1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
2 ATLANTA DIVISION
ROBERT CHRISTIAN WOLF,
5 CIVIL ACTION FILE
6 NO. 00-CIV-1187(JEC)
7 JOHN BENNETT RAMSEY and
PATRICIA PAUGH RAMSEY,
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF
ROBERT ALLEN STRATBUCKER, M.D.
13 May 30, 2002
1025 Howard Street
15 Omaha, Nebraska
Alexander J. Gallo, CCR-B-1332, CRR
1 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
2 On behalf of the Plaintiff:
3 (via telephonic means)
4 DARNAY HOFFMAN, Esq.
5 Law Offices of Darnay Hoffman
6 Suite 209
7 210 West 70th Street
8 New York, New York 10023
9 (212) 712-2766
10 On behalf of the Defendants:
11 JAMES C. RAWLS, Esq.
12 ERIC P. SCHROEDER, Esq.
13 Powell, Goldstein, Frazer & Murphy, L.L.P.
14 Sixteenth Floor
15 191 Peachtree Street, N.E.
16 Atlanta, Georgia 30303
17 (404) 572-6600
18 L. LIN WOOD, Esq.
19 MATTHEW WOOD
20 L. Lin Wood, P.C.
21 2140 The Equitable Building
22 100 Peachtree Street
23 Atlanta, Georgia 30303
24 (404) 522-1713
25 Also Present: J. Rollins, Videographer
1 Deposition Robert A. Stratbucker, M.D.
2 May 30, 2002
3 (Defendants' Exhibit-1, Exhibit-2 and
4 Exhibit-3 were marked for identification.)
5 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the
6 beginning of videotape No. 1 of the deposition
7 of Robert A. Stratbucker, M.D., M.S., Ph.D.,
8 P.E., being taken on May 30 of the year 2002
9 in Omaha, Nebraska.
10 Counsel will now introduce themselves.
11 MR. WOOD: My name is Lin Wood. I
12 am one of the attorneys for the defendants John
13 and Patsy Ramsey. With me from my office is
14 Matthew Wood, legal assistant.
15 Go ahead, Derek.
16 MR. BAUER: Derek Bauer with the law
17 offices of Powell, Goldstein, Frazer & Murphy in
18 Atlanta, also on behalf of Patsy and John
20 MR. RAWLS: Jim Rawls from Powell,
21 Goldstein in Atlanta on behalf of John and Patsy
23 MR. HOFFMAN: I am Darnay Hoffman
24 appearing on behalf of Chris Wolf by
25 teleconference phone in New York City.
1 MR. WOOD: Everybody good to go?
2 MR. HOFFMAN: Ready to go.
3 MR. WOOD: This will, in fact, be
4 the deposition of Dr. Robert A. Stratbucker, an
5 individual who has been identified as an expert
6 witness for the plaintiff Chris Wolf in this
7 case and who has submitted a Rule 26 Expert
8 Witness Report.
9 The deposition is being taken
10 pursuant to agreement of counsel and pursuant to
11 an amended notice of deposition which is dated
12 May 16, 2002, which I have marked for purposes
13 of identification, Darnay, as Defendants' Exhibit
15 MR. HOFFMAN: Thank you, Lin.
16 MR. WOOD: And the deposition will
17 be taken for all permissible purposes under the
18 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, including
19 discovery, cross-examination and, if appropriate,
20 use as evidence at trial.
21 All objections except as to the form
22 of the question or the responsiveness of the
23 answer will be reserved until the time of trial,
24 hearing, or other formal use of the deposition.
25 Are those stipulations agreeable with
1 you, Darnay?
2 MR. HOFFMAN: Yes, Lin, thank you.
3 They are agreeable to me.
4 ROBERT A. STRATBUCKER, having been
5 first duly sworn, was examined and testified as
9 Q. For the record would you state your
10 full name for the record, please, sir?
11 A. Robert Allen Stratbucker.
12 Q. And there are a host of appropriate
13 initials after your name. You are a medical
14 doctor among other degrees that you hold; am I
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And I will address you as Dr.
18 Stratbucker, which is appropriate.
19 Dr. Stratbucker, I've introduced
20 myself to you. I'm Lin Wood and along with
21 Mr. Rawls and Derek Bauer, we represent John and
22 Patsy Ramsey, the parents of JonBenet Ramsey who
23 was murdered in December of 1996 in Boulder,
24 Colorado. You understand that, don't you?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. And you understand that you have
2 been retained as an expert witness for an
3 individual named Chris Wolf, who is the
4 plaintiff in a lawsuit alleging libel filed
5 against Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey that pends in the
6 federal court in Atlanta, Georgia. Do you
7 understand that?
8 A. Yes, I do.
9 Q. When were you retained in this case,
11 A. About eight months ago.
12 Q. Can you date that for me with --
13 A. Well, I would have to check my
14 record to be precise about it.
15 Q. If you would do that, I would
16 appreciate it. I would like a precise date.
17 A. Well, the most precise date I can
18 give you is February 26 of this year, 2002,
19 which is the date of my report; however, I was
20 engaged prior to that. And the precise date of
21 that I can only estimate. I would say it was
22 about two months prior to that. It would be
23 about eight months ago.
24 Q. So you dated -- your best date, it
25 would be December 2001 or January 2002?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Do you recall the manner in which
3 you were first contacted?
4 A. I was contacted by telephone by Mr.
6 Q. Let me tell you that I understand
7 that you are an extremely busy expert for Mr.
8 Hoffman, and I understand that you had to do a
9 fair amount of juggling of your schedule to
10 change this deposition from the date of the
11 28th, I believe, to today, the 30th to
12 accommodate my desire to do some family things
13 over the weekend. I appreciate that.
14 How many depositions have you given
15 this month?
16 A. This month I have not given any.
17 Q. How many court appearances have you
18 made this month?
19 A. None this month.
20 Q. How many active cases are you
21 presently engaged in as an expert witness?
22 A. Probably four.
23 Q. And what do you do with your time
24 other than your consultant work as an expert
1 A. Well, I maintain a part-time medical
2 practice. I am retired from full-time medical
3 practice at this point. And I have a number
4 of other biomedical engineering type enterprises
5 that I am involved in, principally a
6 development, research and development company of
7 my own which does development of medical
8 devices, diagnostic and therapeutic medical
10 And, for example, over the last
11 month, I have had occasion to be in Mainland
12 China for probably three weeks and other travel
13 related to that activity.
14 Q. What type of diagnostic and
15 therapeutic medical devices have been developed
16 by your company?
17 A. Cardiologic, primarily.
18 Q. So there is no misunderstanding, what
19 do you mean in lay terms when you say
21 A. Devices that relate to the diagnosis
22 of heart disease and therapeutic devices that
23 relate to the treatment of heart disease.
24 Q. You have served as an expert witness
25 in civil litigation in the past as well as
1 criminal matters; is that true?
2 A. Yes, I have.
3 Q. Give me your best estimate, Dr.
4 Stratbucker, I am not trying to hold you to a
5 precise figure, but give me your best estimate
6 as to the amount of money, gross revenue that
7 you received in the year 2001 in your capacity
8 as a consultant/expert witness in civil or
9 criminal litigation.
10 A. I would say $75,000.
11 Q. How are we doing this year, 2002?
12 A. About on -- about average, about the
14 Q. How long has that figure been about
15 the average, $75,000 a year?
16 A. I would say it is higher now. It
17 has been increasing over the years; but as an
18 average, I would say for a good ten years,
20 Q. Are you on a regular retainer as a
21 consultant/expert for any company?
22 A. I have been with some companies and
23 now with different companies.
24 Companies are acquired, and those
25 things change from time to time; but it has
1 been a relatively constant average.
2 Q. As we sit here today, what company,
3 or companies, pays you a regular retainer to
4 serve as a consultant/expert witness?
5 A. Within this last month, we have
6 managed to negotiate a contract with the
7 Department of Defense, which is actually
8 channeled through TASER International in Phoenix,
9 Arizona, a research project for the Marine
10 Corps. And that is a sizable research program
11 that I am very much involved in and one of the
12 reasons I have been so tied up this month.
13 Q. Are you paid by check from the
14 United States Treasury or are you paid by check
15 from TASER International?
16 A. I am paid by check from TASER
17 International. They are the fiscal repository
18 for the grant funds.
19 Q. And that only came up within the
20 last month?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Let me hand you what has been marked
23 for purposes of identification to your deposition
24 as Defendants' Exhibit-2.
25 And also while you are looking at
1 that, let me hand you what has been marked for
2 purposes of identification as Defendants'
3 Exhibit-3 and ask you to just look through
4 those. A couple of quick questions to ask you
5 about them.
6 A. All right.
7 Q. In fact, Defendants' Exhibit 2, that
8 is a true and correct and complete copy of the
9 Rule 26 expert report that you have prepared,
10 signed, and submitted in this lawsuit, true?
11 A. It is nearly complete. I noted in
12 one of the copies that's here that there was a
13 page missing out of the autopsy report that is
14 contained in this. And I have supplemented that
15 with a page from another source.
16 Q. Page 4 was missing from your report?
17 A. Page 4 was missing, yes.
18 Q. With the addition of page 4 of the
19 autopsy report on JonBenet Ramsey, does, in
20 fact, Defendants' Exhibit 2 represent a true and
21 correct and complete copy of your Rule 26 Expert
22 Witness Report?
23 A. Yes, it does.
24 Q. And you stand by your report; do you
25 not, sir?
1 A. Yes, I do.
2 Q. Is there anything that you would
3 like to change in that report before we question
4 you about it today?
5 A. No.
6 Q. You also, as part of that report,
7 have supplied us with a copy of your most
8 recent CV, your curriculum vitae; have you not?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And it is a true and -- I was
11 impressed with the thoroughness of it. You even
12 went back to age 19 when you were working at
13 WOW TV or radio, the Johnny Carson Show. It's
14 very thorough in terms of describing your
15 professional endeavors and work experience; is it
16 not, sir?
17 A. I hope it is, yes.
18 Q. And you intended it to be; did you
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. So that we can go there and we can
22 find out where you worked professionally, right?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. We can find out who you worked for
25 in terms of your professional endeavors; can we
1 not, sir?
2 A. I think you can, yes.
3 Q. Do you stand by that CV as being
4 complete and accurate?
5 A. It might have a typographical error
6 here and there, but --
7 Q. We will forgive that.
8 A. -- for the most part, it is accurate
9 and complete.
10 Q. Well, you say for the most part.
11 Is there any part, other than typographical
12 errors, that you have some concerns about in
13 terms of it being accurate and complete?
14 A. Only that I think it has not been
15 updated for about -- I had it retyped, but I
16 didn't update it in preparation for this
17 deposition because of some requirements of the
18 type of display, the font size and so forth.
19 When I did that, it changed the pagination and
20 so forth of the thing. It is different than
21 it was. But I did not update it to include,
22 for example, the items that I've just testified
23 to in connection with the Marine Corps and some
24 of the things that have happened within the last
25 few months.
1 Q. I want to get those updated. So
2 tell me, other than -- and you say the Marine
3 Corps. Is that the Department of Defense
4 deal --
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. -- that's channeled through TASER
8 A. That is correct.
9 Q. And that has been only in the last
10 month, right?
11 A. Well, it has been in preparation for
12 a long time. But, I mean, it is a research
13 and development contract that has been in
14 preparation for well over a year, but the award
15 had only been made within the last month.
16 Q. Anything else that you want to add
17 to your CV in terms of updating it other than
18 the Marine Corps, Department of Defense, TASER
19 International contract that you've just described
20 for me?
21 A. Well, there are a number of other
22 items that I referred to in connection with my
23 travels and so on. I am actively pursuing
24 those. Those are -- for example, there is a
25 proposition outstanding with a major Chinese
1 company to take on the manufacturing of a device
2 that I have developed here in Nebraska and have
3 got patent coverage and trademark coverage on
4 and so forth which lends itself to manufacturing
5 in the Chinese economy. And I have been very
6 active in the development of that line of
8 Q. What is that device?
9 A. It is the -- the trade name of it
10 is an Omnitrode, O-M-N-I-T-R-O-D-E. It is a
11 specialized piece of actual apparatus that a
12 patient wears in order to supply a very
13 comprehensive and complete line of cardiac data
14 to a computer system that in turn does various
15 kinds of pattern recognition, data compression
16 and so forth on the signal. It is integrated
17 into a complete system.
18 My colleagues in Houston have been
19 working primarily on the electronic aspects of
20 it, and I have been working on the front end
21 or data acquisition aspects of it for a number
22 of years, and I am very actively involved in
24 Q. So we have the Omnitrode and we have
25 got the contract with the government through
1 TASER International. Any other things that you
2 need to give me to make sure that we have
3 updated your CV before we leave here today?
4 A. Those are the principal technical
5 aspects of things, and I still maintain a number
6 of local business enterprises that take up a
7 significant amount of my time. We happen to be
8 sitting in one right now.
9 Q. The bank?
10 A. Well, the building.
11 Q. You own this building?
12 A. Not the bank, but the building that
13 the bank is in is a building where I rent
14 space and operate some commercial enterprises.
15 Q. You do your fruit and vegetables
16 deal on Saturday, still?
17 A. That's right.
18 Q. Your dad Herman, right?
19 A. Exactly right. Thank you for being
20 so perceptive.
21 Q. You still work in the land? I know
22 you went back in, what, '91, to help him out?
23 A. That is correct, yes.
24 Q. And do you still do that?
25 A. Very much so.
1 Q. Still do the corn, half yellow, half
3 A. Yes. Still deal with people in
4 Georgia for plants and so on.
5 Q. Good for you.
6 You recognize, Dr. Stratbucker, from
7 your involvement as an expert witness what your
8 role is; do you not?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. How would you describe your role as
11 an expert witness in the litigation?
12 A. Well, I describe my role as being
13 somewhat similar to my role as a teacher for
14 most of my professional life. And the purpose
15 of an expert witness is to teach the judge
16 and/or jury, the court, on matters which may be
17 unfamiliar with them and to make it possible to
18 properly assess evidence and so forth in the
19 face of unfamiliar, particularly high technology
20 sorts of things.
21 Q. Areas of expertise that are generally
22 considered to be beyond that of the knowledge of
23 a lay person?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And one of your roles, and I think
1 you view it as an important one, is to educate
2 the court, the jury, on scientific information?
3 A. Correct.
4 Q. You also are called on, you
5 recognize, to take a certain set of facts and
6 to render opinions from those facts, true?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And you recognize that as an expert
9 witness it is not your role to create facts; am
10 I right?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. You are not and would not
13 misrepresent facts or mislead anyone with respect
14 to the facts upon which you give your opinions,
16 A. That is very true.
17 Q. And you are not taking sides here;
18 are you, sir?
19 A. No.
20 Q. I mean, you come into this dedicated
21 to the concept of your role is to be fair,
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. To be honest, right?
25 A. Correct.
1 Q. To be unbiased and objective, true?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And if I were to present you with
4 factual information, photographic or otherwise,
5 and you felt like the information that I have
6 presented you with established that JonBenet
7 Ramsey had marks on her body that are consistent
8 with the application of a stun gun, you wouldn't
9 hesitate to say that; would you, sir?
10 A. If I -- if it is all as you just
11 represented, that is correct. If all of the
12 evidence that you are referring to is
13 scientifically defensible, I would not have any
14 reservations about it, no.
15 Q. You do not have any agenda here,
16 hidden or otherwise; do you, sir?
17 A. No, sir, I do not.
18 Q. How much money does TASER
19 International pay you each month?
20 A. It's difficult to say because we are
21 just embarking on this now for the first time;
22 and I bill my time at a hourly rate, which
23 happens to be $125 an hour. And I have yet
24 actually to submit a bill. I need to do that
25 in the next probably day or two to finish out
1 this month, which is the first active month of
2 this program.
3 Q. So you have never received any money
4 from TASER International?
5 A. No.
6 Q. They don't pay you in your job as
7 medical director for TASER International?
8 A. Well, that is a very recent
9 description or title. And, in fact, I have not
10 been paid a cent for that up to this point.
11 Now, I have some anticipation that that will
12 change, particularly since the Marine Corps grant
13 or contract, actually, was approved.
14 Q. How recent has that title been
15 bestowed upon you, Medical Director for TASER
16 International, Inc.?
17 A. Well, I think it has been talked
18 about now for a couple of months. As to
19 whether it was a proper designation of the kind
20 of activity that I will be involved in, I have
21 actually commenced over the last probably 60
22 days to take on the role of an on-call medical
23 advisor, medical director, if you will, to
24 handle problems that come up in the field
25 related to their devices that they market, the
1 TASER in particular.
2 And because I have -- I thought when
3 I finished and retired from medical practice
4 that my on-call days and weekends and nights and
5 so forth were going to be freed up some, but I
6 have now jumped right back into the fire from
7 the frying pan, I think, carrying a full-time
8 pager so that I can be reached at a moment's
9 notice and that sort of thing.
10 Q. By TASER International?
11 A. Yes. Well, by -- and by -- and
12 their customers.
13 Q. Well, let me, because you indicated
14 that you had talked about the title for a
15 couple of months and as to whether it was a
16 proper designation that you will be involved in
17 or not.
18 Just plain and simple, do you hold
19 the position as the medical director for TASER
20 International, Inc., the manufacturer of the Air
21 TASER stun gun?
22 A. Yes, I do.
23 Q. How long have you held that
24 position, sir?
25 A. I would say, to be precise about it,
1 it was formally announced at a meeting in Las
2 Vegas two weeks ago.
3 Q. Is that when you took on the role,
4 two weeks ago?
5 A. Well, I haven't been paid yet, so I
6 don't know whether -- if it means I got a
7 check from them, I haven't got a check from
9 Q. Sir, it doesn't mean whether you got
10 a check from them or not. You have a number
11 of degrees. You are an educated man. You
12 have been a businessman all of your life. It
13 is a simple question.
14 When did you become the medical
15 director for TASER International, Inc.? Two
16 weeks ago, two months ago? Tell me.
17 A. Oh, I am not sure that I can say
18 that I am even yet because I don't have cards.
19 I don't have any -- I don't have an official
20 statement from them. I don't have a letter.
21 I don't have anything other than the
22 presentation of myself as the newly appointed
23 medical director of TASER International at their
24 big annual meeting here a few weeks ago in Las
1 Q. So you would not have --
2 MR. HOFFMAN: Lin, may I ask you a
4 MR. WOOD: No. Ask me a question?
5 MR. HOFFMAN: Yes. Are you asking
6 him when he actually began performing any duties
7 as a medical director for TASER?
8 MR. WOOD: I am not. I am asking
9 him when he became the medical director for
10 TASER International, Inc., period. That's my
12 MR. HOFFMAN: Okay. Thank you.
13 Q. (By Mr. Wood) So you would not
14 have represented yourself as a medical director
15 for TASER International, Inc. until two weeks
16 ago when the announcement was made in Las Vegas,
18 A. It certainly would have been an
19 unofficial or in the context of being that that
20 was a discussion that was ongoing and it was
21 highly likely that it would occur.
22 Q. But it had not occurred prior to two
23 weeks ago?
24 A. Prior to two weeks ago, it had not
1 Q. And you had not, as Mr. Hoffman
2 suggested a good question, you had not taken on
3 any actual job responsibilities as the medical
4 director until two weeks ago; is that true?
5 A. The job responsibility --
6 Q. Is that true?
7 A. That is true, yes.
8 Q. And you don't know how much they are
9 going to pay you for that job; do you?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. How much?
12 A. They proposed to pay me $1,000 a
13 month as a retainer. The other activities will
14 be over and above that.
15 Q. And what about stock options, do you
16 have any stock options in TASER International,
18 A. No, I don't.
19 Q. Do you own any stock in that
21 A. No.
22 Q. Have you been made any promises that
23 you would receive any such benefits --
24 A. No.
25 Q. -- from being associated with them?
1 A. No, I have not.
2 Q. Have you ever had any stock options?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. In TASER International, Inc.?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Tell me about those.
7 A. I was compensated by stock option
8 exclusively for work that I did for them several
9 years ago on animal studies for their device.
10 Those options matured and were executed.
11 Q. You purchased the stock?
12 A. Yeah. And I purchased the stock,
13 and I sold the stock. Actually I divided it
14 up amongst my relatives is what I did with it.
15 Q. How many shares of stock are we
16 talking about?
17 A. About 3,000.
18 Q. How much profit did you make on that
19 sale, gross?
20 A. About $40,000.
21 Q. $40,000 gross profit on the sale of
22 the stock of TASER International, Inc.?
23 A. Over the exercise price, yes.
24 Q. Over the exercise price. TASER
25 International, Inc. stock, right?
1 A. Right.
2 (Defendants' Exhibit-4 was marked for
4 Q. (By Mr. Wood) Defendants' Exhibit-3.
5 Let me have back No. 2.
6 A. You want three?
7 Q. I want No. 2. I want you to look
8 at No. 3.
9 In your Rule 26 report, you
10 indicated that you had examined the nine-page
11 autopsy report, correct?
12 A. Correct.
13 Q. And you had also examined four
14 monochrome laser printer images, correct?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. The four monochrome laser printer
17 images you refer to in your report, Rule 26
18 report, are the four monochrome laser images
19 that have been marked for purposes of
20 identification as Defendants' Exhibit 3; am I
22 A. Yes. I think that is correct.
23 Q. Let me hand you what has been marked
24 for purposes of identification to your deposition
25 as Defendants' Exhibit-4 and ask you to take a
1 moment, Dr. Stratbucker, and ask you to review
2 that letter, and I have some questions for you
3 about that letter.
4 A. All right.
5 Q. Are you familiar with that letter,
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. What is the date on the letter?
9 A. January 16, 2002.
10 Q. Five months ago?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Flip to the signature page, sir. Is
13 that, in fact, your signature?
14 A. Yes, it is.
15 Q. And you wrote that letter, as
16 indicated on it, in your capacity of being the
17 medical director for TASER International, Inc.;
18 did you not?
19 A. Yes, I did.
20 Q. Dr. Stratbucker, would you like to
21 take a moment and reflect on your testimony
22 given today under oath and give me the truth
23 about your involvement as the medical director
24 for TASER International, Inc., please, sir?
25 Straightforward, without equivocation. Because
1 we have got some explaining to do; do we not?
2 A. I don't think so.
3 Q. Well, why don't you clear it up
4 because I've heard you earlier testify under
5 oath that you have never represented yourself
6 out to be the medical director of TASER
7 International, Inc. prior to two weeks ago; and
8 I have that letter where you have, in fact,
9 represented yourself as such five months ago.
10 And I would like to find out how I am not
11 either understanding you or whether you have
12 been candid with me about your role, financially
13 and otherwise, with TASER International, Inc.,
14 who just happens to be the manufacturer of the
15 Air TASER stun gun which is one of the issues
16 in this case. So why don't you explain that to
17 me, please.
18 A. I will be happy to, and I won't say
19 anything different than I've already said. And
20 that is that the official pronouncement of the
21 company that I was the medical director of TASER
22 International did not occur until two weeks ago.
23 There had been discussions about it
24 prior to that. And because of the urgency of
25 this particular case in having a resolution, I
1 think I authored this thing and put my name on
2 it as medical director. But I have not
3 received any money as medical director, and I
4 have not received a notification by the company
5 that I am, in fact, a medical director. So I
6 would have to say that this letter represents a
7 kind of an interim activity.
8 And I don't know that I would have
9 accomplished anything by having said I am the
10 medical director pro tem or something of the
11 sort to author this letter and give it an air
12 of officiality.
13 I am not making any cover-up or
14 anything of the sort. What I told you is
15 exactly the state of affairs of my association
16 with TASER.
17 Q. Well, where did you get -- I mean,
18 this isn't an interim letterhead; is it? This
19 letter is written on the letterhead, both a
20 cover, first page with full address, and the
21 other pages --
22 A. Yeah.
23 Q. Excuse me.
24 -- with the TASER International logo
25 and address. Where did you get that stationery?
1 A. Well, as you well know surrounded by
2 computers as you are here today, you can make
3 letterhead at the drop of a hat. So I think
4 that letterhead actually came from an e-mail
5 file that I then amended or added to in order
6 to make a letter out of it.
7 Q. You came up with this letterhead for
8 TASER International on this letter?
9 A. Yes, I have that letterhead on my
10 computer. I can turn out a --
11 Q. I am sorry?
12 A. I can turn out a letter with
13 letterhead under my own resources.
14 Q. Is that the TASER International logo?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. How did you get that?
17 A. The same way I have all these
18 photographs on my computer. That is --
19 Q. Well, who sent it to you? Somebody
20 had to send you the logo.
21 A. I am sure that TASER sent it to me.
22 Q. When?
23 A. I couldn't tell you right now. I
24 could check my computer to find out when.
25 Q. Sir, you gave this report in federal
1 court in Atlanta, Georgia, and you knew at the
2 time that there were contentions that you were
3 going to be addressing that involved the Air
4 TASER stun gun manufactured by TASER
5 International, true?
6 A. No, I don't think that is true at
7 all. I didn't -- there has been no evidence
8 produced, to my knowledge, that there ever was
9 an Air TASER involved in this case at all.
10 Q. Listen very carefully.
11 A. That's is somebody's imagination,
12 maybe; but it is not any evidence available.
13 Q. We will talk about people's
14 imagination a little bit later on, but I didn't
15 ask you that. Let me go back and restate my
17 At the time that you submitted this
18 report in federal court in Atlanta, Georgia, you
19 knew at that time that there were contentions in
20 this case that you were going to be addressing
21 that involve the Air TASER stun gun manufactured
22 by TASER International, true?
23 A. No, not true.
24 Q. You didn't believe that there was
25 any contention made by the Ramseys that an Air
1 TASER stun gun might have been used on their
2 daughter? You didn't know that at the time you
3 gave this report; did you?
4 A. Yes, I knew that there was talk
5 about that. There has been talk about it on
6 national television, for heaven's sake. You
7 would be hard pressed to not know that.
8 Q. So you did, in fact, know at the
9 time that you submitted this report in federal
10 court that there were issues in this case
11 involving the possible application of an Air
12 TASER stun gun to JonBenet Ramsey, which stun
13 gun was manufactured by TASER International,
15 A. I have known that there was a
16 contention that an Air TASER, because of its
17 geometry, met some of the requirements of
18 spacing and so forth; but I also know that no
19 such Air TASER has ever been found other than
20 by purchase by somebody who had maybe even a
21 vested interest in all of this to cause the Air
22 TASER to be implicated. But the Air TASER was
23 not implicated by being a piece of evidence in
24 this case.
25 Q. Sir, I am going to get to your
1 opinions. But I am going to get an answer, if
2 I could, please, to my question whether it is
3 true or not.
4 Isn't it true, sir, that at the time
5 you submitted your Rule 26 report in federal
6 court in Atlanta, Georgia you knew that there
7 were issues in this civil litigation involving
8 the Air TASER stun gun manufactured by TASER
9 International? Is that true or not?
10 A. Well, it is true that I had heard
11 such stories, but it is not true that I used
12 the Air TASER as any foundation for my report.
13 Q. You did not use the Air TASER stun
14 gun as any foundation for your report; is that
15 your testimony?
16 A. I did not use the Air TASER as any
17 evidential foundation for my report.
18 Q. But you knew that there were issues
19 raised about the Air TASER?
20 A. Yes, I did.
21 Q. Don't you think, sir, that you had
22 an obligation and a responsibility in your
23 report or in your curriculum vitae to inform the
24 court and inform the jury about your connection
25 with TASER International, Inc.?
1 A. Well, I think if you look through my
2 curriculum vitae, you will see references to
3 TASER International in my vitae that has been
4 around for a long time.
5 Q. I am going to give you an
6 opportunity in a moment to look through there
7 and show me where there is any indication in
8 that curriculum vitae about your involvement or
9 employment or consultant's role with TASER
10 International, Inc. But before we do that,
11 don't you agree with me, sir, that that should
12 have been clearly disclosed to the judge,
13 ultimately if necessary to the jury and to the
14 involved lawyers in this case?
15 A. No, I don't think it should be.
16 Q. Why not?
17 A. Well, because it is all -- its
18 involvement is all hypothetical and imaginary.
19 It is not -- it's not -- there never has been
20 a TASER involved in this case to anybody's
21 knowledge that is other than just a supposition
22 or an invention.
23 Q. Or an opinion by an expert?
24 A. Or an opinion.
25 Q. By an expert, right?
1 A. Which expert might you be referring
3 Q. Well, maybe I am referring to the
4 one that Mr. Hoffman referred to when he said
5 that we were going to have one of your former
6 colleagues and coauthors rebut your opinion in
7 this case. You know Michael Doberson; do you
8 not, sir?
9 A. Indeed I do, yes.
10 Q. Yes, sir. And you have respect for
11 him; do you not, sir?
12 A. I certainly do, yes, sir.
13 Q. And have you been supplied by Mr.
14 Hoffman with the Rule 26 report of Dr. Michael
15 Doberson, a forensic pathologist and the coroner
16 and medical examiner for Arapahoe County,
18 A. I only recently received it, but I
19 do have that in my possession.
20 Q. When did you recently receive it?
21 A. I would say maybe a month or two
22 ago. A month ago probably.
23 Q. From Mr. Hoffman?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Why is it not in your file materials
1 here this morning?
2 A. Well, I think it is.
3 Q. Well, I haven't been shown it.
4 A. I have no reason to not -- the only
5 copy I have is a fax copy, which is not a very
6 legible one.
7 Q. So if I understand -- is that
8 something you can find for us during a break,
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Am I hearing you, sir, that you are
12 telling me that you don't think that in all
13 candor you should have disclosed your
14 relationship with TASER International because it
15 is your opinion that an Air TASER stun gun was
16 not used on JonBenet Ramsey? Is that what you
17 are telling me, sir?
18 A. Could you ask that question again,
20 Q. Yes, I will be glad to restate it.
21 Are you telling me that you do not
22 believe that candor and full disclosure required
23 that you inform the court of your relationship
24 with TASER International because in your opinion,
25 an Air TASER stun gun was not used on JonBenet
1 Ramsey? Is that your explanation as to why you
2 didn't have to disclose that to the court?
3 A. Well, it is not the explanation I --
4 I can't imagine anything that I have ever done
5 that could be construed as trying to hide the
6 fact that I have no connection with the Air
7 TASER company.
8 And I have testified as an expert in
9 many court proceedings in which the issue of
10 whether or not I had any business connection
11 with Air TASER had -- could have colored my
12 opinion in any way, shape or form. That is a
13 subject which, you know, all lawyers would love
14 to dance on. And it is certainly, if anything,
15 it may be a slight oversight on my part; but
16 it is by no means a subterfuge or cover-up or
17 anything of the kind. I am happy to tell you
18 anything and everything that you wish to know
19 about my association with Air TASER.
20 Q. Well, we are going to get all that
21 out today.
22 A. All right.
23 Q. Do you know Mr. Tuttle?
24 A. Yes, I do.
25 Q. Air TASER, TASER International?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Was TASER International formerly known
3 as Air TASER?
4 A. Yes, it was.
5 Q. And you were back and forth with Mr.
6 Tuttle by e-mails in 2001, I believe, with
7 respect to Lou Smit's, former Homicide Detective
8 Lou Smit's presentation on the NBC series; were
9 you not?
10 A. I think I did correspond with him,
11 not because he arranged it, but because of this
12 connection with Air TASER came up quite
13 spontaneously. I had no idea where it came
14 from with -- between myself and NBC.
15 Q. You think you corresponded with, sir,
16 or did you correspond with him?
17 A. Well, I did correspond with him.
18 Q. Thank you.
19 A. I did correspond with him.
20 Q. And you were corresponding with him
21 on the question of whether or not Mr. Smit was
22 right, scientifically or otherwise, about his
23 belief that there were marks on JonBenet's body
24 that were consistent with the application of an
25 Air TASER stun gun, right?
1 A. I -- I am sure there must be some
2 wording in there in some correspondence or
3 e-mail or whatever about that -- on that matter,
5 Q. And the reason that you are sure is
6 because it is there, you remember doing it, in
7 2001, right?
8 A. Yes. Uh-huh (affirmative).
9 Q. So in 2001, you are getting back and
10 forth e-mails and discussions with Mr. Tuttle at
11 Air TASER or TASER International, Inc. about
12 whether one of that company's stun guns might
13 have been used on JonBenet Ramsey; and then you
14 represent in January of 2002 that are you the
15 medical director for TASER International, Inc.;
16 and you have previously done work that at least
17 enriched you by some $40,000 from stock options
18 that were exercised and subsequently sold. And
19 you don't think that coming into this case to
20 give a Rule 26 report as an expert witness in
21 federal court that you had any responsibility,
22 an obligation professionally to disclose your
23 relationship with Air TASER or TASER
24 International, Inc.; is that your testimony, sir?
25 A. No, that is not my testimony.
1 Q. Well, what is your testimony?
2 A. My testimony is that I did not and
3 still do not view it as a requirement anymore
4 than I would have to disclose the fact that I
5 have had associations with other stun gun
6 companies over the years and done practically
7 the same kind of thing for them that I have
8 done for Air TASER.
9 If, for example, this one, which is
10 made in Taiwan and is prominently displayed in
11 the work that Dr. Doberson and I did in
12 Colorado several years ago, I didn't disclose
13 the fact that I did a test for this company on
14 their stun gun to determine its electrical
16 Q. Did you get involved in some civil
17 litigation as an expert witness that involved
18 that particular stun gun?
19 A. Yes, I did.
20 Q. And you didn't disclose in that
21 litigation that you had worked for this company
22 in the past?
23 A. I did not disclose -- I probably
24 presented the report that I did for them as the
25 kind of evidence that usually is required in
1 those cases.
2 Q. Sir, you have a history of not
3 disclosing information about your relationship
4 with certain electronic firms?
5 A. No, I don't have a history of any
6 such a thing.
7 Q. Well, you were -- there were two
8 attempts to fire you from the faculty at the
9 University of Nebraska Medical School because you
10 refused to disclose your relationship as a
11 consultant with Marquette Electronics, true?
12 Is that true --
13 A. Attempts.
14 Q. -- or not, sir?
15 A. Yes, sir.
16 Q. Is that the truth?
17 A. Right. That is the truth, yes, sir.
18 Q. Yes, sir. And ultimately you --
19 A. They didn't succeed, but it was the
21 Q. Well, they didn't succeed, if you
22 want to be technical --
23 A. Because they were wrong. They
24 didn't succeed because they were wrong.
25 Q. Let's talk about why they didn't
1 succeed. They didn't succeed because they were
2 not allowed to fire you for one year after you
3 had been called back on active duty to take the
4 place of a doctor here at the base who had
5 gone over in Desert Storm --
6 A. Uh-huh (affirmative).
7 Q. -- and there was a law that said
8 you can't fire somebody within a year of their
9 being called up for active duty. That's why
10 they didn't succeed; isn't that the truth, sir?
11 A. That's a pretty good reason; isn't
12 it, sir?
13 Q. It's not because you acted properly
14 in refusing to disclose your consultant
15 relationship with Marquette Electronics?
16 A. It turns out that my consultant
17 arrangement with Marquette Electronics was, in
18 fact, totally legitimate and totally sanctioned
19 by the University.
20 Q. Who tried to fire you twice because
21 you wouldn't tell them what you were doing?
22 A. No. They tried to fire me for a
23 totally -- totally other reasons but --
24 Q. What were the reasons?
25 A. -- used that reason mistakenly and
1 erroneously as an acceptable reason.
2 Q. Why did they want to fire you, then?
3 Why don't you tell us that?
4 A. Well, I will be glad to tell you
6 Q. Please do.
7 A. The department chairman of the
8 Radiology Department, University of Nebraska
9 College of Medicine, was under the gun from the
10 dean to perform in research and development.
11 The Radiology Department had, over the years,
12 come out dead last amongst the various competing
13 departments in the medical school for research
15 And the department chairman, I think,
16 thought that because I had known the founder of
17 Marquette Electronics since the day he started
18 the company in Milwaukee and that the chairman
19 was, in fact, a Milwaukean by birth, that I
20 would be a possible vehicle to attract corporate
21 funds for the department to finally make some
22 kind of showing in the area of research support
23 for the Department of Radiology.
24 When I accompanied the department
25 chairman to Milwaukee to see if we could, in
1 fact, get some corporate funds to support the
2 research activities in the department, the
3 president of Marquette said to me privately, he
4 said: I wouldn't put my hard earned money in
5 that department for anything. He said: I
6 don't like that guy, and I don't think the
7 University has the capability of coming up with
8 any kind of results for my funding. So he
9 turned thumbs down on the project.
10 The dean was unhappy about it
11 because the department chairman had told him he
12 was in for a big surprise because Stratbucker
13 was going to come up with a bunch of research
14 money for the department. And that resulted in a
15 scramble to try to figure out how to save the
16 department chairman's job, and I ended up being
17 the scapegoat for the whole thing on a
18 subterfuge, basically an invention of what was
19 called conflict of interest. He said I had a
20 conflict of interest with a company and that was
21 why they were terminating me from my job.
22 I apologize for the digression in
23 totally unrelated matters here, but you seem to
24 be interested in it, so I --
25 Q. I am interested in everything that
1 you have to say, sir, because my clients, you
2 understand, are being sued for $50 million by a
3 lawyer and a plaintiff who allege that Patsy
4 Ramsey brutally murdered her daughter; and you
5 are their expert. And I am interested in
6 everything about you. So don't hold back.
7 A. It sounds like you have got it all
8 well in hand, so.
9 Q. We haven't gotten to the tip of the
11 A. Well, then let's go then.
12 Q. We are going to go. But I am going
13 to let you now take a moment, and I am going
14 to let you look through your CV while we take
15 a brief recess, and you are going to find for
16 me the references to Air TASER or TASER
17 International that you said were there indicating
18 your involvement with that company. And also if
19 you would get Doberson's report for us.
20 MR. HOFFMAN: Lin, I don't know how
21 you are set up out there. Is it possible for
22 Dr. Stratbucker and I just to consult for a few
23 minutes during this break?
24 MR. WOOD: Absolutely.
25 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Counsel, we are
1 off the record at 11:02 a.m.
2 (A recess was taken.)
3 (Defendants' Exhibit-5 was marked for
5 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Counsel, we are
6 back on record at 11:39 a.m.
7 Q. (By Mr. Wood) Dr. Stratbucker,
8 prior to preparing and signing your Rule 26
9 report, I am correct that the only photographs
10 that you had seen that were represented as being
11 crime scene or autopsy photographs of JonBenet
12 Ramsey were the four monochrome photographs set
13 forth in your report and identified in this
14 deposition as Defendants' Exhibit-3; is that
16 A. I think that is true, yes.
17 Q. It is also true that you had not
18 ever reviewed any color photographs of the crime
19 scene or of the autopsy with respect to JonBenet
20 Ramsey prior to signing and submitting your Rule
21 26 report, true?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. You have -- I am going to hand you
24 Defendants' Exhibit-5 and ask you if you would
25 take a look at those documents real quick.
1 Have you had a chance to review
2 Defendants' Exhibit 5?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Prior to preparing your Rule 26
5 report, you had not, in fact, ever seen the
6 color photos that are represented as being crime
7 scene or autopsy photographs of JonBenet Ramsey;
8 had you, sir?
9 A. I saw some photos when I was in New
10 York City at the invitation of NBC to render an
11 opinion on some photographic material. It must
12 have been in August, I think it was, probably
13 July or August of last year. And there were
14 photographic -- there were color renditions of
15 those pictures at that time that I had only
16 then for the first time seen in color. It
17 could have been that those were shown to me at
18 that time.
19 Q. You don't know; do you?
20 A. I don't remember. I don't remember
21 that I saw color photographs of the ones you
22 just saw at my office or anyplace like that.
23 Q. Who arranged for you to go to New
24 York at the invitation of NBC?
25 A. That came about by -- I was
1 testifying in a murder trial in North Carolina,
2 the so-called Richard Jackson case. And the NBC
3 network, through some source or other, learned
4 that I was there and made contact with me at
5 that -- actually in North Carolina as the trial
6 was ending. I was finishing my testimony. And
7 they asked me if I could change my travel plans
8 and come to New York City directly from North
9 Carolina, which would have been last, I think it
10 was in July maybe, July or August.
11 Q. Do you think Mr. Tuttle might have
12 been involved in speaking with NBC?
13 A. He could have been.
14 Q. Was the idea --
15 A. There were very few people who knew
16 I was there at the time.
17 Q. Tuttle knew?
18 A. Maybe Tuttle did know, yeah. That
19 is possible.
20 Q. Did you go to NBC to look at
21 specifically the JonBenet Ramsey case?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. That would have been July of 2001?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. I have your testimony from your
1 trial in the Jackson matter. Did you testify
2 truthfully in that case, sir?
3 A. I certainly did.
4 Q. Do you stand by each and every
5 statement that you made in that testimony under
6 oath with respect to stun gun marks?
7 A. Yes.
8 (Defendants' Exhibit-6 and Exhibit-7
9 were marked for identification.)
10 Q. (By Mr. Wood) So we can stay in
11 order, let me just ask you, Defendants' Exhibit
12 6 consists of three pages of handwritten notes
13 and some e-mail correspondence that you provided
14 me this morning out of your Wolf v. Ramsey
15 file, true?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. That is your handwriting on the
18 first three pages?
19 A. Yes, it is.
20 Q. Let me show you what has been marked
21 as Defendants' Exhibit 7 and ask you if you are
22 familiar with that photograph from your testimony
23 in the Jackson trial?
24 A. No, I am not familiar with that
1 Q. Did you identify stun gun marks on
2 the body of the victim in that case on the
3 left shoulder?
4 A. I -- yes, I think it was on the
5 left shoulder. But this photograph was not one
6 that I ever recall seeing.
7 Q. Are those the marks, though, in the
8 left shoulder that you identified as stun gun
10 A. Well, they certainly aren't -- they
11 would have been incidental to the main testimony
12 having to do with the marks. Because I
13 meticulously went over those photographs with my
14 measuring apparatus and so forth to get the
15 dimensionality, and I don't remember seeing this
17 I don't -- it might have been --
18 there was a huge collection of photographs. I
19 don't have -- represent that I saw every one of
20 them. But as a matter of fact, I concentrated
21 my efforts on two or three, at the most, of
22 all the photographs that were in evidence there.
23 (Defendants' Exhibit-8 was marked for
25 Q. (By Mr. Wood) Before I leave
1 Defendants' Exhibit 7, the marks that I am
2 pointing out to you on the shoulder of the
3 victim in the Jackson case, you do not deny,
4 sitting here today under oath, sir, that you may
5 have identified those as stun gun marks at the
6 trial in North Carolina?
7 A. I have no recollection of having
8 identified those marks. Those marks do not --
9 I already told you, I don't think I ever saw
10 that picture.
11 Q. Did you ever find any stun gun marks
12 on the victim's neck or left shoulder in the
13 Jackson case?
14 A. I don't -- there were marks
15 extending up on the thorax; and, of course, most
16 of the marks of the main concern were in the
17 inguinal area. But I remember searching for
18 some marks outside of the inguinal area and the
19 area of primary focus to establish scale factors
20 for the actual computation of two distances in
21 those photographs.
22 Q. Defendants' Exhibit 8?
23 A. That one looks familiar, yes.
24 Q. Where are the stun gun marks on the
25 victim on that photograph, sir?
1 A. These --
2 Q. You can take your pen and circle
3 them, if you like.
4 A. Circle them, you say?
5 Q. Yes, sir. Circle and just initial
6 the stun gun marks that you found there.
7 A. Well, I have circled two, two marks
8 there, that are possible candidates. But in my
9 testimony I had very carefully dimensioned and
10 calibrated the photographs. And, of course,
11 this has no such measuring and calibration. I
12 have a recollection that those two marks might
13 have been marks that I had identified as stun
14 gun marks, but I would have to -- I would have
15 to say that the nature of that case was such
16 that the stun gun marks were, in most cases,
17 far more mechanical than electrical because of
18 the way the stun gun was employed. And there
19 were only a few, actually, on the victim's body
20 that were of such a character to rule out the
21 possibility that there was a lot of excoriation
22 of tissue and actual tissue damage due to the
23 actual mechanical effects of the stun gun probes
24 on the skin when the thing is used as a ramrod
25 or a rongeur to actually force increased
1 conductivity to the body by means of pressure.
2 Q. Does the contract that TASER
3 International has recently been awarded by the
4 United States Government involve the purchase by
5 the government of stun guns?
6 A. The specific nature of that contract
7 is confidential.
8 Q. Does TASER International manufacture
9 anything other than stun guns?
10 A. Not anymore. They had a product at
11 one time which was an electrically operated car
12 theft preventer, and they no longer make that.
13 Q. To your knowledge, are they about to
14 start making a new product other than a stun
16 A. No.
17 Q. You have in your file a spiral small
18 pad. On the second page of that you have the
19 name Fleet White.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. What caused you to write Fleet
22 White's name down there?
23 A. Well, I suppose that -- this looks
24 like some notes I made in conversation with a
25 student at the University of Michigan State by
1 the name of Mary McCullough. And I don't know
2 Fleet White at all. This looks like Mr.
3 Hoffman's telephone number. And why I wrote
4 that down, I don't have any idea. But that is
5 -- these are some telephone notes that I took
6 probably in the course of a telephone
7 conversation with Mary McCullough.
8 Q. You did not rely on your review of
9 photographs at NBC in coming to your conclusions
10 in your Rule 26 report; did you, sir?
11 A. I am not quite -- I don't
13 Q. You told us everything in your Rule
14 26 report that you -- Matters Considered: I
15 have examined the following documents as part of
16 my examination and report.
17 And you listed the autopsy report,
18 and you listed four monochrome laser printed
19 images purporting to be renditions of the crime
20 scene and autopsy photographs most commonly
21 attributed to Detective Lou Smit?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. You didn't say anything about
24 anything you saw at NBC; did you?
25 A. No. What I saw at NBC was a
1 hurried mishmash of stuff that was not very well
2 provided, ill provided; and I really had
3 difficulty making any sense out of what they
4 showed me.
5 Q. Do you know who at NBC you were
6 dealing with?
7 A. I can't remember the man's name.
8 Nightline was the program.
9 Q. That would be ABC.
10 A. Well, I am sorry then. It is
12 Q. Dateline?
13 A. Dateline, yes.
14 Q. Was there some idea that perhaps
15 they might do a segment involving you that Mr.
16 Tuttle wanted them to do?
17 A. No, no. The purpose of it, as told
18 to me over the telephone in North Carolina that
19 caused me to come to New York, was that NBC
20 was wanting to do a counterpoint on the Couric
21 presentation that had occurred that previous week
22 or maybe earlier that week and that they wanted
23 someone else outside, an expert, to review the
24 pictures and render an expert opinion on them
25 that was outside of the group that had already
1 been involved. And that is why they apparently
2 contacted me.
3 Q. And that was never done, in terms of
4 your involvement after the --
5 A. Well, I actually was -- I actually
6 was on the air for a very brief period of
8 Q. Talking about what case?
9 A. Talking about the Ramsey case.
10 Q. On Dateline?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. What you were shown was not, as you
13 described it, you had difficulty making any
14 sense out of what they showed you on NBC?
15 A. Yes. They showed me some cropped
16 video presentations of what were alleged to be
17 some new evidence or new photographs that had
18 not yet been seen, I think maybe from Mr.
19 Smit's collection. And they wanted to know if
20 I thought they looked like stun gun marks on
21 these photographs that they presented on a
22 monitor. Now, they had other photographs
23 around, but the ones that they wanted me to
24 comment on and which they took my video
25 deposition, essentially, was based on some
1 electronically presented photographic material
2 that were some spots that they wished to know
3 if I thought they looked like stun gun marks.
4 And I, in the brief time that I was
5 on there, I said that I really --
6 Q. Couldn't say?
7 A. -- couldn't say.
8 Q. Could have been stun gun marks?
9 A. Yeah, might have been.
10 Q. You were not in a position to --
11 A. Might have been.
12 Q. Might have been?
13 A. Might have been. Couldn't say.
14 Q. In fact, the marks on JonBenet's
15 back, as you state in your written notes here
16 that are part of Defendants' Exhibit 6, could
17 have been made by, your words, a conventional
18 sharp pointed stun gun, true?
19 A. Possible, yeah.
20 Q. You don't rule out the use --
21 A. Well, the dimensionality of stun gun
22 marks is extremely important. If you are going
23 to make any causative relationship, you have got
24 to know --
25 Q. The distance?
1 A. -- the authenticity -- well, you
2 have to know the photographic authenticity.
3 Because in this day and age with photographic
4 manipulations by computer, you can do anything
5 you want to. You can make --
6 Q. You bet.
7 A. -- anything look like anything.
8 Q. You bet. And the fact of the
9 matter is you never have been provided with
10 photographic evidence from the autopsy
11 photographs or the crime scene evidence
12 photographs that you were able to reach a
13 conclusion on in terms of the distance between
14 the marks on JonBenet's back; isn't that true,
16 A. Well, in cases that I have
17 testified --
18 Q. Please answer my question. My
19 question is not cases you testified in before.
20 The fact of the matter is you have
21 never been provided with photographic evidence
22 from autopsy photographs or the crime scene
23 evidence photographs from which you were able to
24 reach a conclusion in terms of the distance
25 between the marks on JonBenet's back; isn't that