been published. MS. KURTZ: Correct. THE COURT: All right. So 1 through @ and 9A are all in evidence. MS. KURTZ: Yes. THE COURT: Okay. What else? Anything else? MS. KURTZ: No, the People would rest. THE COURT: All right. The People have rested. Mr. Richards. MR, RICHARDS: Your Honor, we have a motion for directed verdict, and it's based upon the recent cases which I have submitted to you in connection with the jury instructions. THE COURT: Uh-huh (affirmative response). MR. RICHARDS: Basically the way the jury instructions are written, the way the statute is10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ig 20 21 22 23 24 139 written, basically it says you are guilty of obstruction of justice if you do a number of enumerated things, and one of which is false -- with the intent to impede the prosecution of any person you furnish false information. And that's what she is being charged with I believe. THE COURT: Uh-huh (affirmative response) MR. RICHARDS: So, however, the courts have drafted on to that another requirement, which is that not only do you have to give the false information with the intent to impede, you actually have to actually impede the prosecution in some way, in some material way. And the cases of Taylor and Baskerville are the key cases on point. And I think the reason for the cases is that the courts were aware that there has to be some difference between attempt obstruction and obstruction, because that’s a separate misdemeanor offense. So obviously somebody who gives false information intends to impede the prosecution. But either it's not a substantial step towards it or they're not successful and the police see through whatever it is right away and it doesn't hurt the10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 140 police in any way. In that case it might be attempt which has not been charged here. But for the felony, Class 4, the case law is quite clear that you actually need to have the police be hindered, hampered or materially derailed in some way. Based on their case, I just can't see it Let's assume for the moment, which you have to do for the purpose of directed finding, No. 1, that it was false information; that the information that he was living at 11 well, let me back up for a moment. First of all, the information -- the statement "Nobody is living in the building,” I'm not sure that that was exactly what is charged. But even if it had been charged, the officer said immediately within seconds -- he said "What about Richard wWanke?" And she said Richard Wanke lived in 1111. So the first statement "Nobody lives in the building," that certainly didn't materially impede them because they immediately learned within seconds that Wanke was at 1111. So aside from the discomfort of standing out in the cold for a couple more seconds, nothing happened that impeded the police whatsoever in the first statement. Now, the second statement that he lives at10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 41 1111 and the interwoven statement...he doesn't live at 1113...let's assume for a moment, as we should at this stage, that that's false information; that he did, in fact, live at 1113 and that he wasn't living at 1111. How did that statement impede the police investigation? I suggest to you that you haven't heard a word of evidence how it did. Basically Ms. Chavez did refuse to have the police -- give police permission to come in or permission to search; she wouldn't do either one. However, that can't be held against her. It's an exercise of the Fourth Amendment rights. If the rule were otherwise there would be no Fourth Amendment rights. Because every time somebody refused to give consents, they would be charged with obstruction. So that can't be the rule. That was her right; she exercised the right. Once she exercised the right, it didn't matter whether Wanke lived in 1111 or 1113. I mean either way, the police were not going to be able to search that premises without a warrant. Now, in fact, she went in; she cooperated And using whatever information they got, they got a warrant for 1113. They got a warrant for 1111. So10 Lt 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 142 she didn't impede them there. All the stuff was there. She also didn't delay them in such a way that there was any time for anyone to go into 1111 or go into 1113 and destroy anything or throw things away or burn things. Why? Because there is testimony that from the moment she leaves 1113 until the search warrant is executed there is officers watching nonstop. So, again, the difference, discrepancy as to address and whether he lives in one or the other doesn't have anything to do with anything. They get search warrants for both; they search both. They obviously conclude or believe they -- based on their information, that he lives in 1113. They have good information to get that presented to Judge Pumilia to get their warrant. There is just nothing that she did that hindered the prosecution of either herself or of Richard Wanke. And, in fact, there has been no testimony that she was even a suspect. So I'm not sure how she could hinder the prosecution of herself There is nobody saying she is a suspect. So for both of those reasons, the motion10 iL 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 143 for directed verdict should be granted. THE COURT: who is going to respond? MS. KURTZ: I am. THE COURT: All right. Go ahead MS. KURTZ: Your Honor, I would ask that you deny the defense motion. The defendant is charged with obstruction of justice in that she attempted to obstruct the prosecution of both herself and Richard Wanke by giving a false address. I think I said in my opening she is under no obligation -- she is under no obligation to let them search her house. She is under no obligation to let them in, She is under no obligation to answer their questions, but she chose to. And she chose to give inaccurate information. That is -- that was a conscious decision that she made. And the reason the entire dialogue with Detective Lee is important is to understand the defendant's frame of mind and to understand what she is attempting to do. It is certainly -- she repeatedly said she had information and that she wasn't going to give it to the police that was going to clear Richard Wanke, which she is not required to do. But she was choosing to give false information.10 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 144 We have information that he was booked in the next day, that he gave the address of 1113; that for years he used the address of 1113 with the Secretary of State. The evidence that is before this court at this time is that he resided at 1113 Grant Avenue She intentionally gave -- as well as the fact that in the -- it doesn't appear to be any living quarters in 1111. She made a conscious decision to give the police false information Counsel can say that it doesn't materially affect the police investigation. This isn't -- she isn't charged with preventing the apprehension. She is charged with preventing the prosecution, and they wanted to obtain a search warrant. And it's important in the search warrant that the information be accurate. The fact that they were able to obtain it with other information that they gathered during their investigation is not relevant. What's relevant is that she attempted to prohibit the prosecution. We are asking in the light most favorable to the non- moving party that you deny defense Motion for Directed Verdict. THE COURT: I will give my decision at10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 145 1:30. I'm going to review the cases. Thank you. MS. KURTZ: 1:30, Judge? THE COURT: Yes, ma'am. MS. KURTZ: Thank you. (Whereupon, a luncheon recess was taken.) (AFTERNOON SESSION RESUMED AT 1:30 P.M. ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 13, 2013.) (Whereupon, the following proceedings were heard outside the presence of the jury.) THE COURT: We are back in court outside the presence of any jurors. I have considered the motions for directed verdict. The Motion for Directed Verdict as to Count 2 is heard and granted. As to Count 1, it's a close call but it's denied at this time. All right. Are you ready to proceed? MR. RICHARDS: We are, Judge. THE COURT: Bring the jury in. THE BAILIFF: Yes, sir. THE COURT: By the way, while we're waiting for the jury, I have gone over the jury instructions and I have reviewed the case law that was submitted in the instructions. And I will give you an opportunity at our next recess to make a record.10 a. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 146 I'm not inclined to be persuaded that that additional third proposition that you're suggesting is necessary as it relates to the issues instruction You can make a record. MR. RICHARDS: Your Honor, I don't know if you -- we will get to that later obviously. What about the definitional instruction? THE COURT: Aren't the two the same? Isn't that what you're seeking, the same in each? MR. RICHARDS: Well, I think it's the same thought, but I think the definitional at least could be a substitute for the issues instruction THE COURT: Like I say, I'm not inclined to be persuaded that it's required, but you can make a record during our next recess. MS. KURTZ: And I will formally rest in front of the jury. THE COURT: Yes, ma'am. Do you have witnesses ready, whoever you need? MR. RICHARDS: Yes. THE COURT: Who is your first witness going to be? MR. RICHARDS: Diane Chavez.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 147 THE COURT: Okay. I don't know if you want to tell me now, but do you plan on calling anybody else? MR. RICHARDS: No. (Whereupon, the defendant conferred with Attorney Richards off the record.) MR. RICHARDS: Your Honor, depending on how the cross-examination goes, I may want to call the additional witnesses, so I would like to reserve the right to do that, But right now I'm calling Diane Chavez. THE COURT: All right. When she is done at a sidebar you can tell me; okay MR. RICHARDS: Okay. (Whereupon, the following proceedings were heard in the presence of the jury.) THE COURT: You may be seated, ladies and gentlemen, Thank you. Good afternoon Ms. Kurtz. MS. KURTZ: Your Honor, at this time the People would rest. THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, the People have rested. That means they have concluded their presentation of evidence, and the defense doesn't have to put on any evidence. But if they10 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ar 22 23 24 148 choose to, this will be their opportunity to do so. Mr. Richards, does the defense wish to present any evidence? MR. RICHARDS: Your Honor, the defense does. The defense calls Diane Chavez. THE COURT: Ms. Chavez, step forward to be sworn, please; raise your right hand. DIANE CHAVEZ, was called as a witness and after having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: THE COURT: Please be seated. Make sure you scoot that chair up all the way as close as you can get, and then bend that microphone down; make sure your mouth is close. Go ahead. DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR, RICHARDS Q Diane, please state your name for the court reporter. + A Diane Chavez, D-i-a-n-e C-h-a-v-e-z. Q. Diane, how old are you? A, I am 55.10 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 a1 22 23 24 149 Q. And where were you born? A. I was born in East L.A. or East Los Angeles, California. Q. And did you move to Rockford at some point? A. Yes, approximately 1972 my family and I moved to Rockford. Q. And how old were you then? A. I was about 13, 14. a. Did you go to high school in Rockford? A. Yes, I attended -- well, no. I attended Eisenhower Middle School in Rockford and then Belvidere High School in Belvidere, Illinois. Q And after you went to high school, did you have any college? A Yes, I attended down at Southern Illinois University in Carbondale for two years. Then I went to the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana for two years, and then I went back to Southern Illinois University at Carbondale for two years. Q. And did you get a graduate -- did you ever get a B.A. for your -- A No, I did not graduate with a degree. Q. Okay. What courses did you take or what was your major?10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 150 A I took political science. Q. After you finished college did you get a job? A, Yes, I worked with the -- for the City of Rockford as a library staff person for a couple years I worked also with the City of Rockford on their energy, energy assistance program for a couple years. Then I worked as a paralegal for Prairie State Legal Services for approximately, um, five or six years. Q. Let me stop there just to break it up a little for the jury. What were the dates, approximately, you worked for Prairie State Legal Services? A. Approximately from 1985 until about 1990. . Okay. And what did you do for them? A I was -- I was a paralegal for administrative benefits. So I handled a caseload where I represented clients who had problems with benefit termination or eligibility with respect to public aid assistance medical assistance, unemployment benefits and Social Security benefits. Q. Okay. Did you ever have -- as a paralegal were you ever involved and during that job with criminal matters of any sort? A No. Q. After you worked for Prairie State Legal10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 151 Services where were you employed? A. um, after that I was employed at Comcast, or it was called Insight Communications at the time. Then I was employed with Stepping Stones which is a group home for individuals with mental illness, and then I was employed by the State of Illinois. Q. Okay. And your job with the State of Illinois, when did you start that? A. I started in 1998, I became a caseworker for food stamps, medical assistance at the Winnebago County office here in Rockford. a. And do you -- are you still employed by DHS? A. Yes, I am. Q. And are you currently -- is your employment currently suspended because of the pending criminal case? A Yes, for the past five years I've been on what's called judicial suspension which means I'm on unpaid leave until the conclusion of all charges against me, one way or the other. Q. During the course of - during the course of jobs did you also have a volunteer activity? A Yeah, I had several. Um, back beginning in 1981 I was part of a pro se litigation in the10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 152 construction of the Byron nuclear power plant, part of the Citizens Group that challenged the operating license for that facility. In 1984 we were granted the first operational denial for a nuclear power plant since 1957, In 1985 that was reversed and the plant was allowed to operate again. But I was working on nuclear power issues until 1990. After that point in time, starting in 1991, I established in Rockford a volunteer -- on a volunteer basis, a free trade -- I mean a fair trade gift store called the Peace Store located on 7th Street. Q. What is a fair trade store? A It's basically a store which buys goods from people in impoverished countries that are handmade goods and traditional handy crafts. And we market them in stores here in this country. And the proceeds from the sales of those items are sent back to support communities in those countries. a. How long did you operate the Peace Store? A. I operated the Peace Store until 2002. a. Did you ever receive any benefit, money, salary for that? A. No, it was entirely volunteer. Q. And in the course of operating the Peace Store10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2. 22 23 24 153 did you meet Richard Wanke? A Yes. Q. How? A In approximately 1994 I believe Richard Wanke approached our store. Because we were a rather small operation on 7th Street, and he was somebody who was knowledgeable about computers -- and at that time we needed a computer system -- we needed a means by which to publicize the store. We needed fliers. We needed newsletters. And I really didn't know anything about computers at that time. So Richard walked in the door and volunteered to help us acquire equipment and to teach me how to create newsletters and publications on the computer, and he promptly did so. Q. And that was in 1994? A. Yeah; uh-huh. Q. Now, at some point did you become romantically involved with Richard Wanke? A Yes. After approximately I think about a year knowing him, we did become romatically involved. We started dating a little bit. And then I believe that about July of 1995 it was that he moved in with me where I was living at the time, which was a house at 1109 Grant Avenue here in Rockford.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 154 Q Okay. Now, the house at 1109 Grant Avenue, who was that owned by? A, That was part of an estate owned by Milton Mahlburg who happened to be the former director for the Burpee Natural Museum at the time. Q. Now, in addition to that property, over the course of time have you acquired other properties? A Yes, I have attended public tax sales. And over the course of time I acquired six residential vacant lots located on the west side of Rockford and the near downtown area of Rockford Q. Okay. And at some point were some of those lots sold for a public purpose? A. Yes, actually in approximately 2003 I believe two of those lots - MS. KURTZ: (Interrupting) Objection, relevance. THE COURT: How is it relevant? MR. RICHARDS: Well, it will be relevant in terms of the relationship between Ms. -- between Diane Chavez and Richard Wanke. THE COURT: To that extent I will permit it. BY MR. RICHARDS:10 1. 12 13 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 155 Q. What was happening with those lots? A. Two of those lots were sold for use in the construction of the new Winnebago County jail. Q. The one across, down the block? A That's correct. Q. Now, in terms of 1109, you said that Richard Wanke lived with you there? A. Yes, he did. Q. And what was the period where Richard Wanke lived with you at 1109 Grant? A. Well, he lived with me from, like I say probably 1995 until 1997 when I purchased the duplex 1111 Grant Avenue and 1113 Grant Avenue, which was basically the structure next door to 1109 Grant Avenue. Q. I'm going to ask you some questions about Richard Wanke and his personality and the interaction between the two while you lived with him. First of all, what were his -- what was his sleeping habits? MS. KURTZ: Objection, relevance THE COURT: Approach for just a moment, please. (The following proceedings were heard at sidebar by use of a listening device provided to the10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 a. 22 23 24 156 court reporter.) THE COURT: Do you want to state why it's relevant? MR. RICHARDS: Yes, because the prosecution's claim is that since there is no bed in 1111, he can't be sleeping there; he must be living in 1113. She will detail how he rarely sleeps in beds, usually he sleeps in sleeping bags; insomnia, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. So it's all quite relevant to that issue. THE COURT: Anything further? MS. KURTZ: He also said he was going to ask her about his personality. His personality and anything about those things are irrelevant. THE COURT: Well, I suppose to the extent they have some bearing on his personal habits and what was found in 1111, they could be relevant. But I don't want to have you going into other -- MR. RICHARDS: (Interrupting) I know; it's going to be connected to the living arrangements. THE COURT: Okay. MR. RICHARDS: And I will limit her to those questions. THE COURT: Go ahead. (Which were all the proceedings had at the10 ql 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 157 sidebar.) THE COURT: All right. Proceed BY MR, RICHARDS: Q. Ms. Chavez, I'm going to ask you some more direct or leading questions just to make sure we're focused on the right area. What were -- what was Richard Wanke's -- during the entire time you knew him, what was his sleeping pattern or sleeping habit? A. For as long as I've known Richard Wanke, he is an insomniac, a true insomniac. Q. Meaning? A. Meaning -- you know, you hear about people who get two or three hours of sleep a night and they're able to function normally thereafter. Richard wasn't somebody like that. He was somebody who could go a week or two weeks without sleep and get an hour or so of sleep, and he still managed to function pretty much normally. He had a lot of health issues with respect to his insomnia as a result, but he was still functional, a. Now, during the period when you were living with him at 1109, did you sleep in the same bed or separately or how was that done? A Well, initially when our relationship started yes, we slept in the same bed. You know, maybe it was10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 158 the fresh throws of our relationship. But, yes, we did share a bed, and it was fairly normal. And as time went on, it became more irregular, our sleeping together. And towards the end of the relationship it was one of the reasons the relationship ended, was because there was no sleeping intimacy like that. 1 would be asleep -- I'm a sound sleeper. I would be sleeping soundly and he would be off doing things. Q Now, one of the things he had helped you with was computers. How was he with computers or was that his interest? A. Richard's -- yes, it was one of several of his main interests, But he was self-educated with respect to computers and he knew a lot about computers. Older technology, he knew how to integrate it with new technology, how to set up systems and use older computers for things that most people wouldn't -- it wouldn't occur to most people to do. And he kept up with new technology. So he was a technology collector I guess I would say. Q Okay. Now, I'm going to ask you a term, both for you and him. Have you ever heard of the term "hoarder"? A Yes, I have.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 159 Q. Would you consider yourself one? A. I don't consider myself one, but I guess some people would say I am one. Q. okay. And what about Richard wanke? A. Um, I guess people would say the same, except perhaps he is not as broadly as a collector. Perhaps certainly he would be termed maybe a hoarder of computer equipment. Q. Okay. Now, you said that you moved from 1109 to 1113, dash, 1111, correct? A. Yes. Q. Did you purchase that property? A. Yes, I bought that duplex; yes. a. Now, in terms of the duplex -- let me just start with 1113. From the time you purchased it -- by the way, when did you sell it, just so we have the... AL I sold the duplex in May of 2009. Q. Okay. Between the time you purchased the duplex and the time you sold the duplex, just in terms of 1113, did 1113 have a bathroom? AL Yes. Q. Did it have a kitchen? A. Yes. Q. Did it have bedrooms?10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 160 A. Yes. Q. What about 1111; did it have -- from the time you purchased it to the time you sold it, did it have a bathroom? A. Yes. Q. Did it have a kitchen? A. Yes. Q. And did it have bedrooms? A. Yes. Q. Now, the gas and electric for the building, was it one gas and electric or was it divided between the two buildings? A No, there were two separate gas and electric meters per unit, so there was one unit -- one meter one gas and electric meter for the downstairs. And there was a separate gas and electric meter for the upstairs. Q. When you first moved in to the building at 1111, dash, 1113 or the reverse, did Richard Wanke live with you at 1113? A. Yes, he did. And at that point did you still have a rmantic relationship? Yes, we did,10 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 161 Q. What was being done with 1111? A. When I first moved into the duplex there was a tenant in 1113 Grant Avenue, and that person moved downstairs to 1111 Grant Avenue. His name is Stanley Campbell, and he became my tenant at 1111 Grant Avenue. Q. And how long was he your tenant for? A. Approximately six months, as I recall. Q. Okay. At some point did Campbell leave? A Yes, he did. Q. What date was that, approximately, if you remember? A I think it would have been early 1998. Q. After Campbell moved from the downstairs apartment, what was done with it? AL Nothing really; it was vacant. Q. How long was it vacant for? A. Um, well, it was vacant probably for like a couple years before I started using the back room, one of the back bedrooms of that unit for storage, because I had gone to auctions for building equipment. And had intended to do some renovation on the duplex. So it was a vacant spot that I stored some of the supplies, building supplies that I bought from the auctions there. Q. Now, did Richard Wanke from 1998 to 2008 -- did10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 162 Richard Wanke remain at that address or did he go someplace? A. He remained at 1113 Grant Avenue, um, until basically, um, 1999 when he entered IDOC for a period of six months. And then when he returned, he returned back to 1113 Grant Avenue. And he remained at 1113 Grant Avenue until approximately October of 2006. Q. Okay. Now, when Richard Wanke returned from IDOC in 1998, did you still have a romantic relation- ship with him? A No. We were just friends at that time. Q. Okay. And was he your roommate at that point at 1113? A Yes. Q. When he was your roommate at 1113 where did he sleep, if he slept? A, Well, he basically slept in a chair upstairs. I had an upholstered, not really an armchair but kind of like a lounge chair with a foot stool, and he wore that out. That's pretty much where he slept, or on the floor. When he first got out of IDOC, for a long time, probably about nine months, he would only sleep on the floor. Because probably his bedding at IDOC, it was just a hard cot, so that's what he had adjusted to.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2. 22 23 24 163 Q. Between the time he returned from IDOC until October of 2006, what was 1111 being used for? A Well, when he got out of IDOC, he came back freshly energized, and he wanted to start a computer business. So he asked me if he could use the downstairs as a base for his computer operations, and I said sure. And so he promptly started going up to Madison to the university there. They have the swap -- I forget what it stands for, but they sell surplus university equipment, computers and so forth. And he bought quite a number of computers, literally hundreds. And pretty soon there were computers all through the downstairs apartment and some in the basement and both sides of the wall, so.. Q. Now, before October -- you said he had come back from IDOC. Before October of 2006 had he picked up another case? A Yes, in January of 2006 there was a burglary incident. And he was not aware of it until a court appearance in March of 2006 when he was arrested for that incident; um, so that's when it happened Q. Okay. Now, you said that he left 1113, in the sense of living there, in October of 2006. Was there a reason?10 a. 12 13 14 15 16 7 18 19 20 ai 22 23 24 164 A. Yes, I asked him to -- when he picked up the other case, um, I was no longer comfortable with him living upstairs in 1113 Grant Avenue. But because he was on court status, required to report to Pretrial and so forth, he had been on daily reporting, there was careful monitoring of him. And he needed to have a stable address for court purposes to live at. So for that reason, I didn't feel that I could put him out on the street. He also had no friends or acquaintances who would take him in at that point. So I told him "You can move downstairs into 1111 Grant Avenue upon two conditions: Basically, you pay the gas and electric that you use downstairs, and I'll let you have the apartment rent free in lieu of the fact that since I've got these residential properties, these vacant lots, you can take care of them. You can do all the lawn maintenance, snow removal on them, and you can do exterior snow removal and lawn care for the duplex." Q. Okay. Now -- just one moment. And was that the arrangement up until the time when -- up until February 6th of 20087 AL Yes, it was. Let me show you some --10 1. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ar 22 23 24 165 THE COURT: Will you show them to Ms. Kurtz? MS. KURTZ: Okay. I have seen them. MR. RICHARDS: Okay. BY MR, RICHARDS: Q. Let me show you -- first show you what has previously been submitted as Defendant's Exhibit No. 4. MR. RICHARDS: May I approach? THE COURT: Yes. BY MR. RICHARDS: Q Now, viewing what's been marked as Defendant's Exhibit No. 4, if you can see that on the monitor, this silver object in the middle, what's that? A That was the sleeping bag that Richard used at the time of February 6, 2008, to sleep in. Q Okay. And in terms of the rest of the picture with clutter, the computers and so forth, is that generally the way Richard would live anyplace? A Oh, yeah, that's the downstairs front room, kind of the living room of the apartment, 1111. And he had computers on racks. And you can just barely see a little bit of that to the right side of that photograph. And he had a couple desks with older Macintosh computers on top and around and underneath too. I think -- yeah; yeah. But, yes.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 2. 22 23 24 166 Q. I would like to show you now what's previously been marked as Defendant's Exhibit No. 8. Okay. Could you tell us what that is depicted in Defendant's Exhibit 8? A Sure. That's the closet in the middle room of 1111 Grant Avenue. And what's hanging on hangers are two additional sleeping bags that Richard had. THE COURT: Two what? THE WITNESS: Two additional sleeping bags that he kept, you know, his backups. BY MR. RICHARDS: Q. Okay. There is -- you see this red object on a hanger? A. It's actually orange. Q. Okay; orange. It is showing up red in the photograph. What is that object? A. That's a sleeping bag. Q. And what about the blue object next to it on a hanger? A. That's a sleeping bag. Q. And why were those sleeping bags in the closet, if you know? A. Well, they were his backups. Richard had backups for everything.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 167 Q. Okay. So like if one was being washed, he could use something else? A. Yeah. Q. Now, let me go into...talk to you a little bit about food and eating; okay? A. sure. Q. All right. What sort of food do you like to eat or you generally eat? A. Okay. I'm a traditional Hispanic, so I like Hispanic food. I'ma carnivore. I like different foreign cuisines, but mostly Hispanic food. And I cook from scratch. a. Okay. And what kind of food did Richard Wanke like to eat? A. Richard is a vegetarian; he has been since early age I believe. And what Richard would eat is he would eat pizza -- he would order pizzas, fast-food pizzas or he would buy store pizzas from the freezer department and heat them up in the oven, or he would eat sandwiches. He would put together vegetarian sandwiches with, you know, bread, condiments and vegetables, that kind of thing. And he loved garden burgers, boca burgers; anything that was new and out there that said it was vegetarian, he would try it.10 a 12 13 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 168 The other thing is because he was an insomniac hard core -- if you saw Richard around, you always saw him with a large On The Waterfront container for coffee or for soda pop, caffeine. He kept himself caffeinated all the time, and that's how he got by; that's how he functioned. Q. Now, let me talk to you about the meals. Since you liked Mexican food and he liked vegetarian food, did you have meals in common or did you eat separately? A Well, initially when we first had a relation- ship, we tried eating in common. And I tried introducing him to different Hispanic foods. And the only food he really liked was beans, refried beans, because that was kind of vegetarian; that was up his alley. But when we separated, you know, we ate separately. Q. Between October of 2006 and February 6th of 2008, were you eating meals together or separately? AL Separately. a. You heard testimony that the -- well, that the downstairs, 1111 -- first of all, it had a kitchen correct? A. Yes, it did. Q. And we had seen previously it had utensils in10 aL 12 13 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 169 the kitchen, correct? A Yes; uh-huh. Q. There has been testimony from an officer that there was no food in the refrigerator downstairs. Do you remember that testimony? A. Yes. I think he said there was no food downstairs, period. Q. "No food downstairs, period Okay. Can you explain why there was no food downstairs? A Well, first of all, I kind of disagree that there was no food downstairs. The other habit Richard had was he carried bags of snacks like nuts and dried cherries and all of that. So when I went through the duplex afterwards cleaning up, I found his bags of cherries and nuts scattered around. I found a container of peanuts. And the other thing was, um they took the trash when they went through and did the search. They took all the trash. And if they actually accounted for everything in the trash, they would have to say they found lots of fast-food containers and pizza boxes and so forth in the trash. Q. But you never saw that trash again after the search? A. No, I never saw that trash again.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 aq 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 170 Q. Let me talk about the refrigerated items, things that needed to be refrigerated. where were those kept in terms of Richard's refrigerated items? A. Well, originally he had -- well, he had a refrigerator downstairs in his kitchen. Q. And then what happened? A Well, approximately -- approximately five months before he was arrested, um, his refrigerator went out. And at that time he -- he knew he was going to go for a sentencing hearing. And the expectation was that he would be going back to IDOC. So I was kind of faced with a -- the situation was do I go ahead and buy a new refrigerator for the downstairs unit or do I do something or make an arrangement with him where he could get by temporarily until he was gone? And so I opted for the latter. And what I did was I had a refrigerator and freezer in the upstairs in my apartment. And I moved both of them out to the back porch of the upstairs unit, a porch which was accessible for him from the downstairs and, of course it was out my back porch. And I kept the freezer on the bottom, the refrigerator on the top. And it was a hardship for the appliances being out there on the back porch, because they were subject to extreme10 11 12 13 14 1s 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 am winter cold, extreme summer heat, but I figured it would be temporary. I expected a little wear and tear on the appliances but we would get by. Q. And whose food was kept in the refrigerator in the back porch; was that both of yours or only Richard's or yours? A. It was both of ours on the back porch. MR. RICHARDS: One moment, Your Honor THE COURT: All right. BY MR. RICHARDS: a. Now, you said that the -- you said that the bills, that the bills for the gas and electric after October of 2006 for 1111 Grant went to Richard Wanke? A. That's correct. Q. What? A, That's correct. Q. Okay. And did you keep any copies of those bills? A. Yes, I -- well, it's not so much that I kept copies of them. MS. KURTZ: Objection. Judge, may we approach? THE COURT: Yes. (The following proceedings were had at10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2. 22 23 24 172 sidebar by use of a listening device provided to the court reporter.) MS. KURTZ: It's one thing for her to testify that he was paying the bills, but how -- I mean, she cannot lay the foundation for these bills that they are authentic, that this is where they came from. THE COURT: How can she? MR. RICHARDS: Okay. I will withdraw that. THE COURT: Okay. (Which were all the proceedings had at the sidebar.) BY MR. RICHARDS: a. Ms. Chavez, you've seen evidence before that the -- seen evidence of a bank account or bank statements at 1111 in both yours and Richard Wanke's name, Richard Wanke's name? A. Yes; that's correct. Q And was there a joint bank account that you were keeping? A My name was put on his account. It was originally his account. a. Why was your name put on his account? A My name was added to the account in 1999 when10 ql 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 173 he went to IDOC the first time because he needed somebody to administer his money for like commissary, add funds, when he was in IDOC, And there was no one in his family to do that -- competent to do that at the time. And we were in a relationship, so I agreed to do that. I didn't realize at the time that I agreed to put my name on the account, that it was still on there at the time of his arrest in 2008. And I went to the bank, U.S. Bank, and I asked them to remove my name and they told me that he -- because he was the person whose account it was, that he would be the person who would have to do that. So as a result, it's still in both of our names, but it's his account. Q Okay. And did you -- the bank statements, the bank statements on that account, did you look at them or did they go to him? A No, originally, while Richard was still in the duplex they went to him. It was only after he was in the, you know, elsewhere that they were mailed to the house, and they came and I collected them. I got rid of that by asking for, you know, paperless statements and that was it. Q. Okay. Now, I want to go to February 6th of 2008, the day when you had the encounter with the10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 174 police; okay? A. sure. Q. First of all, did you become aware sometime during the day that Gregory Clark had been murdered or shot? A. We had an extremely heavy snowstorm that day and it was one day there was no mail delivery in Rockford. And I was at work that day, and we were let off at work at 4:00 o'clock instead of 5:00 p.m. And I came home -- so I arrived home about 4:15 p.m. I came into my apartment; came upstairs, turned on the TV and started to make myself some dinner. And, um the phone rang, and it was Richard's sister, Kim Klein, calling me to tell me -- she said "Richard's attorney was -- MS. KURTZ: (Interrupting) Objection THE COURT: Stand by, ma'am. MR. RICHARDS: What? THE COURT: I believe there is an objection. Approach. (The following proceedings were had at sidebar by use of a listening device provided to the court reporter.) MS. KURTZ: This is a narrative; I mean,10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 175 she is going on and on. But it is hearsay, what Kim Klein told her. MR. RICHARDS: It is not admitted for the truth of the fact that he was murdered. It is admitted to know that she was aware that he was murdered; that's it, It's not hearsay. It's being admitted to show where her knowledge was at the time THE COURT: what's the substance of that phone conversation going to be? Tell me. MR. RICHARDS: That Richard's attorney had been murdered. THE COURT: That's it? MR. RICHARDS: Yeah. THE COURT: Okay. For that -- MR. RICHARDS: (Interrupting) I will lead her so there is nothing else. THE COURT: Uh-huh (affirmative response) (Which were all the proceedings had at the sidebar.) BY MR. RICHARDS: Q. Just if you would answer yes or no; would it be fair to say that during the course of that telephone call you were told that Richard's attorney, Greg Clark, had been murdered?10 ql 12 13 14 15 16 uy 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 176 A. Yes; that's correct. Q. After you got that phone call, was there a period when you heard a knock on the door or something of the sort? A. Yes. I probably got that phone call about 4:30 and I got the knock on the door about, about 6:55. Q. Okay. And when the people knocked on the door what happened? A. Well, I heard a knock. I was upstairs in the apartment. I heard a knock at the front door. I went out my side door down the stairs, around the corner down to the front door. I opened the inside door, which is a wood door with a window, and then I saw approximately -- I'm going to say approximately 12 people on my front area in front of my front door step, and I opened the screen door and I stepped out. a. Okay. After you stepped out, did you say anything to the officers; did they say anything to you? A. Well, I stepped out; I closed the door. And one -- one officer, I believe it was David Lee, said to me "Are you Diane Chavez?" I said "Yes." Q. After you said Diane Chavez, did he say anything to you?10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 177 AL He said yes -- I mean, no; sorry, I said "Yes." And he said "Do you know Richard Wanke?" Q. What did you say? A. I said "Yes." And he said -- Q. (Interrupting) After you said yes, what did he say? A. He said "Do you -- MS. KURTZ: (Interrupting) Objection. THE COURT: Basis? MS. KURTZ: Hearsay. THE COURT: Mr. Richards? MR. RICHARDS: Did you want me to approach or address it? THE COURT: Yeah. (The following proceedings were heard at sidebar by use of a listening device provided to the court reporter.) THE COURT: Where are we going with this conversation? MR. RICHARDS: The conversation is she is going to say what she said and what he said is not going to be exactly the same as what Lee said. There is slight differences. But it's not being admitted for the truth. It's being admitted to show what she