The Forged Fingerprint
RSK (Randy Steven Kraft) was found guilty of the murder of Mark Hall because forged evidence was presented to the jury. Prosecutor Bryan Brown presented evidence to show RSK's fingerprint was lifted from a piece of glass found near Hall's body on a remote mountaintop. RSK does not deny that print is his fingerprint, but he does deny that he put it on that piece of glass. Someone else did that. The prosecutor's evidence is forged.
In 1976, months after Mark Hall died, RSK's fingerprints were compared to the crime scene print and DID NOT MATCH. You never knew this before now. The jury never knew of it. It was hidden, suppressed by the lies of prosecutor Bryan Brown.
Then after RSK was arrested seven years later, May 14, 1983, the crime scene partial print went missing for 4-6 weeks and when found, it had grown to a whole print and matched RSK’s prints. RSK's fingerprints did not change, so the only explanation possible is that the crime scene print grew and changed while it was lost. Someone forged RSK's fingerprint on that piece of glass. Randy Kraft did not kill Mark Hall. It Just Ain't So.
BEFORE RSK's ARREST ON 5/14/83: Mark Hall and two friends, Wayne Haley and Phillip Holmer, began celebrating New Year's Eve, 1976, at a party in Fountain Valley, CA. Mark was wearing blue type Levis, a long-sleeved Levi jacket, and two tone real high heel dress shoes. Little is known of that party, but the three friends left it after 11pm so they could reach another party of their coworkers in San Juan Capistrano in time to ring in the New Year. Wayne Haley testified at trial that when they left the first party Mark Hall was already very drunk. At the San Juan Capistrano party they rang in the new year, continued drinking, and Mark Hall became even more intoxicated. Hall was falling-down drunk, unable to stand or walk, or even speak. He fell over a coffee table and broke a beer bottle. A next-door neighbor brought a bottle of Jim Beam whiskey, poured a couple of drinks and set the bottle down. Mark Hall picked it up and drank a long drink from the bottle before setting it down. His blood alcohol level ultimately reached .67, a lethal amount. By comparison, in 1976 in California the legal limit for being under the influence was .10. After midnight, but before the party broke up at 10am, Mark Hall left the party. No one saw him leave, and most of the people there later told police they did not think Mark Hall capable of leaving on his own.¹
The party was in San Juan Capistrano on Calle Santa Rosalie. It was about midway between two on ramps to the San Diego Freeway: Ortega Highway to the south, and Junipero Serra Road to the north. The ramps were about two miles apart, so either way Mark Hall had to walk about a mile falling-down drunk to reach either one of them.² In addition, to get to the north ramp (and Santa Ana where Hall lived) about half of that land was undeveloped, just dirt and weeds.
Mark Hall was murdered in the early morning hours, sometime after midnight and before 10am, on January 1, 1976. His remains were found on January 3rd at Bedford Peak, a remote mountain top to the east of Santa Ana, just below the summit. His cause of death was dirt and leaves packed in his trachea (windpipe). Surprisingly, neither the crime scene dirt/leaves nor the party house dirt/leaves, nor the undeveloped property that separated the party house from the freeway dirt/leaves were tested and compared to the autopsy dirt and leaves that caused Hall’s death.
For his part, RSK was at his sister’s house in Westminster with his family celebrating the new year until 12:30 am on January 1 and was seen by family members at his parents' home in Midway between 7:00 AM and 8:00 AM. His family corroborated this in testimony. An important detail included in their testimony was the observation that RSK was wearing the same clothes he had worn the previous night and, significantly, that "nothing appeared amiss". The timeframe asserted by the family – Kraft leaving the Westminster party at 12:30 a.m. and being seen at his parents' home between 7:00 and 8:00 a.m. – created a window of approximately six and a half to seven and a half hours, an insufficient period of time for RSK to: (1) travel from Westminster to San Juan Capistrano, (2) locate and abduct Hall from a party, (3) transport Hall to the remote, mountainous area near Silverado Canyon and Bedford Peak where his body was later found, (4) carry out the elaborate and prolonged murder, (5) dispose of the body, and (6) travel from the disposal site to his parents' house, arriving in a condition where "nothing appeared amiss."
To reach the scene on Bedford Peak one must take Silverado Canyon Road to its end. In 1976, there was a rough dirt fire road known as Silverado Motorway that began and ascended the mountain 2,600 feet in elevation to Bedford Peak. Since then, this fire road has eroded into a hiking trail.
One of the men who found Hall's body, Leon Wilber, an off-duty Santa Ana Police officer, testified the fire road was one of the roughest roads in the area.³ He was there with three friends in dune buggies designed for that terrain. The road was impassable for an ordinary car, even more so at night.⁴
Close to where the dirt fire road begins there was a tavern called The Alpine Inn. In 1976, it was owned by the family of William Bonin, known as The Freeway Killer. He and his cohorts had access to it and mentioned it in their confessions to LAPD detective John St. John (about taking young men there for sex and murder).⁵ St. John and LAPD officer Kent McDonald previously founded a multi-agency Task Force of law enforcement officers from across Southern California to investigate the unsolved murders of young men.⁶
On the night of the day of the discovery of Mark Hall's remains, criminalist Ed Carson collected several pieces of broken glass from a vodka bottle. Carson reported difficulty maneuvering his one and one-half ton crime lab truck over what he described as a gravelly, unpaved road with narrow passages and sharp switchbacks, the same route the prosecution argued RSK had driven in his 80 horsepower Mustang II in the dark of night (RT, pp. 19140-19141).⁷ The next day, also from the Bedford Peak scene, but in daylight, criminalist Wilbur Anderson collected an additional twelve pieces of such broken glass.⁸ Each one developed a partial print from one of his pieces. Carson estimated his to be 15-20% of the whole print. He wrote his initials on a piece of tape and returned the piece to the property bag holding the other pieces he had collected. In 1981, in the crime lab, Anderson was asked to compare his lifted fingerprint to the fingerprint of one Jerry L, whose file prints were fully rolled and whole. Anderson was unable to either make a positive match or eliminate the suspect because his partial was so small and of such poor quality. In 1983, shortly after RSK’s arrest when Jackson discovered Carson’s print was missing, he apparently never gave any consideration to the Anderson print. This also supports the conclusion that the Anderson print was useless, and the one presented at trial is not the original Anderson print.
District Attorney Investigator George Troup was a member of St. John’s Task Force from its earliest days. He discussed homicide cases with Troup hundreds of times. Troup spoke with St. John about the Mark Hall case many times, and went to the Hall scene several times with him in the days after Hall was found. St. John even flew over the scene in a helicopter with LAPD Kent McDonald with whom he founded the Task Force. Troup gave St. John a photocopy of one of the two partial fingerprints recovered from the broken glass at the Hall scene, and St. John testified he took the photocopy back to LAPD crime lab to be compared to possible suspects.⁹
Providentially, St. John kept a day-to-day log of his Task Force activities. The log recounts that Troup gave him the Hall scene fingerprint on June 14, 1976, and he immediately took it to the LAPD latent print department for comparison to two suspects.¹⁰ On June 28, he log states the comparison was "negative" meaning no match to RSK’s fingerprints.¹¹ At best the print Troup gave to St. John would be good only to eliminate someone as a suspect.¹² RSK was eliminated as the source of the Hall scene print. And on June 28, 1976, another suspect tested negative to the Hall print.
AFTER RSK's ARREST ON 5/14/83 RSK was initially arrested for the Gambrel case, the man in RSK’s car, but there is no similarity between that case and that of Mark Hall seven years earlier. There was no reason for the Hall case to be considered in conjunction with Gambrel, except for John St. John and his famed memory.¹³ The Hall case was not related to the Gambrel case. Yet, the Gambrel case was formally charged against RSK on May 17, 1983, and the Hall case was the first case added to Gambrel on May, 24, 1983. We believe that within 48 hours of RSK's arrest and its massive publicity St. John contacted Bryan Brown and his colleagues to tell them he remembered the Hall case and recalled that RSK’s fingerprint did not match. We believe prosecutor Bryan Brown wanted to charge RSK with the grisly Hall crime, but the no-match fingerprint was in his way. He let this be known, and within days the Hall scene fingerprints went missing from the Orange County crime lab and stayed lost for at least 4 weeks.¹⁴ Anything could have happened to it. As we now know, each print lifted in 1976, one partial by Carson and another partial by Anderson, grew to be a whole print while lost and each changed from a no-match to a match, as proved by the photocopy in Los Angeles. The lost print was the original of a photocopy that D.A. Investigator Troup gave to St. John and was a no match to RSK. The photocopy itself was lost, but the no-match comparison to RSK was made before then and recorded in St. John’s log.¹⁵
Criminalist Gary Jackson was given Carson's bag of glass shards, took the only one marked with tape and Carson's initials, and lifted a WHOLE fingerprint, not merely a partial one. Jackson claimed in his testimony at trial that he used a new technique for lifting fingerprints that added additional parts of the fingerprint that were not there before.¹⁶
In the first few weeks after RSK was arrested, he was interviewed by detectives from various law enforcement agencies. After one such interview Sheriff's Detective Sidebotham, also the lead trial investigator for his case, grabbed RSK by the shoulders while his hands were cuffed behind his back and shoved him hard against a wall. Sidebotham said, "I'm going to get you for these, 10, 20, 30 of them whatever. I'll do whatever I have to do to get you." Then he threw RSK back against the wall and walked off.
RSK was fingerprinted, but unlike others he was fingerprinted again and again. His palm prints were taken.On one occasion RSK was taken to the first floor of the jail to give a court-ordered handwriting exemplar.¹⁷ Sidebotham met RSK in a room near the attorney visiting area. He sat RSK at a table facing a wall, gave him writing material and a list of things to handwrite, and then left the room. At one point while he was writing, RSK looked down at the floor and saw a piece of broken glass. It was rounded as might have come from a glass jar or botte. He picked up the piece of glass and put it in a large, frosted crystal ashtray that was on the table. RSK did not want anyone to step on the glass and be injured. RSK recounts, "It was the most normal thing to do, but if I had known then what I know now, after being in jail and prison for more than 40 years, I would not have done it. Jails and prisons are places where there should not be any broken glass anywhere at any time. It is a very serious security violation. I should have left the piece of glass where it was, on the floor, and called it to the attention of the first officer I saw. I didn't know that then." Detective Sidebotham later returned to the room and RSK told him about the piece of broken glass in the ashtray. Sidebotham said he would take care of it, (and RSK’s fingerprints on it) as if it were an everyday occurrence, no questions.
The first day of court for RSK, September 12, 1983, was the first day of RSK’s preliminary hearing in front of municipal Judge John Ryan.¹⁸ A preliminary hearing is the way most criminal trials begin in California.¹⁹ The first business was a routine discovery motion. That is where a judge formally orders the prosecution to give the defense material only the prosecution has or can get that may help the defense, even if it disproves the prosecution's case. In Orange County, George Troup, veteran investigator for the district attorney’s office, was a Task Force member from its earliest days. Among other things, RSK's attorneys asked for materials from the St. John Task Force on unsolved murders of young men, a task force that had operated for a decade and involved every law enforcement agency in Orange County. This would have included St. John' s log of Task Force activities and its notation that RSK's fingerprints were negative to the Hall crime scene print in 1976 and DID NOT MATCH. At the time RSK 's attorneys did not know of the log or the fingerprint comparison, but they knew of the task force and that it had information on some of the murders charged against RSK.
Bryan Brown who was RSK's prosecutor also was concurrently prosecuting William Bonin known as the Freeway Killer. On RSK’s first day in court, the first day of the preliminary hearing, Brown denied the existence of St. John’s task force. He lied. Brown said he worked alongside St. John on the Bonin prosecution, but did not know St. John had a task force that had investigated the murders Brown had charged against Bonin. Brown claimed not to know that St. John left his task force to devote all his time to catching and arresting William Bonin whom Brown was then prosecuting. He denied it, lied about it numerous times. Judge Ryan asked Brown if there was such a task force or "anything remotely resembling one." Brown said there was not. He denied it numerous times. Judge Ryan said, "I think you're hiding something," and still Brown denied the Task Force.²⁰ Based on the prosecutor's lies the court denied any such discovery to the defense and prevented it from finding the 1976 fingerprint comparison that eliminated RSK as a suspect.²¹ As a result, RSK was bound over for trial on the Hall count and several others that brought zero evidence against RSK but were deemed similar to Hall. Most of these other counts were initially suspected of Bonin and later relegated to RSK because there was no one else.²²
Following the preliminary hearing, RSK requested that his lawyer, Doug Otto, be removed from the defense team because of ineffective representation. For example, Otto did not challenge the lies of Bryan Brown concerning the existence of the Task Force. At one point, the judge tried to help Otto out: "Why don't we get Mr. Charvet in here ..."? William Charvet was an attorney for William Bonin and knowledgeable about the Task Force. Otto made no reply and never brought Charvet to court. Judge Luis Cardenas ordered an investigation and as a result removed Otto from the defense.
During the pretrial period, frustrated by prosecutor Brown's lies and obstruction, RSK's attorneys issued subpoenas to St. John and all Orange County law enforcement agencies (police departments) who were alleging murder against RSK. The subpoenas asked for all task force information they had. Bryan Brown opposed the subpoenas and asked the court to quash or invalidate them. ²³ He said he had given all the information to RSK's defense and there was no more. Another lie. But the court believed him and quashed all subpoena issued to Orange County agencies. However, St. John was with the Los Angeles Police Department, and Los Angeles did not oppose the subpoena. ²⁴ But by the time Los Angeles provided 40,000 pages of the Task Force materials it had grown late in the pretrial stage.
To complicate the situation, Judge Turner needed emergency heart surgery in December, 1987, and could not continue as judge. The next name on the list of possible judges was Jean Rheinheimer. Prosecutor Bryan Brown claimed that she was prejudiced against The People (his case) and she was rejected. Next was Donald McCartin who had lobbied the courthouse vigorously to be appointed as judge, and he hid his anti-gay and Marine Corps history.²⁵ Those two factors were important in the Kraft case, and McCartin wanted to hide his obvious bias. He was appointed judge for RSK. The next day in an unrelated trial, McCartin reduced a jury’s recommended sentence of life without parole to 25 years to life for a man who murdered a gay man and who openly said he hated gays. A family member of the victim commented that McCartin is prejudiced against gays.²⁶ McCartin took control of RSK’s case and denied any continuance for RSK’s attorneys so they could absorb the 40,000 pages recently received from St. John in Los Angeles.
Judge Donald McCartin presided over RSK’s 1988-89 trial. As was the case for the preliminary hearing, none of evidence concerning St. John' s log of Task Force activities and its notation that RSK's fingerprints were negative to the Hall crime scene print in 1976, was placed on the certified record of the trial. McCartin also denied a motion for the jurors to visit the alleged site of Hall’s murder, despite testimony so tortuously complicated about the site that even Judge McCartin couldn’t quite understand its location.²⁷ As usual, Brown misrepresented to the jury in his closing argument that the Hall party house was “only two short blocks” from a freeway on-ramp. “Lyin’ Bryan! It was a full mile.” This deception was accomplished by placing round green stickers on a map over the freeway ramps nearest the house, concealing the actual distance to them (RT, pp. 19110-19111, RT, p. 2440-2441).
In 2005 or 2006, fifteen years after having been found guilty, RSK was allowed to see an index to the 40,000 pages St. John turned over for the subpoena. He requested to see a few specific areas that looked productive, and within hours he discovered the negative 1976 fingerprint comparison that eliminated him as a suspect in Hall's murder. Also significant, the materials included Task Force attendance rosters with the names of members who had signed in at each meeting.²⁸ Among them were Deputy District Attorney Jay Mosteller, District Attorney Investigator George Troup, Sheriff Detective Bernie Esposito, Criminalists James White and Sandra Wiersma, Sheriff Detective Sidebotham who was also lead investigator in the William Bonin Freeway Killer case, and lead investigator in RSK's trial, and many other Orange County police officers and investigators whom Bryan Brown knew well. This proved not only that the Task Force existed, but that the prosecutor was surrounded by its members. This attendance roster is dated June 24, 1980, shortly after the arrest of William Bonin on June 8th. We believe Bryan Brown attended this meeting but did not sign the roster because it could have disclosed bias and prevented him from being the prosecutor of Bonin.
But even more damning, on the back of each page is a discovery stamp that verifies on April 22, 1983, that Bryan Brown gave the roster to a defendant's defense team.²⁹ RSK was arrested May 14, 1983, so it could not have been his defense. There was only one trial underway in April, 1983, that invoked St. John's Task Force: the trial of William Bonin, and Bryan Brown was the prosecutor. So, at the same time Bryan Brown told RSK’s judge the Task Force did not exist, he was giving information from that same Task Force to the Bonin defense. RSK was found guilty by lies, one piled on top of another, and by forgery.
You may doubt that any law enforcement officer, or prosecutor, would stoop to such lows as lying and forgery, but sadly it is endemic in Orange County, California. More than two decades later, from the early 21st century up to the present, Orange County law enforcement was swamped by scandals involving lies and mishandling of evidence, paying witnesses to change their testimony to win convictions, plus shredding documents to avoid being caught. It was widely reported in the news media for years.³⁰ One insider said it had been going on for years and never stopped.³¹ RSK did not kill Mark Hall. It Just Ain't So!
CONCLUSION The LAPD crime scene fingerprint is proof by itself that the fingerprint evidence given to the jury at trial was forged. Here's why:The LAPD print that eliminated RSK as its source in 1976 was an identical copy of one of two fingerprints recovered from the Hall crime scene. Veteran District Attorney investigator George
Troup gave a photocopy of one of the two prints to LAPD detective and task force leader John St. John who in turn gave the photocopy to the LAPD crime lab, fingerprint section. The LA photocopy was never lost or unaccounted for before it was compared to RSK’s prints, unlike the fingerprints shown to the jury at trial. In LA the copy was compared to two men and found to be negative, a no-match that eliminated them as the fingerprints source. The print was found to be negative to RSK, a no-match that eliminated him as its source. And it was compared to another man and was also negative, eliminating him as its source. Since the print to which RSK was compared was a photocopy of one of two Orange County prints, it is the same as though RSK's prints were compared to the original print recovered from the crime scene and were a no-match. Therefore, at least one of the Orange County prints must have changed when they were lost. This is undeniable proof provided by the LAPD print: a photocopy given to them by Orange County.
Another difficulty with the case against RSK was the timeline in which the crime was committed. RSK was at his sister’s house in Westminster with his family celebrating the new year until 12:30 am on January 1 and was seen by family members at his parents' home in Midway between 7:00 AM and 8:00 AM. His family corroborated this in testimony. In addition, the fire road to Bedford Peak was impassable to ordinary cars, especially for the Mustang II that RSK drove at the time.
After RSKs arrest on May 14, 1983, none of the crime scene prints are accounted for until 10 days later, May 24, when they were found to be missing. At trial in 1988 the two crime scene prints shown to the jury matched RSK's prints, but that is impossible as shown by the photocopy of one of the two crime scene prints that eliminated RSK as its source, that print given to the LAPD by Orange County. Unlike the Orange County prints, the LAPD print never went missing before it was compared to RSK. At trial it was discovered that LAPD print had also disappeared and could not be found, just like the Orange County prints were lost. Someone wanted to prevent the LAPD true photocopy print from exposing the trial prints as the frauds they are, so they got rid of it. Thanks to the Task Force log of Detective St. John, we know the true crime scene print did not match RSK’s. It is the only true and reliable crime scene print not tainted by being lost. No one knows where the OC prints went or what was done to them while they were lost. OC can only speculate and guess. Anything could have happened. Ditto the glass fragments from which they were lifted. The LAPD photocopy print proves the latent print of one of them was wiped clean and replaced by RSKs print. Forgery. There is no other reasonable explanation. Randy Kraft’s fingerprint was not found at the Hall crime scene. It just ain’t so!
In 1976, months after Mark Hall died, RSK's fingerprints were compared to the crime scene print and DID NOT MATCH. You never knew this before now. The jury never knew of it. It was hidden, suppressed by the lies of prosecutor Bryan Brown.
Then after RSK was arrested seven years later, May 14, 1983, the crime scene partial print went missing for 4-6 weeks and when found, it had grown to a whole print and matched RSK’s prints. RSK's fingerprints did not change, so the only explanation possible is that the crime scene print grew and changed while it was lost. Someone forged RSK's fingerprint on that piece of glass. Randy Kraft did not kill Mark Hall. It Just Ain't So.
BEFORE RSK's ARREST ON 5/14/83: Mark Hall and two friends, Wayne Haley and Phillip Holmer, began celebrating New Year's Eve, 1976, at a party in Fountain Valley, CA. Mark was wearing blue type Levis, a long-sleeved Levi jacket, and two tone real high heel dress shoes. Little is known of that party, but the three friends left it after 11pm so they could reach another party of their coworkers in San Juan Capistrano in time to ring in the New Year. Wayne Haley testified at trial that when they left the first party Mark Hall was already very drunk. At the San Juan Capistrano party they rang in the new year, continued drinking, and Mark Hall became even more intoxicated. Hall was falling-down drunk, unable to stand or walk, or even speak. He fell over a coffee table and broke a beer bottle. A next-door neighbor brought a bottle of Jim Beam whiskey, poured a couple of drinks and set the bottle down. Mark Hall picked it up and drank a long drink from the bottle before setting it down. His blood alcohol level ultimately reached .67, a lethal amount. By comparison, in 1976 in California the legal limit for being under the influence was .10. After midnight, but before the party broke up at 10am, Mark Hall left the party. No one saw him leave, and most of the people there later told police they did not think Mark Hall capable of leaving on his own.¹
The party was in San Juan Capistrano on Calle Santa Rosalie. It was about midway between two on ramps to the San Diego Freeway: Ortega Highway to the south, and Junipero Serra Road to the north. The ramps were about two miles apart, so either way Mark Hall had to walk about a mile falling-down drunk to reach either one of them.² In addition, to get to the north ramp (and Santa Ana where Hall lived) about half of that land was undeveloped, just dirt and weeds.
Mark Hall was murdered in the early morning hours, sometime after midnight and before 10am, on January 1, 1976. His remains were found on January 3rd at Bedford Peak, a remote mountain top to the east of Santa Ana, just below the summit. His cause of death was dirt and leaves packed in his trachea (windpipe). Surprisingly, neither the crime scene dirt/leaves nor the party house dirt/leaves, nor the undeveloped property that separated the party house from the freeway dirt/leaves were tested and compared to the autopsy dirt and leaves that caused Hall’s death.
For his part, RSK was at his sister’s house in Westminster with his family celebrating the new year until 12:30 am on January 1 and was seen by family members at his parents' home in Midway between 7:00 AM and 8:00 AM. His family corroborated this in testimony. An important detail included in their testimony was the observation that RSK was wearing the same clothes he had worn the previous night and, significantly, that "nothing appeared amiss". The timeframe asserted by the family – Kraft leaving the Westminster party at 12:30 a.m. and being seen at his parents' home between 7:00 and 8:00 a.m. – created a window of approximately six and a half to seven and a half hours, an insufficient period of time for RSK to: (1) travel from Westminster to San Juan Capistrano, (2) locate and abduct Hall from a party, (3) transport Hall to the remote, mountainous area near Silverado Canyon and Bedford Peak where his body was later found, (4) carry out the elaborate and prolonged murder, (5) dispose of the body, and (6) travel from the disposal site to his parents' house, arriving in a condition where "nothing appeared amiss."
To reach the scene on Bedford Peak one must take Silverado Canyon Road to its end. In 1976, there was a rough dirt fire road known as Silverado Motorway that began and ascended the mountain 2,600 feet in elevation to Bedford Peak. Since then, this fire road has eroded into a hiking trail.
One of the men who found Hall's body, Leon Wilber, an off-duty Santa Ana Police officer, testified the fire road was one of the roughest roads in the area.³ He was there with three friends in dune buggies designed for that terrain. The road was impassable for an ordinary car, even more so at night.⁴
Close to where the dirt fire road begins there was a tavern called The Alpine Inn. In 1976, it was owned by the family of William Bonin, known as The Freeway Killer. He and his cohorts had access to it and mentioned it in their confessions to LAPD detective John St. John (about taking young men there for sex and murder).⁵ St. John and LAPD officer Kent McDonald previously founded a multi-agency Task Force of law enforcement officers from across Southern California to investigate the unsolved murders of young men.⁶
On the night of the day of the discovery of Mark Hall's remains, criminalist Ed Carson collected several pieces of broken glass from a vodka bottle. Carson reported difficulty maneuvering his one and one-half ton crime lab truck over what he described as a gravelly, unpaved road with narrow passages and sharp switchbacks, the same route the prosecution argued RSK had driven in his 80 horsepower Mustang II in the dark of night (RT, pp. 19140-19141).⁷ The next day, also from the Bedford Peak scene, but in daylight, criminalist Wilbur Anderson collected an additional twelve pieces of such broken glass.⁸ Each one developed a partial print from one of his pieces. Carson estimated his to be 15-20% of the whole print. He wrote his initials on a piece of tape and returned the piece to the property bag holding the other pieces he had collected. In 1981, in the crime lab, Anderson was asked to compare his lifted fingerprint to the fingerprint of one Jerry L, whose file prints were fully rolled and whole. Anderson was unable to either make a positive match or eliminate the suspect because his partial was so small and of such poor quality. In 1983, shortly after RSK’s arrest when Jackson discovered Carson’s print was missing, he apparently never gave any consideration to the Anderson print. This also supports the conclusion that the Anderson print was useless, and the one presented at trial is not the original Anderson print.
District Attorney Investigator George Troup was a member of St. John’s Task Force from its earliest days. He discussed homicide cases with Troup hundreds of times. Troup spoke with St. John about the Mark Hall case many times, and went to the Hall scene several times with him in the days after Hall was found. St. John even flew over the scene in a helicopter with LAPD Kent McDonald with whom he founded the Task Force. Troup gave St. John a photocopy of one of the two partial fingerprints recovered from the broken glass at the Hall scene, and St. John testified he took the photocopy back to LAPD crime lab to be compared to possible suspects.⁹
Providentially, St. John kept a day-to-day log of his Task Force activities. The log recounts that Troup gave him the Hall scene fingerprint on June 14, 1976, and he immediately took it to the LAPD latent print department for comparison to two suspects.¹⁰ On June 28, he log states the comparison was "negative" meaning no match to RSK’s fingerprints.¹¹ At best the print Troup gave to St. John would be good only to eliminate someone as a suspect.¹² RSK was eliminated as the source of the Hall scene print. And on June 28, 1976, another suspect tested negative to the Hall print.
AFTER RSK's ARREST ON 5/14/83 RSK was initially arrested for the Gambrel case, the man in RSK’s car, but there is no similarity between that case and that of Mark Hall seven years earlier. There was no reason for the Hall case to be considered in conjunction with Gambrel, except for John St. John and his famed memory.¹³ The Hall case was not related to the Gambrel case. Yet, the Gambrel case was formally charged against RSK on May 17, 1983, and the Hall case was the first case added to Gambrel on May, 24, 1983. We believe that within 48 hours of RSK's arrest and its massive publicity St. John contacted Bryan Brown and his colleagues to tell them he remembered the Hall case and recalled that RSK’s fingerprint did not match. We believe prosecutor Bryan Brown wanted to charge RSK with the grisly Hall crime, but the no-match fingerprint was in his way. He let this be known, and within days the Hall scene fingerprints went missing from the Orange County crime lab and stayed lost for at least 4 weeks.¹⁴ Anything could have happened to it. As we now know, each print lifted in 1976, one partial by Carson and another partial by Anderson, grew to be a whole print while lost and each changed from a no-match to a match, as proved by the photocopy in Los Angeles. The lost print was the original of a photocopy that D.A. Investigator Troup gave to St. John and was a no match to RSK. The photocopy itself was lost, but the no-match comparison to RSK was made before then and recorded in St. John’s log.¹⁵
Criminalist Gary Jackson was given Carson's bag of glass shards, took the only one marked with tape and Carson's initials, and lifted a WHOLE fingerprint, not merely a partial one. Jackson claimed in his testimony at trial that he used a new technique for lifting fingerprints that added additional parts of the fingerprint that were not there before.¹⁶
In the first few weeks after RSK was arrested, he was interviewed by detectives from various law enforcement agencies. After one such interview Sheriff's Detective Sidebotham, also the lead trial investigator for his case, grabbed RSK by the shoulders while his hands were cuffed behind his back and shoved him hard against a wall. Sidebotham said, "I'm going to get you for these, 10, 20, 30 of them whatever. I'll do whatever I have to do to get you." Then he threw RSK back against the wall and walked off.
RSK was fingerprinted, but unlike others he was fingerprinted again and again. His palm prints were taken.On one occasion RSK was taken to the first floor of the jail to give a court-ordered handwriting exemplar.¹⁷ Sidebotham met RSK in a room near the attorney visiting area. He sat RSK at a table facing a wall, gave him writing material and a list of things to handwrite, and then left the room. At one point while he was writing, RSK looked down at the floor and saw a piece of broken glass. It was rounded as might have come from a glass jar or botte. He picked up the piece of glass and put it in a large, frosted crystal ashtray that was on the table. RSK did not want anyone to step on the glass and be injured. RSK recounts, "It was the most normal thing to do, but if I had known then what I know now, after being in jail and prison for more than 40 years, I would not have done it. Jails and prisons are places where there should not be any broken glass anywhere at any time. It is a very serious security violation. I should have left the piece of glass where it was, on the floor, and called it to the attention of the first officer I saw. I didn't know that then." Detective Sidebotham later returned to the room and RSK told him about the piece of broken glass in the ashtray. Sidebotham said he would take care of it, (and RSK’s fingerprints on it) as if it were an everyday occurrence, no questions.
The first day of court for RSK, September 12, 1983, was the first day of RSK’s preliminary hearing in front of municipal Judge John Ryan.¹⁸ A preliminary hearing is the way most criminal trials begin in California.¹⁹ The first business was a routine discovery motion. That is where a judge formally orders the prosecution to give the defense material only the prosecution has or can get that may help the defense, even if it disproves the prosecution's case. In Orange County, George Troup, veteran investigator for the district attorney’s office, was a Task Force member from its earliest days. Among other things, RSK's attorneys asked for materials from the St. John Task Force on unsolved murders of young men, a task force that had operated for a decade and involved every law enforcement agency in Orange County. This would have included St. John' s log of Task Force activities and its notation that RSK's fingerprints were negative to the Hall crime scene print in 1976 and DID NOT MATCH. At the time RSK 's attorneys did not know of the log or the fingerprint comparison, but they knew of the task force and that it had information on some of the murders charged against RSK.
Bryan Brown who was RSK's prosecutor also was concurrently prosecuting William Bonin known as the Freeway Killer. On RSK’s first day in court, the first day of the preliminary hearing, Brown denied the existence of St. John’s task force. He lied. Brown said he worked alongside St. John on the Bonin prosecution, but did not know St. John had a task force that had investigated the murders Brown had charged against Bonin. Brown claimed not to know that St. John left his task force to devote all his time to catching and arresting William Bonin whom Brown was then prosecuting. He denied it, lied about it numerous times. Judge Ryan asked Brown if there was such a task force or "anything remotely resembling one." Brown said there was not. He denied it numerous times. Judge Ryan said, "I think you're hiding something," and still Brown denied the Task Force.²⁰ Based on the prosecutor's lies the court denied any such discovery to the defense and prevented it from finding the 1976 fingerprint comparison that eliminated RSK as a suspect.²¹ As a result, RSK was bound over for trial on the Hall count and several others that brought zero evidence against RSK but were deemed similar to Hall. Most of these other counts were initially suspected of Bonin and later relegated to RSK because there was no one else.²²
Following the preliminary hearing, RSK requested that his lawyer, Doug Otto, be removed from the defense team because of ineffective representation. For example, Otto did not challenge the lies of Bryan Brown concerning the existence of the Task Force. At one point, the judge tried to help Otto out: "Why don't we get Mr. Charvet in here ..."? William Charvet was an attorney for William Bonin and knowledgeable about the Task Force. Otto made no reply and never brought Charvet to court. Judge Luis Cardenas ordered an investigation and as a result removed Otto from the defense.
During the pretrial period, frustrated by prosecutor Brown's lies and obstruction, RSK's attorneys issued subpoenas to St. John and all Orange County law enforcement agencies (police departments) who were alleging murder against RSK. The subpoenas asked for all task force information they had. Bryan Brown opposed the subpoenas and asked the court to quash or invalidate them. ²³ He said he had given all the information to RSK's defense and there was no more. Another lie. But the court believed him and quashed all subpoena issued to Orange County agencies. However, St. John was with the Los Angeles Police Department, and Los Angeles did not oppose the subpoena. ²⁴ But by the time Los Angeles provided 40,000 pages of the Task Force materials it had grown late in the pretrial stage.
To complicate the situation, Judge Turner needed emergency heart surgery in December, 1987, and could not continue as judge. The next name on the list of possible judges was Jean Rheinheimer. Prosecutor Bryan Brown claimed that she was prejudiced against The People (his case) and she was rejected. Next was Donald McCartin who had lobbied the courthouse vigorously to be appointed as judge, and he hid his anti-gay and Marine Corps history.²⁵ Those two factors were important in the Kraft case, and McCartin wanted to hide his obvious bias. He was appointed judge for RSK. The next day in an unrelated trial, McCartin reduced a jury’s recommended sentence of life without parole to 25 years to life for a man who murdered a gay man and who openly said he hated gays. A family member of the victim commented that McCartin is prejudiced against gays.²⁶ McCartin took control of RSK’s case and denied any continuance for RSK’s attorneys so they could absorb the 40,000 pages recently received from St. John in Los Angeles.
Judge Donald McCartin presided over RSK’s 1988-89 trial. As was the case for the preliminary hearing, none of evidence concerning St. John' s log of Task Force activities and its notation that RSK's fingerprints were negative to the Hall crime scene print in 1976, was placed on the certified record of the trial. McCartin also denied a motion for the jurors to visit the alleged site of Hall’s murder, despite testimony so tortuously complicated about the site that even Judge McCartin couldn’t quite understand its location.²⁷ As usual, Brown misrepresented to the jury in his closing argument that the Hall party house was “only two short blocks” from a freeway on-ramp. “Lyin’ Bryan! It was a full mile.” This deception was accomplished by placing round green stickers on a map over the freeway ramps nearest the house, concealing the actual distance to them (RT, pp. 19110-19111, RT, p. 2440-2441).
In 2005 or 2006, fifteen years after having been found guilty, RSK was allowed to see an index to the 40,000 pages St. John turned over for the subpoena. He requested to see a few specific areas that looked productive, and within hours he discovered the negative 1976 fingerprint comparison that eliminated him as a suspect in Hall's murder. Also significant, the materials included Task Force attendance rosters with the names of members who had signed in at each meeting.²⁸ Among them were Deputy District Attorney Jay Mosteller, District Attorney Investigator George Troup, Sheriff Detective Bernie Esposito, Criminalists James White and Sandra Wiersma, Sheriff Detective Sidebotham who was also lead investigator in the William Bonin Freeway Killer case, and lead investigator in RSK's trial, and many other Orange County police officers and investigators whom Bryan Brown knew well. This proved not only that the Task Force existed, but that the prosecutor was surrounded by its members. This attendance roster is dated June 24, 1980, shortly after the arrest of William Bonin on June 8th. We believe Bryan Brown attended this meeting but did not sign the roster because it could have disclosed bias and prevented him from being the prosecutor of Bonin.
But even more damning, on the back of each page is a discovery stamp that verifies on April 22, 1983, that Bryan Brown gave the roster to a defendant's defense team.²⁹ RSK was arrested May 14, 1983, so it could not have been his defense. There was only one trial underway in April, 1983, that invoked St. John's Task Force: the trial of William Bonin, and Bryan Brown was the prosecutor. So, at the same time Bryan Brown told RSK’s judge the Task Force did not exist, he was giving information from that same Task Force to the Bonin defense. RSK was found guilty by lies, one piled on top of another, and by forgery.
You may doubt that any law enforcement officer, or prosecutor, would stoop to such lows as lying and forgery, but sadly it is endemic in Orange County, California. More than two decades later, from the early 21st century up to the present, Orange County law enforcement was swamped by scandals involving lies and mishandling of evidence, paying witnesses to change their testimony to win convictions, plus shredding documents to avoid being caught. It was widely reported in the news media for years.³⁰ One insider said it had been going on for years and never stopped.³¹ RSK did not kill Mark Hall. It Just Ain't So!
CONCLUSION The LAPD crime scene fingerprint is proof by itself that the fingerprint evidence given to the jury at trial was forged. Here's why:The LAPD print that eliminated RSK as its source in 1976 was an identical copy of one of two fingerprints recovered from the Hall crime scene. Veteran District Attorney investigator George
Troup gave a photocopy of one of the two prints to LAPD detective and task force leader John St. John who in turn gave the photocopy to the LAPD crime lab, fingerprint section. The LA photocopy was never lost or unaccounted for before it was compared to RSK’s prints, unlike the fingerprints shown to the jury at trial. In LA the copy was compared to two men and found to be negative, a no-match that eliminated them as the fingerprints source. The print was found to be negative to RSK, a no-match that eliminated him as its source. And it was compared to another man and was also negative, eliminating him as its source. Since the print to which RSK was compared was a photocopy of one of two Orange County prints, it is the same as though RSK's prints were compared to the original print recovered from the crime scene and were a no-match. Therefore, at least one of the Orange County prints must have changed when they were lost. This is undeniable proof provided by the LAPD print: a photocopy given to them by Orange County.
Another difficulty with the case against RSK was the timeline in which the crime was committed. RSK was at his sister’s house in Westminster with his family celebrating the new year until 12:30 am on January 1 and was seen by family members at his parents' home in Midway between 7:00 AM and 8:00 AM. His family corroborated this in testimony. In addition, the fire road to Bedford Peak was impassable to ordinary cars, especially for the Mustang II that RSK drove at the time.
After RSKs arrest on May 14, 1983, none of the crime scene prints are accounted for until 10 days later, May 24, when they were found to be missing. At trial in 1988 the two crime scene prints shown to the jury matched RSK's prints, but that is impossible as shown by the photocopy of one of the two crime scene prints that eliminated RSK as its source, that print given to the LAPD by Orange County. Unlike the Orange County prints, the LAPD print never went missing before it was compared to RSK. At trial it was discovered that LAPD print had also disappeared and could not be found, just like the Orange County prints were lost. Someone wanted to prevent the LAPD true photocopy print from exposing the trial prints as the frauds they are, so they got rid of it. Thanks to the Task Force log of Detective St. John, we know the true crime scene print did not match RSK’s. It is the only true and reliable crime scene print not tainted by being lost. No one knows where the OC prints went or what was done to them while they were lost. OC can only speculate and guess. Anything could have happened. Ditto the glass fragments from which they were lifted. The LAPD photocopy print proves the latent print of one of them was wiped clean and replaced by RSKs print. Forgery. There is no other reasonable explanation. Randy Kraft’s fingerprint was not found at the Hall crime scene. It just ain’t so!
⁴ Randy Kraft’s car at the time, a 1974 Ford Mustang II, was designed for on-road economy and handling, not for rough terrain. As a stock vehicle it has very low ground clearance. Its drivetrain is RWD only (no factory 4WD or LSD), and it rides on typical road-biased tires. These design choices severely limit its off-road capability. In practice, owners report that a Mustang II sits “only a few inches” off the ground. Its suspension travel is also minimal (the front had very short shock travel), so wheels will quickly bottom out on big dips or bumps. This means the frame or engine/transmission may scrape or hit the ground. Any exposed part under the car – such as the rocker panels, transmission, or differential – can be damaged by rocks or packed dirt (Choksey, 2025; Kohm, 2025). The Mustang Series base 2.3-liter four-cylinder engine with 88 horsepower was notably underpowered, especially for a car carrying the Mustang name, and that was RSK’s car. ⁵ Another thing they didn't tell the jury or anyone: William Bonin's family owned a tavern, the Alpine on Silverado Canyon Rd., six miles from the fire road that led to the Hall crime scene. Further, Bonin rented a home only four miles away the crime scene. Victim Mark Hall and William Bonin were incarcerated at the Orange County Jail at the same time in mid-December 1975, just a few weeks before Hall was murdered. Mark Hall had at least 10 arrests for various crimes during 1975.
¹¹ St. John, J. (1976, June 28). Logbook entry for June 28, 1976 [Unpublished logbook].
¹² Elimination can be even stronger and more reliable than a match by ordinary analysis. This is because all fingerprints have a pattern or design. Some are a loop design, others an arch, a whorl (think whirlpool), a double loop, etc. So, for example, if a scene print has a loop pattern and a suspect’s prints have an arch pattern, they are obviously from different persons, a no-match. No further analysis is needed. In 1976 RSK’s fingerprints disclosed a different pattern than the scene print photocopy, and he was eliminated as the source of the photocopy and of the original scene print.
¹³ John P. St. John (police officer). (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved May 10, 2025 from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_P._St._John_(police_officer)
¹⁹ The preliminary hearing presents the defense with an opportunity to have the court order the prosecution to give the defense information only the prosecution has or can get, even information that might disprove the prosecution’s case. A serious violation of a defendant’s right to get such information at the at the preliminary hearing can invalidate the entire trial. According to Jennings v. Superior Court, “The purpose of the preliminary hearing is to weed out groundless or unsupported charges of grave offenses, and to relieve the accused of the degradation and expense of a criminal trial. Many an unjustifiable prosecution is stopped at that point, where the lack of probable cause is clearly disclosed.”
²¹ Another thing they didn't tell the jury or anyone: At the same time the prosecutor was lying to the preliminary hearing judge about not knowing of any task force, or anything remotely resembling one, he was giving information about that same task force to the defense of William Bonin, the Freeway Killer. No wonder Bryan Brown’s peers at the Orange County Courthouse nicknamed him “Lyin’ Bryan.” ²² “Bound over” is a significant phrase because as it moves the case from Municipal Court to Superior Court, it also shifts the burden of proof from the prosecution to the defense. One the burden shifts it is much harder for the defense to overcome what has been decided at the preliminary hearing.
²⁵ Another thing they didn't tell the jury or anyone: In his younger years, Judge McCartin was a Marine Corps officer in the JAG (legal section) of the Corps. His job was to hunt down gay service men and women, prosecute them and dishonorably discharge them from the military. Six (i.e., Crisel, Gambrel, Hughes, Keith, Loggins, and Moore) of the charges against RSK involved US Marines. RSK was/is gay. And marines are “always faithful” to their fellow marines. Sempre Fi. Just before trial began, on the same day, a motion was made to dismiss the Loggins case because important evidence that could have exonerated RSK was lost by the crime lab. Loggins was a US Marine. In denying the motion, Judge McCartin first words were, “Gentlemen, you know I can’t dismiss Loggins.” In fact, Judge McCartin would not grant any motion made by the attorneys of a gay man. He denied them all. Sempre Fi.
REFERENCES
Choksey, J. S. (2025, February 5). What Is wheel articulation and why is it important when off- roading? J. D. Power.
Hicks, J. (1983, August 13). Kraft pleads innocent to 6 counts of murder. Los Angeles Times. Jennings v. Superior Court, 66 Cal. 2d 867 (1967).
John P. St. John (police officer). (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved May 10, 2025 from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_P._St._John_(police_officer) Kohm, L. (2025, April 30). Ground clearance for off-roading: How much do you really need? [Complete Guide]. KB Tire and Auto Repair. https://kbtireandautorepair.com/how-much-ground-clearance-do- i-need-for-off-road/.
Lasseter, D. (2004). Perfect justice. Seven Locks Press.
Motion for Discovery filed in Preliminary Hearing, People v Kraft, Case No. 83CF00468 (Municipal Court of Orange County, 1983).
Motion to Quash filed in Pre-Trial Hearing, People v Kraft, Case No. C-52776 (California Superior Court, 1985).
Motion to View filed in Trial, People v Kraft, Case No. C-52776 (California Superior Court, 1989).
Moxley, R. S. (2017, March 31). O.C. deputies doctored and shred records after feds began probe. OC Weekly.
People v. Kraft, Reporter’s Transcript Vol. 92, pp. 19022-19024 (California Superior Court, 1989).
People v. Kraft, Reporter’s Transcript Vol. 92, pp. 19124-19027 (California Superior Court, 1989).
People v. Kraft, Reporter’s Transcript Vol. 92, pp. 19145-19149 (California Superior Court, 1989).
People v. Kraft, Reporter’s Transcript Vol. 92, pp. 19170-19174 (California Superior Court, 1989).
People v. Kraft, Reporter’s Transcript Vol. 92, pp. 19184-19185 (California Superior Court, 1989).
People v. Kraft, Reporter’s Transcript Vol. 92, pp. 19203-19207 (California Superior Court, 1989).
People v. Kraft, Reporter’s Transcript Vol. 102, pp. 21767-21780 (California Superior Court, 1989).
People v. Kraft, Reporter’s Transcript Vol. 102, pp. 21781-21785 (California Superior Court, 1989).
People v. Kraft, Reporter’s Transcript Vol. 102, pp. 21828-21841 (California Superior Court, 1989).
St. John, J. (n.d.). The notes contain the statement by William Bonin to Detective John St. John regarding victim Mark Shelton [Interviewer notes].
St. John, J. (1976, June 28). Logbook entry for June 28, 1976 [Unpublished logbook].
St. John, J. (1976, June 14). Logbook entry for June 14, 1976 [Unpublished logbook].
St. John, J. (Detective). (1987, November 6). Declaration of Detective John St. John (Case No. C- 52776). [Superior Court of California].
Saavedra, T. (2024, June 24). OC sheriff protected detective who repeatedly mishandled evidence, legal motion claims. Orange County Register.
Task Force to Investigate the Homicides of Young Men. (1983, April). Log pages from meeting [Internal task force log].
Task Force to Investigate the Homicides of Young Men. (1980, June 24). Log pages from meeting at Norwalk Sheriff Station [Internal task force log].
Welborn, L. (1988, February 6). Killer who hated gays receives 25 years to life: Judge rejects jury vote for life without parole. Orange County Register. Unger, L. N. (1986, October 29). Letter to Thomas McDonald regarding Subpoena Duces Tecum Issued to Detective John St. John of the Los Angeles Police Department [Unpublished letter]. Records of the Office of the Los Angeles City Attorney, Los Angeles, CA.
FURTHER READING ¹ Cal. Civ. Code § 1709 (West 2024). ² Cal. Civ. Code § 1710 (West 2024). ³ Definition of chain of custody in CA. ⁴ Randy Steven Kraft v. James Rowland, Daniel Vasquez, No. S014772, Brief for the Petitioner at 55- 70 (California Sup. Ct. 1990). ⁵ Randy Steven Kraft v. James Rowland, Daniel Vasquez, No. S014772, Writ for the Petitioner at 15-45 (California Sup. Ct. 1990).
Choksey, J. S. (2025, February 5). What Is wheel articulation and why is it important when off- roading? J. D. Power.
Hicks, J. (1983, August 13). Kraft pleads innocent to 6 counts of murder. Los Angeles Times. Jennings v. Superior Court, 66 Cal. 2d 867 (1967).
John P. St. John (police officer). (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved May 10, 2025 from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_P._St._John_(police_officer) Kohm, L. (2025, April 30). Ground clearance for off-roading: How much do you really need? [Complete Guide]. KB Tire and Auto Repair. https://kbtireandautorepair.com/how-much-ground-clearance-do- i-need-for-off-road/.
Lasseter, D. (2004). Perfect justice. Seven Locks Press.
Motion for Discovery filed in Preliminary Hearing, People v Kraft, Case No. 83CF00468 (Municipal Court of Orange County, 1983).
Motion to Quash filed in Pre-Trial Hearing, People v Kraft, Case No. C-52776 (California Superior Court, 1985).
Motion to View filed in Trial, People v Kraft, Case No. C-52776 (California Superior Court, 1989).
Moxley, R. S. (2017, March 31). O.C. deputies doctored and shred records after feds began probe. OC Weekly.
People v. Kraft, Reporter’s Transcript Vol. 92, pp. 19022-19024 (California Superior Court, 1989).
People v. Kraft, Reporter’s Transcript Vol. 92, pp. 19124-19027 (California Superior Court, 1989).
People v. Kraft, Reporter’s Transcript Vol. 92, pp. 19145-19149 (California Superior Court, 1989).
People v. Kraft, Reporter’s Transcript Vol. 92, pp. 19170-19174 (California Superior Court, 1989).
People v. Kraft, Reporter’s Transcript Vol. 92, pp. 19184-19185 (California Superior Court, 1989).
People v. Kraft, Reporter’s Transcript Vol. 92, pp. 19203-19207 (California Superior Court, 1989).
People v. Kraft, Reporter’s Transcript Vol. 102, pp. 21767-21780 (California Superior Court, 1989).
People v. Kraft, Reporter’s Transcript Vol. 102, pp. 21781-21785 (California Superior Court, 1989).
People v. Kraft, Reporter’s Transcript Vol. 102, pp. 21828-21841 (California Superior Court, 1989).
St. John, J. (n.d.). The notes contain the statement by William Bonin to Detective John St. John regarding victim Mark Shelton [Interviewer notes].
St. John, J. (1976, June 28). Logbook entry for June 28, 1976 [Unpublished logbook].
St. John, J. (1976, June 14). Logbook entry for June 14, 1976 [Unpublished logbook].
St. John, J. (Detective). (1987, November 6). Declaration of Detective John St. John (Case No. C- 52776). [Superior Court of California].
Saavedra, T. (2024, June 24). OC sheriff protected detective who repeatedly mishandled evidence, legal motion claims. Orange County Register.
Task Force to Investigate the Homicides of Young Men. (1983, April). Log pages from meeting [Internal task force log].
Task Force to Investigate the Homicides of Young Men. (1980, June 24). Log pages from meeting at Norwalk Sheriff Station [Internal task force log].
Welborn, L. (1988, February 6). Killer who hated gays receives 25 years to life: Judge rejects jury vote for life without parole. Orange County Register. Unger, L. N. (1986, October 29). Letter to Thomas McDonald regarding Subpoena Duces Tecum Issued to Detective John St. John of the Los Angeles Police Department [Unpublished letter]. Records of the Office of the Los Angeles City Attorney, Los Angeles, CA.
FURTHER READING ¹ Cal. Civ. Code § 1709 (West 2024). ² Cal. Civ. Code § 1710 (West 2024). ³ Definition of chain of custody in CA. ⁴ Randy Steven Kraft v. James Rowland, Daniel Vasquez, No. S014772, Brief for the Petitioner at 55- 70 (California Sup. Ct. 1990). ⁵ Randy Steven Kraft v. James Rowland, Daniel Vasquez, No. S014772, Writ for the Petitioner at 15-45 (California Sup. Ct. 1990).