Page 2 - CFDI Program Findings Report Example

• A specific cabinet door is the focus of law enforcement placement of the Defendant and Joe Victim in the kitchen.
Both Joe Victim and Defendant agree this positioning is incorrect. Search warrant photographs of cabinet door with
a defect does not appear recent; this conflicts with the law enforcement explanation of a stabbing attempt missed
and striking the cabinet.
• The Defendant was shown photographs with scales and is incorrectly told the measurements are in millimeters (they
are centimeters); a 2mm injury was described as 2cm. Defendant is also incorrectly told the chest wound to Joe
Victim is 5” (it was 5cm). Based on this incorrect information, the Investigator demonstrates how butcher knife
cannot make the chest wound 5” deep – blade is too wide at 5”. At this point the Defendant is coerced to change his
mind and the Investigator emphasizes the blood on white knife indicates it must have been the knife used.
• The Investigators never questioned Joe Victim about his actions in the same manner, or questioned any manner of
how Joe Victim told of the events, except to give answers when Joe Victim struggled with answers of his own.
• Joe Victim, absent any photographs, states the knife used was a fillet knife – but did not know what a butcher knife
was.
• Defendant was negative for alcohol or drugs by hospital toxicology reports.

Photography
• Images are low quality, using flashlight and no lights on in residence. The images were renamed and numbered,
there is no verifiable quantity.
• No photographs of door indicating if Joe Victim and Defendant were stationary and Defendant restrained Joe Victim
from leaving.
• No use of scales or evidence markers.
• Insufficient information is reported to identify areas of scene.
• Blood found and photographed in the bathroom, bedroom, front door, garage floor; no marks on wall. No evidence
collected.
• The photographs of the response, scene and medical treatment are inconsistent with the corresponding sequences
of events, with some renamed image files.
• Photographs of Joe Victim during progress of treatment are not in order of treatment.
• Black handled butcher knife on carpet is photographed with observed blood spatter of two 90-degree droplets on
the blade (one continues to carpet), one on the handle, and at least three on the carpet near handle.
• Search warrant photographs do not include the area of the recovered butcher knife and no blood is collected.

Evidence
• Evidence collection and documentation lacks consistent fluidity in examination and testing. This includes evidence
not being collected or collected evidence not examined. This would include for fingerprints and/or DNA of the
Defendant and Joe Victim.
• Joe Victim provided a case of Bud bottles and 750ml rum. Joe Victim stated he had two shots and five beers to the
Defendant having eight shots and nine beers. The Defendant consistently reported not consuming any alcohol and
demonstrated consistent and clear communication. Toxicology for the Defendant was negative and for Joe Victim
was .157 with 84 hours of inpatient detoxification by his treating physician. The Investigators only questioned the
veracity of the Defendant’s alcohol consumption and honesty – even with these toxicology results.
• Photographs reveal eight bottles in living room, four in a bedroom closet, a 750ml bottle.
• The refrigerator not inventoried or photographed.
• The search warrant specified for 1) knife mark on wall; and 2) blood samples to support warrant probable cause.
There was no relevant ‘knife mark’ found on a wall; and no blood samples – or any other evidence – was collected.
• Joe Victim was never shown any photographs of the knives, they were only described to him.
• The photographs and diagrams used in the interviews of the Defendant and Joe Victim are not in the provided
discovery materials reviewed.
• No fingerprints or DNA collected from scene, weapons or evidence, therefore no examination could be done.

Victimology