This is the witness testimony of Jerry Thompson, a Salt Lake County Deputy Sheriff. He personally searched Bundy’s Salt Lake City apartments and his VW, and showed Carol DaRonch his mugshot for identification. He testified in the DaRonch kidnapping trial on Tuesday February 24, 1976.
DIRECT EXAMINATION OF DEPUTY SHERIFF JERRY THOMPSON BY MR. YOCOM:
MR. YOCOM: The State calls Jerry Thompson.
Q State your name and occupation, please?
A Jerry Thompson, Deputy Sheriff, Salt Lake County.
Q How long have you been so employed?
A A little over ten years.
Q Directing your attention to the months of August, September, and October of 1975, were you so employed, Deputy?
A Yes, sir.
Q And specifically on the 21st day of August, 1975, did you have occasion to come in contact with the defendant in this action, Theodore Bundy?
A. Yes, sir. I believe that was the date.
Q. Where did that take place?
A. I talked to him in his apartment up on First Avenue.
Q. Prior to going to that location, had you had any conversation with him?
A: Prior to going up there, yes, just briefly when leaving the jail. Sergeant Palardo and I in the car told him we could take him up to his apartment, yes, sir.
Q Did you have any discussion with him in regard to a search of his apartment at that time?
A I didn’t at that time, no, sir.
Q. Did you at any time that day?
A. I was given a consent and waiver by Detective Ben Forbes of the Sheriffs Office, stating he had gave his permission to go through his apartment.
Q. Where did you go after you left the Salt Lake County Jail?
A. Directly up to 565 – First Avenue, to Mr. Bundy’s apartment.
Q. Did you enter that apartment?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And was Mr. Bundy in your presence?
A. Yes, he was.
Q. Did you have an occasion to look through the apartment?
A. Yes I did.
Q. Now, specifically with regard to examination of the closet area of his apartment, did you notice any particular shoes located in that area?
A. I noticed shoes which resembled the type that I am wearing now, a loafer type, that I assumed — a shiny patent leather type. Two or three pairs. I don’t recall exactly how many.
Q. Did you have an occasion on that same day to observe a vehicle, specifically. a VW automobile?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Where was that automobile located?
A. It was parked around in back of the apartment building.
Q. Did you have any conversation with Mr. Bundy regarding that automobile?
A. Yes, I did. I asked him if he would mind if I took some pictures of it. He stated “No, go right ahead.”
Q. Where was the pictures taken from?
A. The pictures were. taken from standing behind it and the right side of the vehicle.
Q. Did you enter the vehicle at all?
A. No I did not.
Q. What sort of camera did you use?
A. It was a Polaroid.
Q. bid you have occasion to have them rephotographed and blown up?
A. Yes. I had them blown up.
Q: Now, after the 21st day of August, 1975, Deputy Thompson, you had occasion to come in contact with a Carol DaRonch?
A: Yes, I did.
Q: When and where, initially, did that take place?
A: It was at the Murray Telephone Office out on Riley Lane, I believe. I believe it was the 1st day of September, ’75.
Q: And who was present at the time you came in contact with her at that location?
A: There was just myself and Miss DaRonch.
Q: Did you have occasion on that date to show her any photographs?
A: Yes, sir.
Q: What, if anything, was said to Miss DaRonch before you asked her to look at a group of photographs?
A: I asked her that I had a group of photographs I would like her to look at them, that I know she has looked at many others a long time ago, but I’d like her to look at these and see if there was anyone in the photographs that resembled or could possibly have been the individual who abducted her.
Q: And how many photographs did you hand to her?
A: I don’t recall the number. I think it was between 20 and 30, but I don’t recall exactly.
Q: I show you what has been marked for identification purposes as State’s Proposed Exhibit 40, ask if you can open that and examine the contents?
A: Yes, sir. This is the group that I showed her.
Q: How many are there? I think it shows on the envelope.
A: It says 27 on the envelope.
Q: Where did you obtain those photographs?
A: The photographs, all of them with the exception of Mr. Bundy, is a group of photographs that I carry around in my car in the suitcase of different individuals; and I obtained Mr. Bundy’s photograph from the Records Division and stuck it in this group.
Q: And do you know when that photograph of Mr. Bundy was taken?
A: It was taken on August the 16th, I believe, ’75.
Q: And would you relate to the Court what took place when you handed those 27 photographs to Miss DaRonch?
A: Yes. She went through them.
MR. O’CONNELL: I object on the grounds this is hearsay, Your Honor. What she says or even indicating is verbal hearsay. She’s testified to it, and I think that we ought to—the State ought to be bound with her version without putting on an officer to give his version of what she said.
THE COURT: For what purpose are you offering the evidence, Mr. Yocom?
MR. YOCOM: There was a prior consistent statement of the witness that she did, in fact, examine those photographs, she did, in fact, remove one from that stack to show the identification of the Defendant with regard to that photo, tentative photo identification she made at that time. Not offered for the truth of the matter stated, merely to show what she did on that occasion.
THE COURT: You are not offering it to say what she stated, but what she did?
MR. YOCOM: What she did, how she removed one photograph. What she stated is a prior consistent statement with her own testimony.
THE COURT: Well, the objection at this point is overruled. Let’s see where he goes.
MR. YOCOM: All right. Thank you.
Q: After she looked at the photographs, what did she do with them?
A: She took a picture out of the stack and held it in her hand. She went through the rest of the pictures, handed me back the stack. She stated, “I don’t see anyone in there.” I then asked her how about the photograph that was in her hand. She stated something to the effect, “Oh, this one, I don’t know. Here.” And handed it back to me. I then asked her why she pul1ed that photograph out, if there was something significant about it. She states, “Yes, I believe that looks a lot like the individual, but I’m not sure.”
Q: Whose photograph was that?
A: Mr. Bundy’s.
Q: Did you have an occasion on the same date to show her the four photographs, the smaller versions of Exhibits 20, 21, and 28 and 29?
A: Yes, sir.
Q: And did she make any statement with regard to those?
A: Yes. She stated that as near as she could remember, she definitely remembered the tear in the back seat of the Volkswagen, and this picture appeared to be like the tear that was in the Volkswagen, as near as she could tell, and that it definitely resembled the vehicle, but that she would like to look at the vehicle in person.
Q: Did you have an occasion on the 2nd day of October, 1975, to be present at the lineup conducted at the Salt Lake Metropolitan Hall of Justice?
A: Yes, sir.
Q: And was Mr. Bundy present as a participant in that lineup?
A: Yes, sir.
Q: And was Miss DaRonch present at that time?
A: Yes, she was.
Q: Show you State’s Proposed Exhibit 22, and ask if you can identify that photograph?
A: Yes, sir, that’s the photograph of that lineup.
Q: And does the photograph accurately depict the appearance of the individuals that participated in that lineup?
A: I would say so, yes.
MR. YOCOM: Offer State’s Proposed Exhibit 22. I also would offer the packet of pictures, Exhibit 40, that’s been so identified by this witness.
THE COURT: Exhibits 40 and 22 are received.
Q: Did you at any time, Deputy Thompson, have any contact with Carol DaRonch from November 8th, 1974, until August 21st, 1975?
A: I believe I talked to her.
Q: By telephone or in person?
A: I believe I talked to her in person when she was with Sgt. Forbes at Murray one day.
Q: Do you recall about when that occurred?
A: I think it was within a short time after November 8th. We was at a body shop, as I recall. I was there, and she came down with Sgt. Forbes, I believe—she came somewhere around—
Q: Did you at that time or any other time, other than what you have indicated; August 21st, show any other photographs of Theodore Bundy to Miss DaRonch?
A: No, sir. I have never showed her any photos other than on that day.
MR. YOCOM: No further questions.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. O’CONNELL:
Q: But on September 4th, 1975, you gave a photo to Officer Beal, or one of the officers from Bountiful, to show to her, didn’t you?
A: I gave him the photo. I don’t recall the date, sir. It was right around then.
Q: It was approximately three days after?
A: Approximately.
Q: Now, you first saw a photo of Mr. Bundy back in December of 1974, didn’t you?
A: As I recall, yes, sir. Somewhere around there.
Q: And at that time, you were aware that Mr. Bundy, when you saw his photo, you were aware that he had a VW automobile, didn’t you?
A: I’d been told that.
Q: The first time you showed a photo, any photos, to Carol DaRonch was on August 21st, 1975?
A: Yes, sir.
Q: Now, when you went up to his apartment, you went through his—well, everything in the apartment, didn’t you?
A: Well, basically looking around generally, yes, sir.
Q: Well, you went through his papers and books?
A: Some of them, yes sir.
Q: And gas receipts?
A: Some of them, yes sir.
Q: And you even took some articles with you, with his permission, right?
A: Yes sir, I think I took three.
Q: Did you make any notes or police report about that search?
A: I believe I have a report.
Q: Did you in that report indicate anything about seeing some shiny shoes?
A: I don’t recall.
Q: Is this the report with the comments various people have written on it?
A: No, this isn’t it. This is the one when I was—
Q: Pardon me, I’m sorry. I turned to the wrong one.
A: Yes, sir, this is the report I wrote.
Q: You noted some items you saw in that house, didn’t you?
A: I noted the items that I took, yes sir.
Q: Did you note in there anything about seeing a pair of shiny loafers?
A: No sir, I didn’t take any shiny loafers.
Q: Did you note anything about seeing them?
A: No sir.
Q: On August 21st, you gave a copy of that photo—I guess we call it a mug shot photo—from the August 16th booking to Bountiful officers, didn’t you?
A: I gave him a copy. I’m not sure on the date, but I gave him a copy.
Q: All right. But that was—in other words, you gave him two photos: you gave him a copy of the mug shot photo on August 2lst—you don’t know the dates, do you?
A: No.
Q: Is that in your report?
A: I don’t recall if it is or not.
Q: Well, on two different occasions, you gave photos to the Bountiful officers?
A: That’s correct.
Q: Did you ever give them to Murray?
A: I can’t recall. I believe they were, but I’m not sure on that.
Q: Now, on September 1st, when you went up to talk to Carol DaRonch, you showed her the photos, the small photos of the automobile?
A: Yes, sir.
Q: And she told you that she definitely remembered the tear in the back seat?
A: That resembled the tear, yes, sir.
Q: Then you told her that you had seen—although she had seen a lot of photos, you gave her this packet of photos that you just identified?
A: Yes, sir.
Q: And you just said that she went through the process, took Mr. Bundy’s photo out and gave you the pack back and said, “The man isn’t in there,” right?
A: Correct.
Q: And then you said, “What about this one?” indicating the one she had in her hand?
A: Yes.
Q: And she said, “I don’t know,” right?
A: Similar to that. “I don’t know, it resembles the individual,” or—
Q: You just testified that she said, “I don’t know,” and then you asked her again, and at that point she said it looks like him?
A: Yes.
Q: Is that the way it happened?
A: That’s possible. I don’t recall the exact wording with her at that time.
Q: All right. Then you testified here just a minute ago that after being asked twice about that photo that was in her hand, she said, “It looks a lot like him”?
A: Yes.
Q: Didn’t she say, after your second questioning about Mr. Bundy’s photo, after saying “I don’t know” the first time, the second time didn’t she really say, “It looks something like him”?
A: Similar conversation. I don’t recall her exact words.
Q: Then she said, after she said it looks something like him, she says, “I really don’t know,” again; right?
A: Something like that.
Q: Well, you don’t—don’t you think there’s a difference between a witness saying that looks something like him, and that looks a lot like him?
A: Yes, I think there’s a difference.
Q: All right. Well, what you said in your report is, she said, “It looks something like him.” You really don’t know?
A: Yes, sir.
Q: And that report was dictated about the time, right?
A: It would have been dictated that day, or probably the next day, by me.
Q: Did you review your report before coming over here to testify, Officer?
A: Yes, I have been reviewing it.
Q: Now, when you showed the photos of Mr. Bundy, or the photo of Mr. Bundy, you had it in this packet. When you showed the car pictures, did you have them mixed up with other pictures of Volkswagen automobiles?
A: No, I didn’t.
Q: Why didn’t you show that driver’s license photo to Miss DaRonch yourself instead of having the Bountiful officers do it, Officer?
A: I didn’t have that photo at that time. After the tentative identification I thought was close, I then attempted to find out if he had a driver’s license photo, and the date when it had been applied for. When I found out that it had been applied for in December of ’74, then I ordered a picture of it, because I assumed that that would have been a close likeness of the way the individual would have looked in November. So I got the photo and noticed the big difference between that photo and the one I had. The Bountiful officers were in my office that day, or we had made a lot of communications together, and they asked me if there was anything that they could do to help me in regard to anything that I was doing, and if I minded if they showed this photo—it was so close to that time—to Miss DaRonch, and I told them that I had no problems with me, that they would have to check with Murray.
Q: Why didn’t you do it yourself, is the question?
A: Why didn’t you do it yourself? I can’t really tell you, other than I was working on other things, or different things, and they volunteered to help me, so I let them do it.
Q: You knew it was improper, didn’t you, to show a witness two different pictures of the same individual, to show a witness another picture of an individual after she had made somewhat of an identification, “This looks like him”?
A: I figured it was improper to show the same photo, but an entirely different one that looked so much different, I didn’t feel there was anything wrong with it.
Q: You just didn’t have time to do it yourself, is that right?
A: I can’t answer that, whether I didn’t have time or what was going at that time. I really can’t say.
Q: Between September 1st and September 8th, three attempts were made to have Carol DaRonch view Bundy’s car, weren’t there?
A: There were several attempts made, yes sir.
Q: And you and other officers were following him around for that purpose, weren’t you?
A: He had been followed around, yes sir.
Q: And hopefully, the idea was to get him so Carol DaRonch could see him in that car; wasn’t that the idea?
A: I can’t say that was true, no.
Q: Why was it you were so interested? Why were you doing it when he was driving around rather than just some evening when his car was parked in front of his home, or parked up at the law school?
A: There were several attempts at his home. Went by his home to see if the car was there; it was not there. There were attempts at the law school when it was not there. And there was other reasons to set up for the surveillance.
Q: Now, every attempt that was actually made with you and the Bountiful officers, Mr. Bundy—except the final one in September 8th—Mr. Bundy was in the automobile, isn’t that true?
A: I can’t say that, because I wasn’t there on all of them.
Q: Now, on September 8th, she was taken up to the Avenues to a car which was parked, right?
A: I believe that was the day?
Q: Who was involved in that operation?
A: Bountiful—I’m not sure, I think it was Ira Beal and Sgt. Collard from Bountiful, and I believe Ron Ballentine. I’m not sure of any other Bountiful officers, and I don’t know just who she was with.
Q: How about from your office?
A: The only individuals involved from my office would be then myself and Captain Hayward, but I did not go up there when she viewed the car.
Q: Well, she talked to you afterwards, didn’t she?
A: I don’t recall.
Q: Did she identify the car?
A: My understanding from the Bountiful officers was (nodding yes.)
Q: Didn’t you think that was incredible?
MR. YOCOM: Objection, what he thought, it’s immaterial.
THE COURT: Objection is overruled.
Q: Didn’t you think it was incredible that she could identify that car?
A: I don’t know what you mean.
Q: By “incredible,” I mean unbelievable?
A: Not really.
Q: Well, you had observed the car yourself before she did, didn’t you?
A: Oh yes, sir.
Q: And how did it look, compared to the way you saw it just a few days before?
A: It was changed.
Q: The seat had been replaced? The back seat had been replaced?
A: Repaired, anyway. I don’t know if it had been replaced or not, but it was repaired.
Q: Rust spots had been touched up?
A: Had primer on the front end of the vehicle.
Q: You noted in your report, “looked different,” didn’t you?
A: I believe I did.
Q: What made you think it was possible for that lady, then, to walk up and say, I mean, that that car was the car that she had been in 10 months ago now that the seats had been repaired? How do you suppose she could identify that?
A: Well, I really can’t tell you how she could or why. I just went on the story that was given to me by the Bountiful officers that she stated that she believed that was the vehicle; however, it did not have a tear in the back seat at this time.
Q: Well, as far as you were concerned, it was a flat identification, wasn’t it?
A: I thought—
Q: Wasn’t that your understanding that she said it was the automobile?
A: I thought it was an identification, yes sir.
Q: In fact, you put that in an affidavit that she had identified the automobile while parked on a public street as being the automobile that she had been abducted in, didn’t she?
A: I believe she did.
Q: On October 1st, were you up at the University of Utah Law School?
A: I was up there. I’m not sure of the day.
Q: Wasn’t it the day before the lineup, at least one or two days?
A: One or two days before the lineup.
Q: And was Carol DaRonch up there?
A: Yes, she was with me.
Q: Who else was involved in that operation?
A: There was some Bountiful officers, which I believe they were the same ones I have mentioned. Capt. Hayward was outside. Jerry Kinghorn, County Attorney’s Office, was there. And I can’t recall the rest of the people.
Q: Well, let’s get back to these affidavits for search warrant. They were filed on October 1st in front of Judge Gowans, is that correct?
A: I believe it was Judge Gowans.
THE COURT: Are you going into another area on your examination?
MR. O’CONNELL: Just be a couple more minutes.
THE COURT: All right.
Q: Now, one of these affidavits was for the search of the Defendant’s apartment at 364 Douglas Street, is that right?
A: Yes, sir.
Q: And the other one was for search and seizure of the Volkswagen automobile?
A: That’s correct.
Q: Now, in each of these you stated under oath that you had reason to believe that there was certain property in the Volkswagen and certain property in the apartment as follows: one small black revolver: one brown leather ladies purse with zipper top, shoulder strap fastened by two rolled rings and stitching on the side unsewn; one earring, white in color, round in shape, gold clip; one gold ladies wallet with papers and identification of Carol DaRonch. Right?
A: Yes, sir.
Q: What made you think that that property was in the 1968 Volkswagen automobile, Officer?
A: I assumed Mr. Bundy was a good suspect in that case at that time, due to the circumstances previous, and it was his car, and possibly it could be in that vehicle.
Q: You knew that the vehicle had been searched on August 16th, didn’t you?
A: I knew it had.
Q: And you had looked in it yourself?
A: No, I had not.
Q: Well, you had taken pictures through the window, hadn’t you?
A: That’s correct, but I never opened the doors and looked at it.
Q: Did you ever ask Mr. Bundy if you can look in his car?
A: No, I haven’t.
Q: He was being very cooperative about the search of his apartment?
A: I agree.
Q: Cooperative about your taking pictures of the car?
A: Yes, sir.
Q: Did you think that Mr. Bundy, having his car searched on August 16th from your department, among others, did you really believe that he had gone out and got the articles and put them in the car?
A: I didn’t believe he went and got any articles and went and put them in. The reason for that, when you talked with the officers that searched the car originally, they had no idea of what we were looking for or what was involved, and they did not recall if they had seen an earring or something, because they weren’t looking for one. And so I wanted to look.
Q: They were looking for a gun, weren’t they?
A: I can’t tell you what they were looking for. I don’t know.
Q: Don’t you think if they had found a gun, that they would have noted that?
A: I’m sure they would have.
Q: Then why did you say you had reason to believe there was a gun in Mr. Bundy’s car?
A: The things that were on there were what the DaRonch girl had advised was taken from their case, and everything that was pertaining to that was put on the search warrant.
Q: Now, granted you didn’t—this is a different apartment than the one you searched on August 21st?
A: That’s correct.
Q: Did you really believe that that property was in his apartment at 364 Douglas Street?
A: I have no idea.
Q: You had no idea, but you said under oath, you told Judge Gowans under oath that you had reason to believe it was there, didn’t you?
A: Because he was a suspect, yes sir.
Q: All right. Did you tell Judge Gowans that that car had already been searched by your department?
A: I don’t recall if I did or not.
Q: You didn’t put it in the affidavit, did you?
A: I can’t answer that either. I don’t know.
Q: Did you tell Judge Gowans that you had alreadysearched his apartment where he had resided on August 21st?
A: I don’t recall that, either. I may have, I may not have.
MR. O’CONNELL: Offer Defendant’s Exhibit 44, which is a certified copy of the affidavit which appears in the City Court records, the affidavit and the search warrant and the seizure warrant for the 1968 Volkswagen automobile.
MR. YOCOM: No objection.
THE COURT: Exhibit 44-D is received.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. YOCOM:
Q: Deputy Thompson, on the 21st day of August, 1975, when you searched Mr. Bundy’s apartment on the Avenues—I believe that is 565 First Avenue?
A: Yes, I believe so.
Q: Why at that time didn’t you take or seize the patent leather shoes you saw at that time, shiny shoes?
A: I didn’t happen to see or take the patent leather shoes. At that time, it was primarily a Murray case. The case we are talking about right now was really not in my mind. They were in my mind in regard to another incident, and I did not want to take them at that time to tip my hand in regard to other things.
MR. O’CONNELL: I didn’t understand you on that last sentence. Will you repeat it, or could I have the Court Reporter read it?
(The answer was read by the Reporter.)
Q: You mean other cases?
A: Yes, sir, I meant other cases.
Q: Did you later confer with the Murray City officers with regard to the description that Carol DaRonch had given the officers on the date of her abduction?
A: Yes. There was a lot more conversed with Murray after my visit at that apartment.
Q: With regard to the two search warrants, the one for the vehicle and the one for the searchof another apartment of Mr. Bundy’s, who prepared those, Mr. Thompson?
A: You did.
Q: And with regard to the information contained therein, do you know how that was compiled?
A: The information contained was from the Murray case, from the Murray case report.
Q: Now, it’s indicated on your Exhibit 44 the description of a 1968 Volkswagen automobile, serial number and two license numbers. Can you tell us why those two license numbers were included on there?
A: Yes, sir. Checking on the vehicle, using one license plate number on it and running a computer, I can’t remember exactly what happened, it came back with two license plates registered to the same vehicle, to the same party, same serial number. And checking with Motor Vehicle, they informed me that, I believe it was sometime in February, the Utah plate was first applied for, and sometime in April, another Utah plate was applied for by the same individual, stating the first one had either been lost or stolen, I don’t recall which.
Q: At the time the affidavit for seizure of the automobile was prepared, to your knowledge, Mr. Bundy still owned that vehicle?
A: At the time it was prepared? I believe so.
Q: And when did you later find out that he had sold the car?
A: I can’t remember exactly when it was we were notified.
Q: Sometime after the affidavit was prepared?
A: I believe so, yes. I can’t remember right now.
Q: And with regard to the affidavit for the search of the apartment at 364 Douglas Street, the upstairs north apartment, had Miss DaRonch at the time this affidavit was prepared made the identification of the Defendant?
A: Sure she had when that affidavit was made on the apartment. I believe that was after, yes. I think so.
Q: It is dated the 6th day of October. This is six days after the lineup, is that correct?
A: Yes, sir, that is correct.
Q: And did you have reason to believe at that time that possibly some of her belongings were in that apartment?
A: Well, I had no reason to believe that they weren’t in there. I didn’t know. I assumed that if there’s any item or any type of thing, the people would keep them in his home.
Q: And you had not searched that apartment prior to that time?
A: No, I had not.
Q: Now, at any time at the August 21st search of his apartment on the Avenues, did Mr. Bundy ever inquire of why you were searching his apartment?
A: He never asked me.
MR. YOCOM: No further questions.
RECROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. O’CONNELL:
Q: Well, this had been after your partner, Ben Forbes, been talking to him down at the jail, wasn’t it?
A: Yes, Ben had talked to him before.
Q: And it was Ben Forbes that got the concept to search the apartment, right?
A: That’s correct.
Q: Didn’t you suppose that Ben told him what he was doing?
A: I later found out that Ben told him, yes, sir.
Q: The Murray case wasn’t on your mind, is that right, when you went up there?
A: Not entirely. There were a lot of others more on my mind.
Q: Why did you take photographs of that automobile?
A: Why did I take photographs?
Q: Of the torn backseat?
A: Because that I recalled from the Murray case.
Q: All right. Now, this other case that involved patent leather shoes, that was the Bountiful officers’ case, right?
A: That’s correct.
Q: Did you make a notation in your report so you could tell them about it?
A: I told Bountiful, I’m sure, the very next day, or that night.
Q: Well, why didn’t you put it in your report? You wrote down other things in that apartment, didn’t you?
A: I think I just wrote down what I seized.
Q: Well, the things you wanted to remember about it, you take notes of and when you get back to the police station, you dictate a report; right?
A: That’s correct.
Q: Were you afraid Mr. Bundy was going to read that report and be wise to what you had seen?
A: No.
MR. O’CONNELL: That’s all.
MR. YOCOM: No further questions.
1 thought on “Trial Transcript: Jerry Thompson, 1976”