-Caveat Lector-
an excerpt from:
Loud and Clear
Lake Headly and William Hoffman�1990
Henry Holt and Company
115 W. 18th St.
New York, NY 10011
ISBN 0-8050-1138-2
272 pps � out-of-print/one edition
--[19]--
19
The Downey
Connection
DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA. NOVEMBER 17, 1979
I swam in a sewer. What brought me from Phoenix to this community just south
of Los Angeles was the critical August 17, 1976, police report written by Jon
Sellers, which, incredibly, had not found its way to the defense until
recently, more than three years, after Bolles died.
On 8/17/76, investigator flew to Downey, CA after receiving a telephone call
from Det. Gary Morrow of the Downey Police Department. Det. Morrow related to
investigator that he was in touch with a Bill Wright who allegedly was in an
alcoholic hospital with Bradley Funk shortly after the Bolles incident. He
related to investigator that Mr. Wright was giving him information concerning
statements that Bradley Funk allegedly made to him during their stay at the
hospital.
On 8/17/76 at approximately 1:30 P.m., investigator interviewed William D.
Wright, c/m, D.O.B. September 21, 1921, present address of 8276 Telegraph,
Downey, CA, no phone. Mr. Wright related that he is a retired truck driver.
A tape recording of the conversation held with Mr. Wright was made and the
tape was retained for future reference. For a complete verbatim account of
what was said, please refer to the tape. The following is the highlights of
the conversation held with Mr. Wright.
He said that on June 7, 1976, he was admitted to the Beverly Manor Hospital
located at 401 South Tustin in the city of Orange. He said that the hospital
is a private hospital for alcohol and drug-related problems. He said that on
June 7, 1976, he was in the detox center and was present when Bradley Funk
came into the hospital on June 8, 1976.... He said that at the time he did
not know this was Bradley Funk but that he and this person were ultimately
assigned the same room, Room #211, and spent approx. 25 days together in this
room.... He said that Funk became very nervous following Bolles's death and
bought the paper every day and received numerous clippings from Arizona
concerning the Bolles investigation. He related that Funk told him that he
felt his family was going to be blamed for the bombing. He said that Funk
stated that in his opinion, some dog owners were the ones that killed Bolles.
He also stated that there were going to be some big people hurt as a result
of this and named Steiger and Goldwater. Wright said that Funk mentioned some
land deals and that he at some time during the conversation believes he
mentioned Max Dunlap's name. Wright was unable to be specific as to the
conversation or how it took place. He did maintain, however, that at no time
did Funk implicate himself or his family in the bombing of Bolles and simply
stated that they were going to get the blame for it.
Wright stated that he remembers Funk telling him that he believed Bolles was
blown up by a controlled device and remembers him telling him that the
explosives or something were purchased in San Diego. He further stated that
one time during their stay together, when they were on pass, Funk took him to
a hobby shop when he was buying some material for a model boat that he was
putting together and at this time Funk pointed out to him a remote control
device, stating that it was something like the one that was used to blow
Bolles up. He said that Funk only pointed to the device through the case and
did not handle or examine the device. Wright described the device as being
brown but later changed the color to black and was shown a photograph of the
remote-control device which investigators suspect is similar to the type that
was used. At this time, Wright said that the device that Funk showed him was
similar to the one that investigator had a photograph of.
Sellers had concluded that a follow-up interview with William Wright wasn't
necessary.
I concluded differently.
Through a contact I had at the California Department of Motor Vehicles, I
attempted to run Wright down using his date of birth and former address,
obtained from Sellers's report. But the DMV had no information on his current
whereabouts.
Knowing he was a retired trucker, I contacted Teamsters Local 896 in Los
Angeles and talked. to Frank Martinez, a union steward. Years earlier
Martinez had helped me with an investigation I conducted for the Teamsters.
The Justice Department had charged them with shaking down packing houses by
refusing to move meat unless paid a bribe. I was able to show that the
Justice Department informants lied to obtain lenient sentences for
themselves, and charges were dropped.
Through Martinez I obtained Wright's current address. I didn't want to just
show up on his doorstep, unannounced, but I couldn't call and make an
appointment because he had an unlisted phone. So I went to a contact at the
telephone company�who charged a hundred dollars per number-and got Wright's
listing.
I don't like this procedure, but the police use it, and they don't have to
pay. One time I had coffee with a pair of cops in Las Vegas. "What you doing,
Lake?" one asked. "Not much," I said. "Let's find out," the second cop said.
"We'll run his tolls." He was joking, but he could have done it, even though
by law a court order is required. A former CIA agent once told me he could
get unlisted phone numbers anywhere in the world.
I flew to Los Angeles, rented a car, and drove to the Downey police station,
where William Wright had agreed to meet me.
Wright, thin and balding, introduced me to Detective Gary Morrow, who seemed
protective of the truck driver. Morrow expressed disenchantment with the
Phoenix police's handling of this witness and remarked that Wright's anxiety
stemmed from the Mob connotations in the Bolles bombing.
"Mr. Wright," I said, "I read Jon Sellers's report of his interview with you."
"I'm glad someone's interested. I don't think Sellers liked what he heard
from me. He never came back."
"Well, we're shooting for a new trial, and I want to talk to you. I can't
answer for Sellers."
"It surprised me," said Detective Morrow, "that we didn't hear back
from-Phoenix. I thought they would check out what Bill told them."
"You were never subpoenaed to the trial?" I asked Wright.
"All I had was that one talk with Sellers."
"When did you meet Bradley Funk?"
"On June 8, 1976, the day after I checked into the hospital."
"Who admitted you to Beverly Manor?"
"I admitted myself."
"No. I mean what person at the hospital did the paperwork?" I wanted to go
see this individual, who might also have admitted Funk.
"I don't remember. He was a young, big guy."
"And you met Bradley Funk on your second day at the hospital?"
"Correct."
"What kind of shape was he in?"
"He seemed okay to me. Frankly, I wondered why he was even there."
That Funk checked into a detox center before Bolles died, thus removing
himself from the scene of the investigation, struck me as a coincidence not
dissimilar to Neal Roberts having had three cars stolen on the day of the
bombing.
"Did Funk mention John Adamson to you?"
"Yes. He said Adamson was just a 'stooge' in the murder conspiracy."
Some of what Wright told me had been contained in the Sellers police report,
but not the truck driver's opinion that Funk didn't need alcohol
rehabilitation, nor that Funk had called Adamson a "stooge."
On what did Funk base this judgment? He claimed he met Adamson only once, at
the Stockyards Restaurant, describing the killer as "a slimy-looking guy with
mirrored glasses." Adamson, for his part, claimed he had never met Funk.
"Did Funk tell you he knew Adamson?"
"He said he saw him numerous times at the dog tracks."
"Did Funk ever mention Don Bolles?"
"That's mostly all he talked about."
"What did he say?"
"Not much until Bolles died. Then he told me he knew his family would be
blamed, but he said he believed some dog owners were responsible."
"Dog owners?"
"That's what he said."
"Did he name any of these dog owners?"
"Like I told Sellers, the only names I remember were Steiger and Coldwater.
Brad said some big people were going to be hurt."
Adamson owned dogs. But most dog owners revered Bolles, saw him as a champion
in their fight for better purses from the Funk-Emprise racing monopoly. Dog
owners wouldn't want Bolles dead.
"What else did Funk talk to you about?"
"He mentioned some land deals being exposed because of this killing."
"Can you be more specific?"
"No. Just that land deals would be exposed."
I wondered if this connected with JoDon's revelation about Monte Kobey, who
had been indicted with The Godfather of Land Fraud, Ned Warren.
"Did Funk say anything about how Bolles was killed?"
"Yes. He told me he was blown up by a bomb triggered by a remote-control
device."
"In Sellers's police report, he quotes you as saying that Funk told you the
explosives or something-'or something,' that's the way he words it-were
purchased in San Diego. What did you mean by 'or something'?"
"I think Brad told me the explosives had been bought in San Diego. But I
can't be one hundred percent sure. I know something was purchased there."
If Adamson did buy the dynamite in San Diego, it contradicted his trial
testimony, which stated that he had stolen it from a bunker on the property
of a rancher named Stan Tanner. However, Adamson and Gall Owens had visited
San Diego, where they purchased the remote-control device, which she paid for
and stored in her home. During this same visit, Adamson had met with the
underworld figure known as San Diego Ralph.
Later I refreshed my memory by reviewing the January 4, 1977, sworn statement
made by John Adamson to Assistant Attorney General William J. Schafer III:
SCHAFER: What was actually stored in Gall Owens's clothes closet?
ADAMSON: The device.
SCHAFER: The radio control device?
ADAMSON: Yes. And I believe some of the dynamite.
SCHAFER: If there was dynamite there, then you're saying she only had two
[sic] things in her apartment, the device itself and the dynamite and the
container they were both in.
ADAMSON: Right.
SCHAFER: And if I understood you right yesterday-or correct me if I'm
wrong-at the time you put that stuff in there, she knew what it was for?
ADAMSON: Yes.
SCHAFER: Because you told her; is that correct?
ADAMSON: Yes, sir.
SCHAFER: Did she know it was for Don Bolles at that time?
ADAMSON: Yes.
SCHAFER: Because you had used the name.
ADAMSON: (Nods head.)
SCHAFER: And she knew it was there to eventually kill Don Bolles.
ADAMSON: Yes.
Immunity for Gail Owens had been almost as outrageous as immunity for Neal
Roberts.
"Did Funk," I asked Wright, "tell you how he knew the explosives 'or
something' were purchased in San Diego?"
"No. But he sure seemed positive."
"Tell me about the visit to that hobby shop. When did it take place?"
"Around June fifteenth. The hobby shop is just a few blocks from the detox
center, and we went there to get supplies for a model boat he was building.
Out of a clear blue sky, he pointed to a remote-control device and said,
'That's like the one used to blow up Bolles.'"
How could Funk know this? I later reviewed every newspaper article I could
find dated before June 15, 1976, and indeed Funk could have discovered the
bomb was detonated by remote control, since the news appeared as early as
June 10. But what of the statement that Adamson purchased the dynamite, "or
something," in San Diego?
I had been led to Wright by Sellers's report, which the detective described
as "highlights" of his interview. These highlights had not been available to
defense counsel during the trial, and the complete taped interview still
wasn't.
Highlights, I thought. Here was a key witness in the biggest murder
investigation in Arizona history, conducted by a detective with twenty years
of experience. I couldn't help flashing back to homicides I worked while a
police officer in Las Vegas, and imagining how my boss, Chief of Detectives
Captain Bill O'Reilly, would have reacted had I presented a report called
"Highlights." I could almost hear O'Reilly roar, "Highlights, my ass! I want
either the complete conversation on my desk in the morning, or your badge."
"Lake," said Detective Morrow, "you've got a copy of Sellers's written
report. Did he mention those cards I gave him?"
"Yes, he did." I handed Sellers's report to Morrow, pointing out the
paragraph in question:
At this time, Det. Morrow turned over to investigator two business cards, one
with the name of Bradley J. Funk imprinted on the front with a handwritten
telephone number on the back as follows: Area code 602/273-7181. The second
card was identified by the letters ANC Towing imprinted on the front with
handwritten phone number on the back: Area code 602/248-8243. This card had
been torn up by Mr. Wright and dropped on the ground which he [Morrow]
ultimately retrieved. Mr. Wright was asked about this ANC Towing card and
stated that he could not remember anything about the phone number or why he
threw it away.
Through Terri Lee, I had attempted to run down ANC Towing. She had
back-checked business licenses for ten years, but could find nothing listed
under ANC. I suspected the "A" stood for Adamson, who we knew operated a
shady towing business. He wasn't the sort to bother with a business license.
Terri Lee had gone to the 1976 CrlssCross Directory, found nothing, and then
to the phone company itself, but it kept records only for six months.
A dead end. So that "A" in ANC remained a mystery.
"Sellers's report," I said to Morrow, "doesn't indicate why you had those
cards. How did you get them?"
"From Bill Wright. He came to me about his relationship with Funk�that's why
I called Phoenix�and handed me the cards Bradley Funk had given him."
"Why," I asked Wright, "would Funk give you an ANC Towing card?"
"You need to remember, this was three years ago. I really can't recall."
Right. But Sellers's taped interview, conducted just two months after Bolles
died, should contain the answer. A top priority was obtaining that interview.
"Mr. Wright, I'd like you to show me Beverly Manor, and also the hobby shop."
"Sure. I'm ready now if you are."
The two�hospital and hobby shop�were quite close to each other, definitely
within walking distance. Wright and I entered the hobby shop and he showed me
the display case that had contained the remote-control device Funk had
pointed out. Then I drove Wright to his home and headed to the airport.
Upon my return, I called on Murray Miller, a Phoenix criminal defense
attorney whom the Dunlap Committee had recently retained to help convene an
evidentiary hearing-separate from the appeal, designed to provide a forum for
the mass of new facts we had uncovered since the trial, information now
widely disseminated in the press but technically not being considered by the
Arizona Supreme Court.
Murray Miller's entrance into the case encouraged me. I believed some of the
others were too willing to wait for the outcome of the appeal, in effect
tying our hands until the supreme court ruled. Miller also thought we might
be stymied, but had decided to open up a second front anyway�get things
moving, force some action. Of course, I wholeheartedly supported his activism.
Miller, not part of Phoenix's good-old-boy network, proved himself willing to
make waves. He listened to my appraisal of the Wright interview and declared
without hesitation, "Let's go back there. I want to hear this with my own
ears."
He and I hopped a flight to Los Angeles and drove to Downey, where Bill
Wright repeated the story of his relationship with Bradley Funk at Beverly
Manor Hospital. Miller shot off a letter to Attorney General Corbin and
Assistant Attorney General Schafer:
It has recently come to my attention that your office is in possession,
custody, or control of a tape recording made by the Phoenix Police
Department, of a conversation with William Wright, recorded in the state of
California, in the month of August 1976.
A three-page synopsis of the police officer's version of what this witness
said was submitted to judge Thompson in your Petition for Determination of
Discoverability filed with the Court, July 24, 1979.
We respectfully request that you permit us to listen to this tape recording
immediately and if a transcript of this recording was made, that we be
permitted to inspect it forthwith.
We further request an immediate written response as to whether or not this
tape recording, and/or a verbatim transcript, was ever furnished judge
Thompson prior to trial, or at any subsequent time.
If the tape recording and/or a verbatim transcript of the tape recording was
furnished to judge Thompson, please inform us of the date this was done.
A copy of this letter is being forwarded to judge Thompson so that the Court
file may reflect its contents.
It didn't take long for Schafer to reply. Herewith his answer, in its
entirety.
Dear Mr. Miller:
In view of the actions of the trial court, I do not deem it appropriate for
us to answer the questions you posed in your letter of November 27.
What actions of the trial court? Perhaps this referred to judge Howard
Thompson's earlier wringing of hands when Miller sought to obtain the
contents of File #85 1. Thompson finally had ruled that he had no
jurisdiction and laid the matter in the lap of the Arizona Supreme Court.
This buck passing yielded no results (the supreme court hadn't yet ruled),
and maybe Corbin/ Schafer felt Thompson would decide the same way if
confronted with the withheld Wright tapes.
Miller was determined to find out. Faced with the attorney general's refusal
to cooperate, he filed a December 6, 1979, lawsuit, worded in the strongest
possible way, in the Superior Court of the State of Arizona, Maricopa County:
Defendant Dunlap respectfully submits this Supplemental Memorandum and
requests the Court for an immediate Evidentiary Hearing for the following
reasons:
The material recently discovered by the Defendant, Dunlap, indicates that
there may have been a massive cover-up by the Government of material,
significant, and vital evidence, which enabled the Government to obtain a
conviction of this defendant in deprivation of his constitutional right to a
fair trial....
NONDISCLOSURE OF SECRET TAPE RECORDING
The prosecutors have had in their possession and control a secret tape
recording made by the chief homicide investigator, Jon Sellers. Detective
Sellers flew to Downey, California, on August 17, 1976, and taped a lengthy
interview with a key witness named William Wright. A sterilized version of
this interview appears in the Court files, which were certified to the
Supreme Court of Appeal, and is attached as Exhibit 1.
A mere glance into this exhibit indicates that as early as August 1976, the
Phoenix Police were aware of a witness who told them that during the same
month that Don Bolles was murdered, the witness was taken to a hobby shop in
California by Bradley Funk and was shown a remote-control device that was
similar to the one used to blow Bolles up. Detective Sellers verified this by
showing Mr. Wright a photograph of the remote control device,
"which investigators suspect is similar to the type that was used. At this
time, Wright said the device that Funk showed him was similar to the one that
investigator had a photograph of."
This report was never given to defense counsel prior to trial. Even more
incredible is the fact that the full, complete, and unedited interview of
William Wright, as tape recorded by homicide investigator Sellers, was never
shown to defense counsel, and to the best of our knowledge was never given to
the trial Court.
A sincere attempt was made to learn the contents of this secret recording and
to determine whether or not the State ever submitted it to the trial Court.
This knowledge is crucial to defense counsel and is a prerequisite to
requesting Post Conviction Relief on the basis of newly discovered evidence.
To this end, a letter was addressed to the Attorney General, dated November
27, 1979, requesting this specific information. A copy of this letter is
attached as Exhibit 2.
An informative response was received from Attorney General on December 3,
1979, in which they stated (Exhibit 3):
"In view of the actions of the trial court, I do not deem it appropriate for
us to answer the questions you posed in your letter of November 27."
Our ex-president notwithstanding, a clearer case of "Stonewalling" is
difficult to imagine....
No Court, nor any defense counsel, can accept a police officer's summarized
version of what a witness stated, when in fact, a verbatim tape recording of
the witness's testimony has existed from the very beginning. If in fact they
never submitted this secret tape recording to Court or counsel, this is
clearly prosecutorial suppression of ev-idence.
The time for "Stonewalling" has long since past. Two men are held in
death row. We are entitled to answers, and therefore requesting an
Evidentiary Hearing.
While Murray Miller pressed forward on the legal front, I raised cain in and
with the press. Jonathan Marshall continued the Scottsdale Daily Progress's
barrage against the official explanation of the Bolles homicide; the Los
Angeles Times reported the ongoing struggle; even the Arizona Republic became
less cocky in its commitment to the guilt of Robison and Dunlap, quoting
chunks of Miller's allegations of withheld evidence.
Finally, the police department announced it "couldn't find" the Sellers
interview of William Wright.
Couldn't find? "It's lost," said a police spokesperson.
"Ludicrous," Terri Lee said.
"I'd bet the farm," I said, "that it isn't lost at all. It's been purged,
just like File Eight-Five-One."
I wondered aloud why Sellers hadn't been disciplined, both for presenting
only "highlights," and also for "losing" the tapes.
But the scandal had to extend far beyond Sellers. He had superiors who were
supposed to steer him back onto the track whenever he veered off. Who were
these people, and did they act with deliberate malice?
pps. 199-211
--[cont]--
Aloha, He'Ping,
Om, Shalom, Salaam.
Em Hotep, Peace Be,
Omnia Bona Bonis,
All My Relations.
Adieu, Adios, Aloha.
Amen.
Roads End
Kris
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
